Squire wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Bloody marvellous.Cookie's plans to emegrate have just been pushed up the agenda. 

If you get the opportunity cease it.

Surely you mean seize?

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Edo wrote:

50% increase in the Uni registration fees - up from 900 to 1500 - nice one lads

I've just started a new course and that's very unwelcome. Here's hoping my grant covers that rather substantial pay-out.

And to think, you could have spent that money on drinking and chasing fast women. 

Aragon wrote:

Kate P wrote:

Quote :

I for one am sorry that the children's allowance is not being means tested. It's not equitable and as someone without children, I resent paying for the gap year giftbox of the chattering classes. Linking it to the higher rate of tax would be fair - if you move into the higher level, children's allowance is taxed at a lower level.

18 year olds in college losing their children's allowance, I'm not hugely sympathetic with either, I have to say and for one main reason; at that stage, kids are entitled to a grant if they pass the means test. Change means tests if the levels are too high, by all means, but otherwise it means the taxpayer is paying twice and three or four times over (with free fees and paying for the education in general - registration fees are not the same as college fees) for kids to attend college. Investing in education makes good economic sense, but I think there's room to look also at how efficiently we invest taxpayer's money in third level education.

Have to disagree with you there Kate. We're a family that is almost always just hovering above the levels at which we might qualify for assistance. We end much worse off than families on lower income. We'll have to pay huge sums for books, transport and all sorts of expenses we don't have now if our daughter is to go to college. God knows where it is going to come from and there is no question of her leaving home of course - or of any gap year. We'll have an expensively dependent child in our house for several years. The state needs educated, trained people if the economy and society are to thrive.

Perhaps more importantly than the above however, is that child benefit is a form of child protection and it should, imo, be one of the untouchables. The amount of money saved will be negligible after the cost of administering the testing is taken into account - unless the idea is to restrict CB to all but the destitute. A fraction of a per cent increase on corporation tax would have been preferable.

I agree Aragon: means tested benefits are very costly to administer. There are plenty of studies to show that it is common for married women to be deprived of money within the relationship. Child allowance is a much needed safety net for all kinds of women. It would be much more cost effective to increase the higher rate of tax.

As to whether people without children should pay for those who do have them, you could make the same argument for any form of targetted payment that doesn't directly benefit oneself - people with two children could be giving out about paying for people with four. Social measures - services and financial supports - contribute to the general well-being of society as a whole and can't just be measured in individual terms.

Aragon wrote:

Kate P wrote:

Quote :

I for one am sorry that the children's allowance is not being means tested. It's not equitable and as someone without children, I resent paying for the gap year giftbox of the chattering classes. Linking it to the higher rate of tax would be fair - if you move into the higher level, children's allowance is taxed at a lower level.

18 year olds in college losing their children's allowance, I'm not hugely sympathetic with either, I have to say and for one main reason; at that stage, kids are entitled to a grant if they pass the means test. Change means tests if the levels are too high, by all means, but otherwise it means the taxpayer is paying twice and three or four times over (with free fees and paying for the education in general - registration fees are not the same as college fees) for kids to attend college. Investing in education makes good economic sense, but I think there's room to look also at how efficiently we invest taxpayer's money in third level education.

Have to disagree with you there Kate. We're a family that is almost always just hovering above the levels at which we might qualify for assistance. We end much worse off than families on lower income. We'll have to pay huge sums for books, transport and all sorts of expenses we don't have now if our daughter is to go to college. God knows where it is going to come from and there is no question of her leaving home of course - or of any gap year. We'll have an expensively dependent child in our house for several years. The state needs educated, trained people if the economy and society are to thrive.

Perhaps more importantly than the above however, is that child benefit is a form of child protection and it should, imo, be one of the untouchables. The amount of money saved will be negligible after the cost of administering the testing is taken into account - unless the idea is to restrict CB to all but the destitute. A fraction of a per cent increase on corporation tax would have been preferable.

I don't know if things have changed but very few people got the grant in my day and especially few who lived in Dublin. A few farmers with good accountants did well out of it though. Public servants' and other PAYE workers' children rarely qualified. I worked so I could get money to socialise. A taxi driver was telling me about all the spending money he had to give his kids. People have to get a grip on that sort of thing.

I can't figure out how much I'm losing, it's all over the place. It looks like about 600 quid. Not too bad - could have been much worse I suppose.

I can see myself two thousand down, but there may be some pluses I've missed: a new bike ?

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

I can't figure out how much I'm losing, it's all over the place. It looks like about 600 quid. Not too bad - could have been much worse I suppose.

hmmm - seeing as I will be officially unemployed in 2 weeks bar a miracle that would put Lazarus in the shade - I really dont know - tho I have been paying a lot closer attention to Social Welfare issues than I usually do - an increase in UB as opposed to loosing me job - think I will end up the year in the negative column.

Slim Buddha wrote:

Now that's being pessimistic! I think I'll stay where I am for now!

Well I'd say I'm being realistic rather than pessimistic. Lenihan has buggered the middle classes royally from one end to the other. As a result there will be a huge backlash against them because despite Parlon's giggery-pokery the Builders (traditional FF supporters that they are) know that their previous way of life cannot be sustained and that this budget is the last attempt at CPR that they are going to get. After this it's every man from themselves. But where do they do from there? SF would be worse with the economy than my little nephew with his abacus so only Labour and FG are left and I don't suspect either can pull much of a government together alone so it's really the only logical alternative and I susoect that such a coalition this time round will be a disaster. They have both been out of the loop too long and Labour is too old and the young guns of FG won't play nice with labour's old men and women.

cookiemonster wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Now that's being pessimistic! I think I'll stay where I am for now!

Well I'd say I'm being realistic rather than pessimistic. Lenihan has buggered the middle classes royally from one end to the other. As a result there will be a huge backlash against them because despite Parlon's giggery-pokery the Builders (traditional FF supporters that they are) know that their previous way of life cannot be sustained and that this budget is the last attempt at CPR that they are going to get. After this it's every man from themselves. But where do they do from there? SF would be worse with the economy than my little nephew with his abacus so only Labour and FG are left and I don't suspect either can pull much of a government together alone so it's really the only logical alternative and I susoect that such a coalition this time round will be a disaster. They have both been out of the loop too long and Labour is too old and the young guns of FG won't play nice with labour's old men and women.

What are ya worried about Cookie? - FF will lose about 10 seats at the next election ,but will still stay in power as Cowen and Gilmore finally consumate their budding relationship and the Labour pensioners get one final go in power before retirement - which for me as an FGer would absolutely class - FG will gain about 7-10 seats - Kenny will retire to the backbenches sometime afterwards as one of the young turks steps up to the plate - With the Labour monkey off our back - if people want a change of government and a proper right facing administration at that with the guts to what is neccessary to the public services, that properly understands that our future depends on a proper pro business ,but ethical environment - FG should be able to get on with constructing a proper right wing alignment ,either on its own or with a successor to the Pds ( At least that is what I hope happens - but we have to resist the temptation of getting into bed with Labour - hopefully Fianna Fail will take that choice away)

Edo wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Now that's being pessimistic! I think I'll stay where I am for now!

Well I'd say I'm being realistic rather than pessimistic. Lenihan has buggered the middle classes royally from one end to the other. As a result there will be a huge backlash against them because despite Parlon's giggery-pokery the Builders (traditional FF supporters that they are) know that their previous way of life cannot be sustained and that this budget is the last attempt at CPR that they are going to get. After this it's every man from themselves. But where do they do from there? SF would be worse with the economy than my little nephew with his abacus so only Labour and FG are left and I don't suspect either can pull much of a government together alone so it's really the only logical alternative and I susoect that such a coalition this time round will be a disaster. They have both been out of the loop too long and Labour is too old and the young guns of FG won't play nice with labour's old men and women.

What are ya worried about Cookie? - FF will lose about 10 seats at the next election ,but will still stay in power as Cowen and Gilmore finally consumate their budding relationship and the Labour pensioners get one final go in power before retirement - which for me as an FGer would absolutely class - FG will gain about 7-10 seats - Kenny will retire to the backbenches sometime afterwards as one of the young turks steps up to the plate - With the Labour monkey off our back - if people want a change of government and a proper right facing administration at that with the guts to what is neccessary to the public services, that properly understands that our future depends on a proper pro business ,but ethical environment - FG should be able to get on with constructing a proper right wing alignment ,either on its own or with a successor to the Pds ( At least that is what I hope happens - but we have to resist the temptation of getting into bed with Labour - hopefully Fianna Fail will take that choice away)

Keep saying nice things, Edo. Soothes the pain. It's perhaps a more pretty picture than the one I've painted only for the fact that we'd have to endure an awful FF/Green and then FF/Labour government for the near future, which happens to be exactly the time we need a decent governmnet.

I don't like FG, I make not bones about it, but my reason isn't because I've met YFG, it's because they were a terribly opposition party with an awful leader. Kenny may have done wonderful things internally but I could never see him as Taoiseach. If he was gone and they put forward a competitant front bench before the next election I would rest an awful lot easier any would porbably vote for them too.

cookiemonster wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Edo wrote:

50% increase in the Uni registration fees - up from 900 to 1500 - nice one lads

I've just started a new course and that's very unwelcome. Here's hoping my grant covers that rather substantial pay-out.

And to think, you could have spent that money on drinking and chasing fast women. 

Indeed and I could've had just as much fun. It's all unfair and the budget is rubbish. Why couldn't they have taken a year pay-break from the NPRF rather than cut capital spending? It's necessary for the long-term health of the economy and the only thing keeping the building sector going.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Edo wrote:

50% increase in the Uni registration fees - up from 900 to 1500 - nice one lads

I've just started a new course and that's very unwelcome. Here's hoping my grant covers that rather substantial pay-out.

And to think, you could have spent that money on drinking and chasing fast women. 

Indeed and I could've had just as much fun. It's all unfair and the budget is rubbish. Why couldn't they have taken a year pay-break from the NPRF rather than cut capital spending? It's necessary for the long-term health of the economy and the only thing keeping the building sector going.

It's a bloody awful budget, it's purely a short term stop-gap from now until the next election. There isn't one single piece of genuine long-term thinking in it.
Up until today I wasn't seriously worried about the future of this country, now I am.

cookiemonster wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Edo wrote:

50% increase in the Uni registration fees - up from 900 to 1500 - nice one lads

I've just started a new course and that's very unwelcome. Here's hoping my grant covers that rather substantial pay-out.

And to think, you could have spent that money on drinking and chasing fast women. 

Indeed and I could've had just as much fun. It's all unfair and the budget is rubbish. Why couldn't they have taken a year pay-break from the NPRF rather than cut capital spending? It's necessary for the long-term health of the economy and the only thing keeping the building sector going.

It's a bloody awful budget, it's purely a short term stop-gap from now until the next election. There isn't one single piece of genuine long-term thinking in it.
Up until today I wasn't seriously worried about the future of this country, now I am.

It is an awful hotch-potch of tweaks here and adjustments there with little sense of an overarching vision driving the whole process forward. There was no commitment to reducing or at least freezing public sector pay and they should have simply called time on decentralisation. They should also sell the evoting machines and all other spare property to bridge the gap over the next 2 years.

Who would buy them AT ? But they could save 860K by recycling them.

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Who would buy them AT ? But they could save 860K by recycling them.

Civil Servants?

EvotingMachine0197 wrote:

Who would buy them AT ? But they could save 860K by recycling them.

North Korea could buy them for the craic. We could convince Kim Jong-Il they're a form of electronic cognac mixer.

cookiemonster wrote:

Edo wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Now that's being pessimistic! I think I'll stay where I am for now!

Well I'd say I'm being realistic rather than pessimistic. Lenihan has buggered the middle classes royally from one end to the other. As a result there will be a huge backlash against them because despite Parlon's giggery-pokery the Builders (traditional FF supporters that they are) know that their previous way of life cannot be sustained and that this budget is the last attempt at CPR that they are going to get. After this it's every man from themselves. But where do they do from there? SF would be worse with the economy than my little nephew with his abacus so only Labour and FG are left and I don't suspect either can pull much of a government together alone so it's really the only logical alternative and I susoect that such a coalition this time round will be a disaster. They have both been out of the loop too long and Labour is too old and the young guns of FG won't play nice with labour's old men and women.

What are ya worried about Cookie? - FF will lose about 10 seats at the next election ,but will still stay in power as Cowen and Gilmore finally consumate their budding relationship and the Labour pensioners get one final go in power before retirement - which for me as an FGer would absolutely class - FG will gain about 7-10 seats - Kenny will retire to the backbenches sometime afterwards as one of the young turks steps up to the plate - With the Labour monkey off our back - if people want a change of government and a proper right facing administration at that with the guts to what is neccessary to the public services, that properly understands that our future depends on a proper pro business ,but ethical environment - FG should be able to get on with constructing a proper right wing alignment ,either on its own or with a successor to the Pds ( At least that is what I hope happens - but we have to resist the temptation of getting into bed with Labour - hopefully Fianna Fail will take that choice away)

Keep saying nice things, Edo. Soothes the pain. It's perhaps a more pretty picture than the one I've painted only for the fact that we'd have to endure an awful FF/Green and then FF/Labour government for the near future, which happens to be exactly the time we need a decent governmnet.

I don't like FG, I make not bones about it, but my reason isn't because I've met YFG, it's because they were a terribly opposition party with an awful leader. Kenny may have done wonderful things internally but I could never see him as Taoiseach. If he was gone and they put forward a competitant front bench before the next election I would rest an awful lot easier any would porbably vote for them too.

OK then , O Great Hurler on the Ditch and Classic" I know what I dont like ,but fuck dont ask me to come up with a positive alternative that would hold water outside the theoretical fantasy land of Cyberworld" - what would you like to see happening? and would you bother to get involved and maybe try to change the parties and alternatives on offer?

- its easy to say No and the politics of negativity and knocking down is piss easy - you will win referendums like that - but you will never be elected to a position of power unless you can come up with an optimistic,positive and clear position and are able to convince a majority of the electorate to go with you - that is something Labour and the left in the Ireland has singularly failed to do and is currently Fine Gaels problem too - Im am of the opinion that Enda is our "Neil Kinnock" - has done a brilliant job bringing the party back from the dead - but is simply not seen by the electorate as a credible taoiseach - but at the same time we have no "tony Blair" on the horizon as of yet - a few potential candidates and the age profile of the party in general has been massively reduced - but it is a transition we still have to make and it will happen in its own time - could happen a lot faster if those who constantly carp at us were prepared to put their money where their mouths are, and get involved and hurry that transition instead of wistfully awaiting a Jesus Christ Figure to ride over the horizon - democracy and political parties dont work that way.

Edo wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Edo wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Now that's being pessimistic! I think I'll stay where I am for now!

Well I'd say I'm being realistic rather than pessimistic. Lenihan has buggered the middle classes royally from one end to the other. As a result there will be a huge backlash against them because despite Parlon's giggery-pokery the Builders (traditional FF supporters that they are) know that their previous way of life cannot be sustained and that this budget is the last attempt at CPR that they are going to get. After this it's every man from themselves. But where do they do from there? SF would be worse with the economy than my little nephew with his abacus so only Labour and FG are left and I don't suspect either can pull much of a government together alone so it's really the only logical alternative and I susoect that such a coalition this time round will be a disaster. They have both been out of the loop too long and Labour is too old and the young guns of FG won't play nice with labour's old men and women.

What are ya worried about Cookie? - FF will lose about 10 seats at the next election ,but will still stay in power as Cowen and Gilmore finally consumate their budding relationship and the Labour pensioners get one final go in power before retirement - which for me as an FGer would absolutely class - FG will gain about 7-10 seats - Kenny will retire to the backbenches sometime afterwards as one of the young turks steps up to the plate - With the Labour monkey off our back - if people want a change of government and a proper right facing administration at that with the guts to what is neccessary to the public services, that properly understands that our future depends on a proper pro business ,but ethical environment - FG should be able to get on with constructing a proper right wing alignment ,either on its own or with a successor to the Pds ( At least that is what I hope happens - but we have to resist the temptation of getting into bed with Labour - hopefully Fianna Fail will take that choice away)

Keep saying nice things, Edo. Soothes the pain. It's perhaps a more pretty picture than the one I've painted only for the fact that we'd have to endure an awful FF/Green and then FF/Labour government for the near future, which happens to be exactly the time we need a decent governmnet.

I don't like FG, I make not bones about it, but my reason isn't because I've met YFG, it's because they were a terribly opposition party with an awful leader. Kenny may have done wonderful things internally but I could never see him as Taoiseach. If he was gone and they put forward a competitant front bench before the next election I would rest an awful lot easier any would porbably vote for them too.

OK then , O Great Hurler on the Ditch and Classic" I know what I dont like ,but fuck dont ask me to come up with a positive alternative that would hold water outside the theoretical fantasy land of Cyberworld" - what would you like to see happening? and would you bother to get involved and maybe try to change the parties and alternatives on offer?

- its easy to say No and the politics of negativity and knocking down is piss easy - you will win referendums like that - but you will never be elected to a position of power unless you can come up with an optimistic,positive and clear position and are able to convince a majority of the electorate to go with you - that is something Labour and the left in the Ireland has singularly failed to do and is currently Fine Gaels problem too - Im am of the opinion that Enda is our "Neil Kinnock" - has done a brilliant job bringing the party back from the dead - but is simply not seen by the electorate as a credible taoiseach - but at the same time we have no "tony Blair" on the horizon as of yet - a few potential candidates and the age profile of the party in general has been massively reduced - but it is a transition we still have to make and it will happen in its own time - could happen a lot faster if those who constantly carp at us were prepared to put their money where their mouths are, and get involved and hurry that transition instead of wistfully awaiting a Jesus Christ Figure to ride over the horizon - democracy and political parties dont work that way.

I think we're running off topic now, perhaps another thread on this issue would be in order.

cookiemonster wrote:

Edo wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Edo wrote:

cookiemonster wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Now that's being pessimistic! I think I'll stay where I am for now!

Well I'd say I'm being realistic rather than pessimistic. Lenihan has buggered the middle classes royally from one end to the other. As a result there will be a huge backlash against them because despite Parlon's giggery-pokery the Builders (traditional FF supporters that they are) know that their previous way of life cannot be sustained and that this budget is the last attempt at CPR that they are going to get. After this it's every man from themselves. But where do they do from there? SF would be worse with the economy than my little nephew with his abacus so only Labour and FG are left and I don't suspect either can pull much of a government together alone so it's really the only logical alternative and I susoect that such a coalition this time round will be a disaster. They have both been out of the loop too long and Labour is too old and the young guns of FG won't play nice with labour's old men and women.

What are ya worried about Cookie? - FF will lose about 10 seats at the next election ,but will still stay in power as Cowen and Gilmore finally consumate their budding relationship and the Labour pensioners get one final go in power before retirement - which for me as an FGer would absolutely class - FG will gain about 7-10 seats - Kenny will retire to the backbenches sometime afterwards as one of the young turks steps up to the plate - With the Labour monkey off our back - if people want a change of government and a proper right facing administration at that with the guts to what is neccessary to the public services, that properly understands that our future depends on a proper pro business ,but ethical environment - FG should be able to get on with constructing a proper right wing alignment ,either on its own or with a successor to the Pds ( At least that is what I hope happens - but we have to resist the temptation of getting into bed with Labour - hopefully Fianna Fail will take that choice away)

Keep saying nice things, Edo. Soothes the pain. It's perhaps a more pretty picture than the one I've painted only for the fact that we'd have to endure an awful FF/Green and then FF/Labour government for the near future, which happens to be exactly the time we need a decent governmnet.

I don't like FG, I make not bones about it, but my reason isn't because I've met YFG, it's because they were a terribly opposition party with an awful leader. Kenny may have done wonderful things internally but I could never see him as Taoiseach. If he was gone and they put forward a competitant front bench before the next election I would rest an awful lot easier any would porbably vote for them too.

OK then , O Great Hurler on the Ditch and Classic" I know what I dont like ,but fuck dont ask me to come up with a positive alternative that would hold water outside the theoretical fantasy land of Cyberworld" - what would you like to see happening? and would you bother to get involved and maybe try to change the parties and alternatives on offer?

- its easy to say No and the politics of negativity and knocking down is piss easy - you will win referendums like that - but you will never be elected to a position of power unless you can come up with an optimistic,positive and clear position and are able to convince a majority of the electorate to go with you - that is something Labour and the left in the Ireland has singularly failed to do and is currently Fine Gaels problem too - Im am of the opinion that Enda is our "Neil Kinnock" - has done a brilliant job bringing the party back from the dead - but is simply not seen by the electorate as a credible taoiseach - but at the same time we have no "tony Blair" on the horizon as of yet - a few potential candidates and the age profile of the party in general has been massively reduced - but it is a transition we still have to make and it will happen in its own time - could happen a lot faster if those who constantly carp at us were prepared to put their money where their mouths are, and get involved and hurry that transition instead of wistfully awaiting a Jesus Christ Figure to ride over the horizon - democracy and political parties dont work that way.

I think we're running off topic now, perhaps another thread on this issue would be in order.

Fair enough - as long as you are not running away from what I brought up.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

eoinmn wrote:

Also, on the VAT increase. If it was me I'd be lowering VAT.
For a few reasons, one being that the retail sector needs cash right now.

Yes, Christmas is wrecked for small business/retailers I reckon?

Raising VAT on discretionary goods by only .5% is clever enough, with retail target pricing it won’t be passed on, distribution businesses will have to absorb it.

This is more likely to hit professional services where VAt makes up large amout of the bill. Whatever about retailers, professionals are taking a kicking at the moment - estate agents, accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers and so forth are all being laid off at the moment. This is taking a kick at those who provide services to individuals (clients who are not registered for VAT). Still, it is only 0.5%!

Are services not charged at 13%?

Aragon wrote:

Kate P wrote:

Quote :

I for one am sorry that the children's allowance is not being means tested. It's not equitable and as someone without children, I resent paying for the gap year giftbox of the chattering classes. Linking it to the higher rate of tax would be fair - if you move into the higher level, children's allowance is taxed at a lower level.

18 year olds in college losing their children's allowance, I'm not hugely sympathetic with either, I have to say and for one main reason; at that stage, kids are entitled to a grant if they pass the means test. Change means tests if the levels are too high, by all means, but otherwise it means the taxpayer is paying twice and three or four times over (with free fees and paying for the education in general - registration fees are not the same as college fees) for kids to attend college. Investing in education makes good economic sense, but I think there's room to look also at how efficiently we invest taxpayer's money in third level education.

Have to disagree with you there Kate. We're a family that is almost always just hovering above the levels at which we might qualify for assistance. We end much worse off than families on lower income. We'll have to pay huge sums for books, transport and all sorts of expenses we don't have now if our daughter is to go to college. God knows where it is going to come from and there is no question of her leaving home of course - or of any gap year. We'll have an expensively dependent child in our house for several years. The state needs educated, trained people if the economy and society are to thrive.

Perhaps more importantly than the above however, is that child benefit is a form of child protection and it should, imo, be one of the untouchables. The amount of money saved will be negligible after the cost of administering the testing is taken into account - unless the idea is to restrict CB to all but the destitute. A fraction of a per cent increase on corporation tax would have been preferable.

I thought you'd disagree Aragon and I don't blame you. If your daughter is of college going age, then she has choices to make herself about what sacrifices she is willing to make. Is she happy to babysit on weekends for neighbours rather than go out? Is she happy to commute by bus instead of train because it's cheaper? Will she buy second hand books and commit to using the library as her main resource? The state needs educated, trained people if the economy and society are to thrive, but your daughter can take responsibility for her own third level education - with some help from you if you're able.

I'm surprised at you saying child benefit should be an untouchable. The Tony O'Reillys and JP McManuses of the country get the same child benefit as you - how does that protect children? It's fundamentally unjust and the cost of implementation if tied to income tax is unlikely to be exorbitant. In the long term what it does is point out that we don't treat all people equally but we treat them according to their needs - and that is fairness.

Kate P wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Kate P wrote:

Quote :

I for one am sorry that the children's allowance is not being means tested. It's not equitable and as someone without children, I resent paying for the gap year giftbox of the chattering classes. Linking it to the higher rate of tax would be fair - if you move into the higher level, children's allowance is taxed at a lower level.

18 year olds in college losing their children's allowance, I'm not hugely sympathetic with either, I have to say and for one main reason; at that stage, kids are entitled to a grant if they pass the means test. Change means tests if the levels are too high, by all means, but otherwise it means the taxpayer is paying twice and three or four times over (with free fees and paying for the education in general - registration fees are not the same as college fees) for kids to attend college. Investing in education makes good economic sense, but I think there's room to look also at how efficiently we invest taxpayer's money in third level education.

Have to disagree with you there Kate. We're a family that is almost always just hovering above the levels at which we might qualify for assistance. We end much worse off than families on lower income. We'll have to pay huge sums for books, transport and all sorts of expenses we don't have now if our daughter is to go to college. God knows where it is going to come from and there is no question of her leaving home of course - or of any gap year. We'll have an expensively dependent child in our house for several years. The state needs educated, trained people if the economy and society are to thrive.

Perhaps more importantly than the above however, is that child benefit is a form of child protection and it should, imo, be one of the untouchables. The amount of money saved will be negligible after the cost of administering the testing is taken into account - unless the idea is to restrict CB to all but the destitute. A fraction of a per cent increase on corporation tax would have been preferable.

I thought you'd disagree Aragon and I don't blame you. If your daughter is of college going age, then she has choices to make herself about what sacrifices she is willing to make. Is she happy to babysit on weekends for neighbours rather than go out? Is she happy to commute by bus instead of train because it's cheaper? Will she buy second hand books and commit to using the library as her main resource? The state needs educated, trained people if the economy and society are to thrive, but your daughter can take responsibility for her own third level education - with some help from you if you're able.

I'm surprised at you saying child benefit should be an untouchable. The Tony O'Reillys and JP McManuses of the country get the same child benefit as you - how does that protect children? It's fundamentally unjust and the cost of implementation if tied to income tax is unlikely to be exorbitant. In the long term what it does is point out that we don't treat all people equally but we treat them according to their needs - and that is fairness.

But would the cost of administering a means test translate to savings at the bottom line (and would they be passed on to those who need it most?).

I have to say that like Aragon, we were the family that always seemed just above the threshold for all those sorts of grants and assistance packages. I never got one for college and worked my way though (and damn hard to boot) and it wasn't easy but I have to admit that I was glad that I had to do it (not go glad I'm still paying for it!) because as well as qualifications I gain a strong work ethic and have never sence and never will be confortable coasting along on somebody elses coat tails when when the oppertunity presents itself. It's a lesson that cost me a lot in may ways but at the same time is almost priceless.

Upon reflection, I didn't expect anything special from this budget and I wasn't disappointed. Like all FF policies, the budget has completely reflected the FF ethos over the last decade: concentrate the gain and spread the pain.

I'm amused that socially oriented people are angry at the way tax has been levied. Did you really expect anything else by now?

I was aghast that so many TDs upped sticks and left the chamber before all parties commented on the budget. Shows a lack of resprect for the Dáil, its procedures and to democracy itself. Another sad day, imo, for Irish governance, the economy and the way we conduct ourselves.

What's been a pretty dour few weeks has just turned gloomier.

(Btw, like the Govt Health Warning on left hand side of main page. That's quick. More importantly some good advice to those who can't afford to take out loans. Don't buy over-valued assets just becuase someone dangles money before you. Debt will make you regret.)

rockyracoon wrote:

Upon reflection, I didn't expect anything special from this budget and I wasn't disappointed. Like all FF policies, the budget has completely reflected the FF ethos over the last decade: concentrate the gain and spread the pain.

I'm amused that socially oriented people are angry at the way tax has been levied. Did you really expect anything else by now?

I was aghast that so many TDs upped sticks and left the chamber before all parties commented on the budget. Shows a lack of resprect for the Dáil, its procedures and to democracy itself. Another sad day, imo, for Irish governance, the economy and the way we conduct ourselves.

What's been a pretty dour few weeks has just turned gloomier.

(Btw, like the Govt Health Warning on left hand side of main page. That's quick. More importantly some good advice to those who can't afford to take out loans. Don't buy over-valued assets just becuase someone dangles money before you. Debt will make you regret.)

The voice of realism, Rocky. I fully agree with you. It's not that an unfair, unimaginative, visionless budget was passed but that we accept that what we witnessed yesterday is in some way ok. That we have a democracy where shortly after its introduction, a couple of people in an almost deserted chamber exchange quotations on a budget of such import is depressing. There doesn't seem to be any imagination present at all.

tonys wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

eoinmn wrote:

Also, on the VAT increase. If it was me I'd be lowering VAT.
For a few reasons, one being that the retail sector needs cash right now.

Yes, Christmas is wrecked for small business/retailers I reckon?

Raising VAT on discretionary goods by only .5% is clever enough, with retail target pricing it won’t be passed on, distribution businesses will have to absorb it.

This is more likely to hit professional services where VAt makes up large amout of the bill. Whatever about retailers, professionals are taking a kicking at the moment - estate agents, accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers and so forth are all being laid off at the moment. This is taking a kick at those who provide services to individuals (clients who are not registered for VAT). Still, it is only 0.5%!

Are services not charged at 13%?

Professional services are charged at 21%. Construction, tradesmen etc charge at 13% as far as I know.