Retired people are at a much lower risk of poverty than younger people

Purple said:
That's because as a cohort they are rich and under taxed. There was a time when they were poor and needed support and we constructed our taxation and welfare structure accordingly. Now they are rich and don't need those supports but the structures remain the same.
A far more targeted approach is necessary. Things like free travel and medical cards should be means tested. They should pay the full rate of PRSI since it's very unlikely that they contributed enough to fund their State pension over their working life. Social transfers should be given to those who needs them, not to those who don't.

I'm sure there'll be lots of the usual "I/they worked hard all their life" entitled nonsense in response.
Click to expand...
I often thought that the state pension should be divided into two elements;
a) a basic minimum,, say €180 - €200pw and
b) a means-tested top-up for the remaining €70pw

I have no mathematical basis for picking the rates but its illustrative. I think Michael O'Leary has previously ridiculed that he will get the full standard rate of €253.30pw in due course. Yes, I know civil servants hate the idea of means-testing (too much work!) but the principle of paying €253.30pw to everybody regardless of their wealth seems crazy
 
jfrank said:
I often thought that the state pension should be divided into two elements;
a) a basic minimum,, say €180 - €200pw and
b) a means-tested top-up for the remaining €70pw

I have no mathematical basis for picking the rates but its illustrative. I think Michael O'Leary has previously ridiculed that he will get the full standard rate of €253.30pw in due course. Yes, I know civil servants hate the idea of means-testing (too much work!) but the principle of paying €253.30pw to everybody regardless of their wealth seems crazy
Click to expand...
Means testing is a recipe for poverty traps and all sorts of anomalies. For example, at the moment, SUSI is docking 2022/23 third level grants for students who earn more than €4,000 a year from summer or part-time work.
 
T McGibney said:
Means testing is a recipe for poverty traps and all sorts of anomalies. For example, at the moment, SUSI is docking 2022/23 third level grants for students who earn more than €4,000 a year from summer or part-time work.
Click to expand...
I get that but the principle of giving for example Michael O'Leary a state benefit of €253.30pw is bizarre notwithstanding he has paid his full quota of PRSI contributions. I am not sure how actuarily sound a 4% PRSI funding rate is for a quasi index-linked benefit of €253.30pw?
 
jfrank said:
I get that but the principle of giving for example Michael O'Leary a state benefit of €253.30pw is bizarre notwithstanding he has paid his full quota of PRSI contributions. I am not sure how actuarily sound a 4% PRSI funding rate is for a quasi index-linked benefit of €253.30pw?
Click to expand...
And I get your point too. The problem is that with all the bureaucracy, it's nearly cheaper and definitely easier to give O'Leary the extra few bob and be done with it.
 
Only those who have 28 years service or more in the PS/CS are on the pre 95 public sector pensions. That cohort of staff in teaching for example have paid a 5% pension contribution plus 1.5% spouses and childrens contribution (regardless of whether they have either!) from day one of their working lives. They also now pay the also pay the ASC if still in service. Yes it is a generous benefit to which anyone under the age of 50 will not be entitled. However they have always contributed . All workers need to be mandated to contribute towards their state pension entitlement on a more realistic basis.
 
jfrank said:
Yes, I know civil servants hate the idea of means-testing (too much work!) but the principle of paying €253.30pw to everybody regardless of their wealth seems crazy
Click to expand...

Civil Servants will do what they're paid to do. And they don't formulate the policies - that's what the "legislators" (don't laugh) in Leinster House are paid to do!
Civil Servants' main objections to means tests is that there are too many of them as it is. And they're all different! I recall someone once telling me that there are about three dozen of them across the public service - all introduced by those same legislators!

Naming a few off the top of my head, there's one for a medical card, another for HAP/Rent Allowance, another for SUSI, another for jobseekers' allowance, another for Disability Allowance, another for the non-Contributory State Pension .... and so on. It's ridiculous.
 
This is done much better elsewhere - in France, for example, your income tax assessment has a figure "Reference Income level" calculated which is used for most means tested payments
 
jfrank said:
I often thought that the state pension should be divided into two elements;
a) a basic minimum,, say €180 - €200pw and
b) a means-tested top-up for the remaining €70pw

I have no mathematical basis for picking the rates but its illustrative. I think Michael O'Leary has previously ridiculed that he will get the full standard rate of €253.30pw in due course. Yes, I know civil servants hate the idea of means-testing (too much work!) but the principle of paying €253.30pw to everybody regardless of their wealth seems crazy
Click to expand...
Hello,

I disagree with that.

Let those on higher incomes pay more tax during their years working, but don't then penalise them for paying that tax.
 
Some suggestions to re-balance supports slightly away from over 65s:

(1) do not remove FTP, as that is too political / too tangible / very well-known
(2) do not remove GP Visit Card

Tax measures
(3) abolish the 18k/36k exemption
(4) abolish the DIRT exemption
(5) abolish the Age tax credit
(6) abolish the lower rates of USC

(7) maybe make the GMS medical card means-test a bit stricter
 
Protocol said:
Some suggestions to re-balance supports slightly away from over 65s:

(1) do not remove FTP, as that is too political / too tangible / very well-known
(2) do not remove GP Visit Card

Tax measures
(3) abolish the 18k/36k exemption
(4) abolish the DIRT exemption
(5) abolish the Age tax credit
(6) abolish the lower rates of USC

(7) maybe make the GMS medical card means-test a bit stricter
Click to expand...

Any opinion on the HBP? Why should I (and Enda Kenny and Bertie and Michael D Higgins) get free TV licences and some free electricity every month when we're well able to pay for it from our own resources?
 
Groucho said:
Any opinion on the HBP? Why should I (and Enda Kenny and Bertie and Michael D Higgins) get free TV licences and some free electricity every month when we're well able to pay for it from our own resources?
Click to expand...
I support the idea of a flat-rate state pension as an anti-poverty measure and to ensure that everyone who pays in gets something out. But the universal benefits that kick in for over-70s are very hard to justify from any kind of equity perspective.


Means testing is complicated and time consuming of course but by the time you've got to 70 your income is generally stable and wealth is declining. A single means test at 70 with periodic reassessments would make a lot of sense and there isn't huge risk of overpayment they way there is with young people whose income is much more volatile.
 
NoRegretsCoyote said:
I support the idea of a flat-rate state pension as an anti-poverty measure and to ensure that everyone who pays in gets something out. But the universal benefits that kick in for over-70s are very hard to justify from any kind of equity perspective.


Means testing is complicated and time consuming of course but by the time you've got to 70 your income is generally stable and wealth is declining. A single means test at 70 with periodic reassessments would make a lot of sense and there isn't huge risk of overpayment they way there is with young people whose income is much more volatile.
Click to expand...

Consideration could be given to giving it to anyone on the n-c State pension and making it subject to a means test for people receiving the full State Contrib Pension.

But only for newbies of course! We oldies must be allowed to keep it!
 
Purple said:
But of course! :)
It's like the old question, "Who are the rich?" The answer is "Anyone who has more than me."
Click to expand...

If you look at it dispassionately, doesn't it make you all warm inside to know that I'm a beneficiary of a small portion of all of the taxes that you pay? (Not forgetting your employer's generous PRSI contribution, of course!) :D
 
Groucho said:
If you look at it dispassionately, doesn't it make you all warm inside to know that I'm a beneficiary of a small portion of all of the taxes that you pay? (Not forgetting your employer's generous PRSI contribution, of course!) :D
Click to expand...
But of course it does! :)
If it didn't go to you it could be wasted on scoliosis operations or mental health services. Mind you the girls and boys working in the Health Service are experts at wasting money so even if they got it they'd probably manage to use it to not help anyone. Yes, it's probably better going to the idle rich like yourself. At least you appreciate it. :D
 
I'm Nobody said:
Is that not the way of the world.
The pensioners of today were poor when they were in their 20's.
I know I was.
Click to expand...
Sure, but so were pensioners back then. We construct our taxation and social police as if that was still the case when clearly it isn't. That's what this thread is about.
I've been working for over 30 years. I did 60-70 hour weeks for years. I worked 7 days a week. I cycled 10 miles to and from work while working 14 hour days. Etc etc, blah, blah, blah. It's still much harder to be young now. Much harder.
 
I've worked 7 days a week as well.
My first wage in 1973 was 8 pounds a week.
Most People now have stuff, too much of it, that they don't need we had nothing in the 60's and 70's.
Where I am living now there were people living in mud huts against a ditch in the 1960's in Ireland.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top