"We must dismantle our culture of dependency"

T McGibney said:
GDP-based stats are useless in the case of Ireland whose GDP is distorted by measurement criteria and massively inflated by foreign multinational transfer pricing. Irish GDP recently rose by 26% in a single year without much discernible improvement in our economy.
Click to expand...

Well there is plenty of people on here complaing about the amount of our taxes being spent on welfare payments.
Perhaps you can ask them how they figured that out?
 
Jim2007 said:
Well as I have already pointed out Swiss welfare payments include health insurance premiums which can run at anything from say €3,000 to €10,000 pa. And of course unlike Irish taxpayers, Swiss taxpayers voted for this, just like we will vote on a proposal to increase state pensions by 10% next month.

On the one had you are complaining that someone needs to pay for Johnny and at the same time your complaining about Switzerland making generous payments to genuine cases, it is not about the money alone with us, it's about people putting something back into the community that supports them.
Click to expand...

Im not complaining about the Swiss welfare payments!! Where did I complain about? It seems an infinitely more generous system than Irelands, and by what you have mentioned would appear to be getting even more generous!
You were one coming on and telling us how tough the Swiss system dealt more effectively with welfare claims than Ireland. I simply pointed out that it is not short on criticism with accusations of encouraging 'freeloaders'.
So perhaps you can answer this, should Ireland adopt the Swiss approach to welfare, which costs a great deal more than Irelands approach?
 
Purple said:
Exactly; it's not about what is spent but spending it in the most socially just way, i.e. rewarding people who are gainful members of society and encouraging others to act likewise.
Click to expand...

Thats BS Purple. This whole topic is about the 77% who, allegedly, fund the 23%. If you believe what you are saying then you think the 23% of households are NOT gainful members of society. You believe the 23% are not actively seeking work, are not upskilling in college courses, FAS courses, apprenticeships, back to work schemes, etc...etc..
These people in receipt of welfare, the vast majority of them, would jump at the chance to be financially independent. But we are coming out of the worst recession ever and your attitude is to kick them when they are down.
 
Purple said:
I'm seeing a trend here. Do you resent people on higher incomes and do you think employers exploit their employees as a matter of course?
Click to expand...

If you read my posts then you will have read the part where I state that I have nothing against anyone who wants to earn as much as they want.
What I am against is shoe-shine posters who argue that the rich are taxed too much whilst simultaneously, warfare recipients cost too much.
This is patent nonsense. Most welfare recipients, where able, are engaged in finding work. Where possible they are engaged in all sorts of courses and schemes to upskill and retrain. Many of whom even took part in JobsBridge (50,000 I estimate) where they worked for free. This was a subsidy from taxpayers to employers. Unfortunately, even wealthy employers couldn't help taking advantage of free labour, and in turn, taxpayers money, and had to abuse the system to such extent that it is nows scrapped.
 
GDP-based stats are useless in the case of Ireland whose GDP is distorted by measurement criteria and massively inflated by foreign multinational transfer pricing. Irish GDP recently rose by 26% in a single year without much discernible improvement in our economy.
Click to expand...

TheBigShort said:
Well there is plenty of people on here complaing about the amount of our taxes being spent on welfare payments.
Perhaps you can ask them how they figured that out?
Click to expand...

No, my complaint was with your bogus stats. The fact that you're unable to defend them without resort to generalised whataboutery speaks volumes.
 
T McGibney said:
No, my complaint was with your bogus stats. The fact that you're unable to defend them without resort to generalised whataboutery speaks volumes.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? If I was to post stats based on official figures you would shoot them down. So I will leave it to you and others to show where we have a 'culture of welfare dependency' and how and why it should be dismantled.
One poster already came on alluding to the Swiss welfare system. As it transpires it has its own critics not dissimilar to critics on here.
But the Swiss welfare also provides for more health and pension provisions that we could only dream about in Ireland - but it comes at a cost, which I would doubt we would be willing to pay.
But for someone to attack the Irish welfare because of the cost and in turn endorse a more expensive one, you have to laugh.
 
TheBigShort said:
I never said that was a solution. What I said was that cutting his welfare will most probably cost the state more in the provision of other public services.
That it would be cheaper in the long run to let him live as is, rather than cut his welfare and in the absence of concrete proposals to do otherwise.

Other proposals, they are pretty thin on the ground around here.
Click to expand...

The proposals of work and training have been dismissed by you.


So what is your solution?
 
TheBigShort said:
Thats BS Purple. This whole topic is about the 77% who, allegedly, fund the 23%. If you believe what you are saying then you think the 23% of households are NOT gainful members of society. You believe the 23% are not actively seeking work, are not upskilling in college courses, FAS courses, apprenticeships, back to work schemes, etc...etc..
These people in receipt of welfare, the vast majority of them, would jump at the chance to be financially independent. But we are coming out of the worst recession ever and your attitude is to kick them when they are down.
Click to expand...
No the whole topic is explicitly not about the 23% being funded by the 77% and nobody is complaining about the amount of money we spend on welfare. The topic is about how our welfare system encourages a culture of dependency, not that everyone on welfare has fallen victim to that culture.
I have no problem with the amount we spend on welfare. I have a huge problem with people on long term benefits getting the same as people on short term benefits. I have a huge problem with someone who works and contributes for 25 years getting the same as someone who never worked a day in their live.
I know people who don't work because they are as well off on welfare. Your solution to that is to force employers to pay them more than they are worth, in essence the skilled employees, already paying a marginal tax rate of over 50%, get less money than they are worth so that the unskilled employee can get more than they are worth. I don't think that's socially just.
I think the solution is to change the angle of the graph on welfare payments so that people get more at the start and less the longer they are unemployed. That will encourage them to up-skill and seek work because they will not be better off on welfare in the longer run and so it is not an economically valid lifestyle choice. I think that is socially just.

I really mean no offense but it seems to me that you are attributing ideological positions to posters and that is colouring your perception of what they are saying.
I have no problem with social engineering (taxing tobacco, VRT based on carbon emissions, water charges based on usage, plastic bag taxes etc.) and so I believe out welfare system should steer people towards work and our taxation system should steer people towards working harder/smarter/better.
In the long run that gives the best outcomes for society in general.
 
ppmeath said:
The proposals of work and training have been dismissed by you.


So what is your solution?
Click to expand...

Where did I ever dismiss proposals to work and training? If we are talking about our man 'johnny', then surely you picked up that he wad reflective of the tiny minority of welfare recipients?
Please tell me, that after all this, you are able to distinguish between a waster like 'johnny' and the vast majority of welfare recipients who are actively looking for work, who are participating in training courses and trying to upskill?
Please dont tell me that just because a person comes from a certain area, like Ballyfermot, that you think they are automatically some kind of sponger (although you did identify areas with known social and economic deprivation, comparing them to more affluent areas)?

Please tell me that you now know and understand that the majority of welfare recipients are not part of any culture of welfare dependency?
Please tell me that you understand that many welfare recipients (particularly at the height of the crash) were graduates who, in ordinary times, would have sourced employment a lot quicker?
Please tell me that you are aware that many of our welfare recipients, educated as they were (and coming from more affluent areas), decided to emigrate due to the lack of opportunity here?

This topic is wholly bogus, littered with inept posters who havent a clue about economics or social provisions. Clueless as to impact in cutting the income of those trying to better themselves, clueless as to the lack of opportunity afforded to young people. And worst of all, they see an inane headline like 77% of households support the other 23% and jump all over it, moralising and pontificating.
The biggest welfare handout in this country is to corporate multi nationals who pay no tax, to property developers bailed out by tax payers, to vulture funds buying on the cheap from NAMA from money borrowed at 0%.

And its because of this that more and more good ordinary working people will invariably need a welfare payment as they lose jobs or their wages cant pay rent or mortgage any longer.

But our 'Johnny', on €188 a week, its all his fault.
Wake up!
 
T McGibney said:
If you continue to post stats based on bogus GDP comparisions, I will most certainly shoot them down.
Click to expand...

When did I post bogus stats? But if you know they are bogus, then presumably you have correct stats? Otherwise how do you know what you are talking about?

So if you dont mind, please post the 'true' %gdp spent by Switzerland and Ireland on welfare benefits.
 
TheBigShort said:
When did I post bogus stats? But if you know they are bogus, then presumably you have correct stats? Otherwise how do you know what you are talking about?

So if you dont mind, please post the 'true' %gdp spent by Switzerland and Ireland on welfare benefits.
Click to expand...

You quoted stats based on %GDP. I've explained to you that %GDP-based stat comparisons are misleading in Ireland's case, because of the particular factors that wildly distort Irish GDP. This is common knowledge. I'm surprised you're not aware of it.
 
T McGibney said:
You quoted stats based on GDP. I've explained to you that GDP-based stat comparisons are misleading in Ireland's case. This is common knowledge. I'm surprised you're not aware of it.
Click to expand...

So where are the 'non-misleading' stats? You must have them? Right?
 
ppmeath said:
You'll have to be more specific I'm afraid, there are a few posts there, but there don't appear to be any clear solutions, so maybe you could oblige?
Click to expand...

That was a response to Purple who decided after 10pages of the topic that it was not about what the opening poster stated it was about.
As for solutions, you are short on any. My purpose here is to dismantle the baseless and clueless attacks on welfare recipients.
Those who support the notion that there is a culture of welfare dependency need to show where it exists, and how to dismantle it, without making things worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top