PRSI contribution rates to be increased

[Freelance]

I do not think I am getting much value from my PRSI payments to be honest.

The clue is in the title, it’s Social INSURANCE. And like your house or car insurance you don’t get much from it most of the time. But it should be there for you when you or yours need it.

There have been significant increases in Social Protection payments over the last few years and some contribution increases are necessary and inevitable.

Anyway it will all be sorted in a few years time. Pearse O’Doherty on the wireless this morning explaining how SF were against these increases for the blocklayers and the hairdressers and how SF would not charge anybody anything extra apart from adding a few percentage points to those earning over €100k. Nirvana is on the way.

 

[Dr Strangelove]

The clue is in the title, it’s Social INSURANCE.

It’s more or less another tax.

The majority of drawdowns relate to pensions which are a highly predictable event for everyone.

I’m lucky enough to have zero chance of involuntary employment. The only insurance I’m basically getting from PRSI is illness benefit in case of disability and I wouldn’t voluntarily pay 4% for that.

 

[gipimann]

Your PRSI also entitles you to Treatment Benefit (optical, dental and hearing aids). Still might not justify the 4%, but it is a benefit.

 

[Marsupial]

Anyway it will all be sorted in a few years time. Pearse O’Doherty on the wireless this morning explaining how SF were against these increases for the blocklayers and the hairdressers and how SF would not charge anybody anything extra apart from adding a few percentage points to those earning over €100k. Nirvana is on the way.

What Doofus Doherty fails to understand is that as many public servants are earning over €100K, their ultimate employer is the taxpayer, so it's the taxpayer who will have to pick up a significant element of the increase in "employers" PRSI contributions.

Maybe Pearse needs to learn the meaning of the phrase "robbing Peter to pay Peter"!

 

[Purple]

The clue is in the title, it’s Social INSURANCE. And like your house or car insurance you don’t get much from it most of the time. But it should be there for you when you or yours need it.

It's just another tax. Let's stop pretending otherwise.

There have been significant increases in Social Protection payments over the last few years and some contribution increases are necessary and inevitable.

Can we go back to calling it social welfare? Social Protection sounds stupid and those in receipt of other people's money should acknowledge that they are taking other people's income because they can't or won't provide for themselves and their families. There should always be an element of shame when you can't or won't provide for yourself.

Anyway it will all be sorted in a few years time. Pearse O’Doherty on the wireless this morning explaining how SF were against these increases for the blocklayers and the hairdressers and how SF would not charge anybody anything extra apart from adding a few percentage points to those earning over €100k. Nirvana is on the way.

Yep, the Shinners want to abolish wealth tax, in fact they won't tax wealth at all, but they want to tax the bejesus out of high(ish) earners. As I've said many times, Sinn Fein is aa party for the rich and the old. If you are young and not rich they are the last party you should vote for.

 

[ashambles]

I think it was the IMF who had a look into our PRSI system and commented along the lines of it being indistinguishable from income tax.

People point out the "SI" letters in PRSI, but what about the "PR" letters that describe a less abstract concept? They charge PRSI on other sorts of earnings not just pay - and often charge PRSI which explicitly will not provide any insurance - e.g. on interest earnings.

PRSI payouts are not in the main pay related. If you're in France or Sweden and similar countries, you'll get a (capped) pension and unemployment based on your salary, it ticks the "pay related" box. Even the US has a pay related social insurance pension.

It should be a good deal for all but the most wealthy - it's not supposed to be a for profit insurance scheme or even to completely cover its costs. If it did completely cover its cost via payments - why would the government waste their time being involved.

At least next year we will see a tentative effort to make unemployment benefits "pay related"

 

[S class]

There should always be an element of shame when you can't or won't provide for yourself.

There should be no shame attached to most people claiming Social Protection payments.

Anybody claiming a Social Protection Benefit is entitled to the benefit as a result of their Prsi contributions.

 

[Purple]

There should be no shame attached to most people claiming Social Protection payments.

Anybody claiming a Social Protection Benefit is entitled to the benefit as a result of their Prsi contributions.

Even if they've never made a PRSI contribution?
Most people don't pay enough in PRSI to fund the State Pension they'll receive. If they are getting an (almost) free house, and the dole then they certainly haven't contributed enough. They are net recipients, they are adults who can't provide for themselves.
Unless they have a disability then they should feel a sense of shame for living off their neighbours... or is being able to fend for yourself no longer something that grown adults should be able to do?

I'm all for a rights based society but it has to be balances with responsibilities.
I'm responsible for feeding and housing my children. If I can't do that then I'm failing as a parent and as an adult. I've been close to that a couple of times, at one stage for over a year I'd less than €80 a week to feed three children, but I got through it without putting my hand into my neighbours pocket. If I'd failed then I'd have had the right to spend other people's money to feed and house them but I'd certainly feel a sense of shame in that circumstance. I don't know how anyone wouldn't.

 

[S class]

at one stage for over a year I'd less than €80 a week to feed three children, but I got through it without putting my hand into my neighbours pocket. If I'd failed then I'd have had the right to spend other people's money to feed and house them but I'd certainly feel a sense of shame in that circumstance. I don't know how anyone wouldn't.

Did you receive Child Benefit ?
If so we're you ashamed to receive it ?

 

[Purple]

Did you receive children's allowance ?
If so we're you ashamed to receive it ?

My ex-wife received it, even though the kids live with me but my genitalia precludes me from receiving it. I don't think I should be entitled to it.

 

[S class]

Sorry to hear that.
Would you be ashamed to receive the Contributory State Pension if you qualify ?

 

[Purple]

Sorry to hear that.
Would you be ashamed to receive the Contributory State Pension if you qualify ?

No, I'll have certainly paid enough PRSI to have funded it. I do think the pension age should be increased to 70 and that pensioners should pay the full rate of PRSI.

 

[S class]

No, I'll have certainly paid enough PRSI to have funded it.

Good.
So now you agree that there shouldn't always be an element of shame on a person receiving a Social Protection payment.

 

[Purple]

Good.
So now you agree that there shouldn't always be an element of shame on a person receiving a Social Protection payment.

Fair point. I've no problem paying taxes and helping those who cannot help themselves. The corresponding responsibility on those who cannot provide for themselves is that they take steps to do so in the future. If they can't due to disability or infirmity that's fine but if they can then they should and if they can and they choose not to then they should feel a sense of shame.

What sort of example to parents want to set for their children? Do they want them to aspire to live off their neighbour or do they want them to aspire to be self sufficient and self reliant?

 

[ATC110]

What sort of example to parents want to set for their children? Do they want them to aspire to live off their neighbour or do they want them to aspire to be self sufficient and self reliant?

I agree with your point but arguably they are higher up the evolutionary chain if living off the endeavours of others.