The R Word

[aonfocaleile]

so they are still getting their increments. oh for god sake. they are so pathetic. they are getting rises in a recessions and they are still complaining?

Here's one for a start. If you go further back in thread there's another post that describes public servants as "greedy and lazy". Needless, sweeping generalisations which contribute absolutely nothing to the debate and which the poster in question has failed to back-up with any evidence.

 

[ccbkd]

Here's one for a start. If you go further back in thread there's another post that describes public servants as "greedy and lazy". Needless, sweeping generalisations which contribute absolutely nothing to the debate and which the poster in question has failed to back-up with any evidence.

Can we move on from obssession with public servants, the weathers miserable and the ECB are about to raise interest rates, lets get back to the thread title and wallow in our collective misery

 

[ubiquitous]

Can we move on from obssession with public servants, the weathers miserable and the ECB are about to raise interest rates, lets get back to the thread title and wallow in our collective misery

Indeed or even close the thread, which seems to have run its course.

 

[Sunny]

Indeed or even close the thread, which seems to have run its course.

I agree. It has gone beyond the point of being interesting and is certainly not a great financial debate.

 

[shnaek]

Society should not strive for communist style equality; rather it should strive for equality of opportunity.

Well said. Because due to human nature and the way of the world, as you pointed out earlier, there will never be 'equality' because we all aren't equal. I play guitar and sing, and I'd love to be up there on stage playing auritoriums all over the world just like Metallica and the Chilli Peppers, but I amn't equal to them in musical ability. This analogy can be applied to every aspect of life. We aren't, nor will we ever be, equal. We are individuals. Equality of opportunity is the fairest, level playing pitch we can manage. After that it is up to each of us to make the best it. And the rest of that argument I will save for another forum.

As for 'Increments' and 'Work to Rule' etc - why is it that the public service has it's own language on these things?
Increment = pay rise. Full stop. Call it a goobeedoo if you like. It's the same thing.
Work to Rule = strike.
Stick a beak on me and call me a duck, but I am still a human being.

And back on topic - the ISEQ is getting hammered this morning. Anyone read McWilliams article in the Indo yesterday? He is comparing Ireland to Japan, and saying we need action fast to avoid a long term situation just like the Japanese found themselves in.

And it turns out that Ireland is different after all! We are the only country to have gone from such a huge surplus to such a big deficit in such a short amount of time! So all those who were pointing out how different Ireland is were right!

On a lighter note, we will eventually get out of this. How fast will be determined by Fine Fail.

 

[redstar]

When times are good there is bonuses in the private sector that are not avalible to equilivent people in the public sector. .

Ever wonder why public sector workers do not get bonuses ? The unions wouldn't have it. They will not allow pay to be related to performance. So anyone who performs well in the public sector will not be rewarded with a bonus. Its their own fault.

 

[television]

This analogy can be applied to every aspect of life.

No it can't I am afraid.

 

[shnaek]

No it can't I am afraid.

Yes it can. So now.

 

[michaelm]

Society should not strive for communist style equality; rather it should strive for equality of opportunity.

Spot on. Unfortunately too many in politics, the media and the PC brigade, are enamored with equality of outcome rather than of opportunity.

 

[television]

test

 

[eileen alana]

Personal finance expert Jim Aughney gives some tips on how to save money during an economic downturn.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0701/drivetime_av.html?2394125,null,209

 

[michaelm]

Personal finance expert Jim Aughney gives some tips on how to save money during an economic downturn.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0701/drivetime_av.html?2394125,null,209

Not sure it's worth listening to. It takes them eight minutes to say 'shop around for a better mortgage & credit card rate, mind that overdraft now, claim your tax credits and shop around for insurance'.

 

[Complainer]

Ever wonder why public sector workers do not get bonuses ? The unions wouldn't have it. They will not allow pay to be related to performance. So anyone who performs well in the public sector will not be rewarded with a bonus. Its their own fault.

Pure fiction, yet again. Bonuses do exist within the public sector, for many senior executives in the civil service, local authorities and some public bodies - remember the furore when Prof Drumm picked up a substantial bonus. But keep on making up stories about the public sector if it makes you feel good.

in fairness, that has been the thrust of much of this week's media debate between the unions and business interests. Despite only being able to listen to radio for an hour or two yesterday, I heard several times that we have the second highest minimum wage in the EU. According to some, this is badly needed. According to others it damages our competitiveness.

Thanks for the clarification. It's funny how this point has flown right over the heads of the public sector bashing posters here on AAM who can't see the wood for the trees.

Please point out where comments “verging-on-racist bile and invective” have been posted.

If the cap fits....

Society should not strive for communist style equality; rather it should strive for equality of opportunity. I agree that more can be done in this area

Well said. Because due to human nature and the way of the world, as you pointed out earlier, there will never be 'equality' because we all aren't equal. I play guitar and sing, and I'd love to be up there on stage playing auritoriums all over the world just like Metallica and the Chilli Peppers, but I amn't equal to them in musical ability. This analogy can be applied to every aspect of life. We aren't, nor will we ever be, equal. We are individuals. Equality of opportunity is the fairest, level playing pitch we can manage. After that it is up to each of us to make the best it. And the rest of that argument I will save for another forum.

Hold your horses here, Purple . You told us earlier that the class war was over, and now you think that 'more can be done'. Make your mind up.

No-one mentioned 'communist style equality'. I know it suits your arguement to put two and two together to make 27, but let's stick to a bit of reality here. Perhaps you could explain how the equality of opportunity applies to the households with a person with a long-term illness or disability that have double the risk of poverty? Perhaps you could explain how equality of opportunity applies those in the lowest occupational class whose risk of death is between 100% and 200% higher than those in the highest occupational class?

• For circulatory diseases it was over 120% higher
• For cancers it was over 100% higher
• For respiratory diseases it was over 200% higher
• For injuries and poisonings it was over 150% higher

Did they get an equal chance? Please try to avoid sounding like the Python luxury sketch in your answer.

When faced with the hard statistical evidence of the very real inequalities in Ireland today, Purple and shneak attempt to move the goalposts and position any attempt to address these inequalities as 'communism'. Readers should keep this in mind when considering the public sector bashing comments on this and other thread.

 

[Purple]

Hold your horses here, Purple . You told us earlier that the class war was over, and now you think that 'more can be done'. Make your mind up.

There is inequality but there is no "class war" in Ireland. That sort of rhetoric went out before the Second World War. Poverty is primarily a social problem in Ireland. I, and many of my friends, come from areas of social deprivation. We had about the same opportunities as other kids in our area and about the same as kids from average socio-economic backgrounds. If parents let their kids skip school, stay out late, neglect their education and generally behave like scumbags that has nothing to do with household income and everything to do with bad parenting. The same goes for bad diet and smoking. It is not the fault or responsibility of those who work hard and raise their children to be productive members of society that others fail in their duty to their children. I think that the state should use its resources to help the children of these bad parents to overcome the disadvantage that being raised by bad parents gives them but that has nothing to do with class wars, multinationals or any feeling of misplaced guilt that the smoked salmon socialists in the Labour Party feel.

No-one mentioned 'communist style equality'. I know it suits your arguement to put two and two together to make 27, but let's stick to a bit of reality here.

What sort of equality would you like to see? Do you think that people should not be free to do things that damage their health or prospects in the medium to long term? Beyond equality of opportunity what sort of equality would you look for?

Perhaps you could explain how the equality of opportunity applies to the households with a person with a long-term illness or disability that have double the risk of poverty? Perhaps you could explain how equality of opportunity applies those in the lowest occupational class whose risk of death is between 100% and 200% higher than those in the highest occupational class?

• For circulatory diseases it was over 120% higher
• For cancers it was over 100% higher
• For respiratory diseases it was over 200% higher
• For injuries and poisonings it was over 150% higher

Did they get an equal chance? Please try to avoid sounding like the Python luxury sketch in your answer.

“Johnny Blue” and fast food have more to do with it than class wars. You can avoid eating bad food, get exercise and not smoke no matter what occupational class you are in. By the way, what is an occupational class? Is it sort of labelling so beloved by socialists who seeks to trap people in their social strata or is it just more meaningless jargon that judges people based only on their income and address?

When faced with the hard statistical evidence of the very real inequalities in Ireland today, Purple and shneak attempt to move the goalposts and position any attempt to address these inequalities as 'communism'. Readers should keep this in mind when considering the public sector bashing comments on this and other thread.

I am faced with statistical evidence that some people don’t take care of themselves or teach their children to do so. But guess what, they are adults and choose to behave in that way. They have no one to blame but themselves. I smoke on occasion. If I get cancer from my bad habit it will be no one’s fault but mine. The same would apply if I drank too much or spent all my money in a bookie’s.
Again I will state the blindingly obvious: We should not strive for equality. We should strive for equality of opportunity so that those who choose to better themselves are not held back by bias or lack of resources. We should not seek to provide a living to those who are capable of providing it for themselves (see my signature).

 

[Complainer]

There is inequality but there is no "class war" in Ireland. That sort of rhetoric went out before the Second World War. Poverty is primarily a social problem in Ireland. I, and many of my friends, come from areas of social deprivation. We had about the same opportunities as other kids in our area and about the same as kids from average socio-economic backgrounds. If parents let their kids skip school, stay out late, neglect their education and generally behave like scumbags that has nothing to do with household income and everything to do with bad parenting. The same goes for bad diet and smoking. It is not the fault or responsibility of those who work hard and raise their children to be productive members of society that others fail in their duty to their children. I think that the state should use its resources to help the children of these bad parents to overcome the disadvantage that being raised by bad parents gives them but that has nothing to do with class wars, multinationals or any feeling of misplaced guilt that the smoked salmon socialists in the Labour Party feel.

Well, you clearly failed on the 'not sounding like the Python luxury sketch' requirement. Let's see if we can highlight the other gaping holes in these arguments.

It's just so easy to spout off the 'Daily Mail' blame-the-parents line without bothering to go just a little below the surface and look at root cause. So now it's all the parents fault. Have you ever stopped to think why (according to your explanation) bad parenting is prevalent in areas of economic deprivation? Or perhaps that would be cutting it just a little too close to the bone. And do come up with a credible explanation of how long-term illness and disability is all their own fault too.

What sort of equality would you like to see? Do you think that people should not be free to do things that damage their health or prospects in the medium to long term? Beyond equality of opportunity what sort of equality would you look for?
“Johnny Blue” and fast food have more to do with it than class wars. You can avoid eating bad food, get exercise and not smoke no matter what occupational class you are in. By the way, what is an occupational class? Is it sort of labelling so beloved by socialists who seeks to trap people in their social strata or is it just more meaningless jargon that judges people based only on their income and address?

Occupational class is explained (not surprisingly) in the report that I linked to earlier. You might also be interested to check out the root causes of the links between smoking and low income - Try [broken link removed] and you might want to rethink your points.

I am faced with statistical evidence that some people don’t take care of themselves or teach their children to do so. But guess what, they are adults and choose to behave in that way. They have no one to blame but themselves. I smoke on occasion. If I get cancer from my bad habit it will be no one’s fault but mine. The same would apply if I drank too much or spent all my money in a bookie’s.
Again I will state the blindingly obvious: We should not strive for equality. We should strive for equality of opportunity so that those who choose to better themselves are not held back by bias or lack of resources. We should not seek to provide a living to those who are capable of providing it for themselves (see my signature).

Again, I'd be very interested in your explanation of how long-term illness or disability comes under the heading 'people don't take care of themselves'. Perhaps you subscribe to the [broken link removed]. It's a bit hard to keep yourself healthy when you can't afford the €80 per month perscription fees. It's a bit hard to keep yourself healthy when you don't have a warm coat, or a warm house.

No-one with a slim grasp on reality believes that a child born into a family with 3rd generation unemployment mixed in with a range of addiction issues gets the same opportunities at education/employment/development as a child who born into a comfortable middle-class family that can pay to get the best healthcare and the best network.

 

[Complainer]

1) Wheres your credible explanation ? Chernobyl/Sellafield/Overhead power lines/genetics etc ? How much of this is under government control. All I get from your style of writing is an offended tone as though we are expected to be mindreaders.

2) How is it the governments fault ? Unless you blame the government for not taking away their freedom. . . or for not implementing genetic engineering/enforced sterilisation...

Look up. That's my point up there flying right over your head. Fault is not the issue here. It's not a question of who is at fault or who caused the disability or long-term illness. The issue is the failure of Government to create anything like equality of opportunity for people in such circumstances.

Have a look at recent updates from AHEAD about how we treat students with disabilities;

[broken link removed]

[broken link removed]

Now tell me where is the much acclaimed 'equality of opportunity' there?

So what ? Any government paper is going to seek to 'stigmatise' smoking. Calling it low class is only one way it is being done. The paper proves nothing.

Eh the ESRI is not the Government. It is a private, independent body. It does recieve some Government funding for some aspects of its work, but it is not the Government. I guess you didn't read beyond the title of the paper. I'll be happy to discuss the finer points when you've actually read it.

Thats nonsense. Theres a government scheme whereby prescription costs are refunded above a certain amount regardless of income or means.
[broken link removed]. The Drug Payment scheme has been in operation for many years. The fact you mentioned the figure of €80 per month highlights your ignorance.

Yes, there is a lot of ignorance flying round here. I was specifically referring to the Drugs Payment Scheme in my comment. The limit used to be in the region of €80 per month, and has now increased to [broken link removed]. I'd be very interested to hear how a family with one parent working in a typical low-skill role (warehousing, security, hygiene) and the other minding children with a cleaning job mornings/evenings for pin money can find €90 per month for prescriptions?

Apparently if this 'class' of people are chain smoking (according to you) then since they can obviously afford so many expensive cigarettes; its' down to choice if they dont' wish to spend 10 euro on a thermal blanket. Or are they too lazy to go down to the local charity shop/health board and beg for a coat. Which is it ? Since you ignored my earlier questions I'll expect yet another fudge followed by a raft of outdated cliches.
Reality check, which century are you living in ? You appear to be harking back to a time when the welfare state was non existant. However even in those times there still existed charity. Is there a little match girl outside your window by any chance ?

Just for the record, it was Purple's glib 'Johnny Blue' comment that brought up the issue of smoking. There is indeed a fairly well-established link between low income and smoking. You seem to belive that there is no poverty in Ireland. I'm sure that will be news to the approx 300,000 people deemed by the CSO to be living in consistent poverty. Source: [broken link removed]. The little match girl may well be outside the window. It's probably a bit harder to recognise her and find her, but she does still exist.

So how prevalent is this ? And what is your solution ? Over the last 10 years I am pretty sure anyone who wanted a job could get one. Even drug addicts got jobs on building sites on Pearse Street (in Dublin) such was the demand for labour.
Families which have a culture of begging/unemployment are a special problem but I disagree that they won't have the wherewithal to scam some money off the system. I have never seen a gypsy without a jacket. Even the worst cases know what side their bread is buttered on. Drug addiction and crime (the solution of I steal the jacket and disregard the rights of others) is a separate issue and again is a choice made in free will with no lack of support if someone wishes to turn their back on it.
The state can only provide opportunitys; not impose them or provide people with a meaning for their lives. They have to find that meaning and purpose for themselves.

3rd generation employment does indeed exist. I did some work with a primary school in Jobstown as part of a programme to expose the kids to people who work, as they probably don't know anyone in their extended family who has a job. I'm sure the people who are waiting will be delighted to hear that there is 'no lock of support if someone wishes to turn their back'.

The state has a long, long way to go in providing equality of opportunity for all its citizens.

To get back to the R-word, the noises coming from Government, the response to recession will be to cut services from the most vulnerable citizens, while continuing to create a two-tier society by privatising more and more services.

Equality - yea, righ.....

 

[ubiquitous]

Time (once again) to shut this thread in my opinion. 423 posts to date and getting worse and worse the longer it goes on...

 

[Purple]

Look up. That's my point up there flying right over your head. Fault is not the issue here. It's not a question of who is at fault or who caused the disability or long-term illness. The issue is the failure of Government to create anything like equality of opportunity for people in such circumstances.

So now you are talking about equality of opportunity. In that I agree with you.

You seem to belive that there is no poverty in Ireland. I'm sure that will be news to the approx 300,000 people deemed by the CSO to be living in consistent poverty. Source: [broken link removed]. The little match girl may well be outside the window. It's probably a bit harder to recognise her and find her, but she does still exist.

I never suggested that there was no poverty in Ireland. I suggested that the root cause was more social than economic

3rd generation employment does indeed exist. I did some work with a primary school in Jobstown as part of a programme to expose the kids to people who work, as they probably don't know anyone in their extended family who has a job.

I was born in an area where third generation unemployment was common. I have friends who are the first in their family to have a job in 30 years so I know all about it. Your work in the school in Jobstown (which is laudable) lends weight to the opinion that the problem is primarily social.

The state has a long, long way to go in providing equality of opportunity for all its citizens.

Again I agree but funding should be directed toward making it as easy as possible for people to take care of themselves rather than toward the state taking care of them. For example the money the state will spend sending my children to 3rd level would be better spent providing a good income for students from poor backgrounds while they go to 3rd level. Imagine if a 18 year old from the school you went to in Jobstown received €100 on top of what he would get on the dole if he went to college (and passed his exams)? That would be money much better spent than allowing me to go on a few more family holidays over the next 10-15 years.

To get back to the R-word, the noises coming from Government, the response to recession will be to cut services from the most vulnerable citizens, while continuing to create a two-tier society by privatising more and more services.

I do not support cutting services to the most vulnerable but I do support the provision of services as long as delivery criteria remains as is. There is no fundamental link between privatising provision and creating a two-tier system.

 

[redstar]

Pure fiction, yet again. Bonuses do exist within the public sector, for many senior executives in the civil service, local authorities and some public bodies - remember the furore when Prof Drumm picked up a substantial bonus. But keep on making up stories about the public sector if it makes you feel good.

So would a clerical officer of any grade get a bonus for a job well done ?
Are bonuses only reserved for the senior grade officers and heads ?
Why are the unions not fighting this inequality and demanding performance related pay for ALL public service staff ?
(ps my wife and sis-in-law both work in the public sector - they are my sources, not 'made up' stories. So there )

 

[shnaek]

According to the CSO:

Consistent Poverty means having an income below 60% of the median and also experiencing enforced deprivation. This means being on a low income and not being able to afford basic necessities such as new clothes, not having the money to buy food such as meat or fish, not being able to heat your home, or having to go into debt to pay ordinary household bills.

Well, this figure is likely to get lower as our 'median' income is reduced over the next few years. Also, anyone got a link to where they come up with the 'median' level of income?