Entitlements and moral rights to....

[MrMan]

It is totally unjust that those on incomes of €200k plus a year get the same as those on €40K.

But the argument could be put forward that the guy on €200k is already contributing far more to the system at the higher end of the tax band, so the benefits could be seen as justifiably his also.

 

[Purple]

I'm a believer that those who can pay should pay. I suppose I'm a bit of a socialist. The only reason that I don't support what pass themselves as socialist parties in this country is that I believe that they are there to protect middle class vested interests (public sector unions etc) and that their policies don't help the poor but rather seek to make everyone poor.
That's why I think that children's allowance should be means tested (and/or taxed), tax credits should be refundable, over 70's medical cards should be means tested and high income families (like mine) should pay for their kids to go to college.
I believe that most of what passes for social justice measured by this and preceding governments has just been a sop to buy middle class votes.

 

[Jock04]

One of the problems of means-testing something like child benefit is where to set the bar.

A family with 2 or 3 kids, both parents in reasonably well-paid jobs could well still be very dependant on the child benefit to get through the month. People are, I think, generally loath to go through means-testing & all it involves - loss of privacy, low self-esteem, the unimaginable horror of a neighbour finding out, etc etc. The system in place now helps these people, no doubt about it.

Against that, the couple raking in 500K or whatever get the same benefit, and stick it away for a trip to a health spa or to pay the cleaning lady. They pay their taxes, they have kids, so they're entitled to the benefit.
If they had to stoop (in their eyes) to going along to the Welfare Office to be means-tested for it, they probably wouldn't bother, and wouldn't notice the drop in income.

So where to draw the line? High enough that all who need the help can still get it? What would that figure be? We may find that doing so would exclude so few that it wouldn't be financially viable to operate it - it'd be cheaper to carry on as at present.
As said above, there are many ways to help the less fortunate, should you feel you are being given support you don't need. You can do so regularly, or indeed, as above, put it in a savings scheme to maybe help out with an apartment when the kids go to college or whatever.
But I don't thnk anyone should feel bad about themselves because they don't need the benefit to run their households on a week-to-week basis.

 

[Caveat]

One of the problems of means-testing something like child benefit is where to set the bar.

A family with 2 or 3 kids, both parents in reasonably well-paid jobs could well still be very dependant on the child benefit to get through the month. People are, I think, generally loath to go through means-testing & all it involves - loss of privacy, low self-esteem, the unimaginable horror of a neighbour finding out, etc etc. The system in place now helps these people, no doubt about it.

Against that, the couple raking in 500K or whatever get the same benefit, and stick it away for a trip to a health spa or to pay the cleaning lady. They pay their taxes, they have kids, so they're entitled to the benefit.
If they had to stoop (in their eyes) to going along to the Welfare Office to be means-tested for it, they probably wouldn't bother, and wouldn't notice the drop in income.

So where to draw the line? High enough that all who need the help can still get it? What would that figure be? We may find that doing so would exclude so few that it wouldn't be financially viable to operate it - it'd be cheaper to carry on as at present.
As said above, there are many ways to help the less fortunate, should you feel you are being given support you don't need. You can do so regularly, or indeed, as above, put it in a savings scheme to maybe help out with an apartment when the kids go to college or whatever.
But I don't thnk anyone should feel bad about themselves because they don't need the benefit to run their households on a week-to-week basis.

Well put Jock.