# 44% of those with children 'better off on dole'



## DB74 (12 Jun 2012)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0612/44-of-those-with-children-better-off-on-dole.html

Are we surprised?

Not really.

In fact, given that the ESRI report would appear to deal solely with the financial aspects, I would think that the figure is actually higher. Is someone who is, say, financially €10 a week better off working, the non-financial aspects of staying at home with young children would far outweigh that €10.

In my opinion


----------



## circle (12 Jun 2012)

I'd have to call into question some of their figures:

_A childless worker would need €7,000 a year to cover expenses such as lunches and commuting - working out at €140 per week._

That's an outrageuous figure, anyone working has the option of bringing lunch with them that would cost the same as what they would need to eat at home. My equivalent cost would be the cost of a tax free commuter ticket after tax a year, so < €500. Obviously some people may have long commutes and no public transport options but 7,000?

There's also the non-financial aspect of being a good role model to your children and working for a living!


----------



## Knuttell (12 Jun 2012)

It really beggars belief that those who are getting up every morning at 7am dropping the kids to creches and schools before working an 8-12 hour day,5-6 days a week are actually *worse off* than someone who is unemployed...

At a time when we are borrowing massively and taxing the working class to penury to support this madness,how in the name of God does that make any sense whatsoever??

This has to stop immediately,enough is enough.


----------



## Sunny (12 Jun 2012)

We need to be very careful here when reports like this come out. The vast majority of people do not want to be unemployed. Of course there are some who abuse the system but let's not start condemning every unemployed person for 'choosing the dole'. The most interesting thing is that since I am going to be unemployed soon, it sounds like it might actually pay for me to have kids which is ridiculous.


----------



## micmclo (12 Jun 2012)

Time for my hobby horse 

A creche can cost much the same as second mortage
Yet the staff are not well paid, not much more then minimum wage

I know there is insurance and other costs
But where is the money going? Must be the owners. They certainly aren't paying their staff big money

Why can't the State step in and run a network of creches at cost price.
It'll still cost the parents but not the current ridiculous sums.
And the staff get a decent wage too


Oh I know the State can be inefficient and not be able to deliver some services but this should be looked at I think

Joan Burton has no interest in this 
Senator Kathleen O'Meara in Labour Party from North Tipp was big on this issue but she didn't get elected as a TD and isn't a senator anymore


----------



## truthseeker (12 Jun 2012)

The link in the OP now links to a story saying that they have withdrawn this report.



> The ESRI has taken the unprecedented step of withdrawing the working paper that stated that up to 44% of unemployed families were better off on the dole.



I assume thats not what it said when it was originally linked? I heard the story on the radio earlier but no details.

@circle - the 7000 a year expenses, I assume this covers the commute, lunches, clothes for work, personal grooming expenses? It still sounds too high.


----------



## Sunny (12 Jun 2012)

truthseeker said:


> The link in the OP now links to a story saying that they have withdrawn this report.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That is shocking. To release a report like that into the public domain and not be able to stand over the figures is disgraceful. Time for the ERSI to vanish as this is not the first time.


----------



## Firefly (13 Jun 2012)

micmclo said:


> Why can't the State step in and run a network of creches at cost price.


 
Hi micmclo,

Thanks for that, I needed a lift this morning 

Firefly.


----------



## Purple (13 Jun 2012)

I heard the acting CEO of the National Wemmens Group on RTE radio this morning saying that we needed the government to spend more money on childcare and support for wemmen, especially in the first year of a child’s life.
She said we needed to move to the Scandinavian model (she didn’t say which one which was strange as they vary greatly from country to country). She said that it could be paid for by introducing a third rate of tax for those earning over €100K a year. She didn’t seem to think that increasing the marginal rate of income tax from well over 50% to god knows what would be a disincentive to work. She also didn’t offer any cost analysis. Very poor and unprofessional performance, the sort of thing you’d expect from a transition year student at a debate who was caught on the hop and who hadn’t done ant research. 
I have 4 children and I did all of the night feeds etc on all of them (yes, they weren’t breast fed ) so I know that it’s hard work but I think the State, i.e. my neighbours taxes, does more than enough as it is. Considering the state the country is in I’d be in favour of cuts to child benefit (and it’s removal from high income families) and large reductions to maternity and parental leave.


----------



## Superman (13 Jun 2012)

Sunny said:


> That is shocking. To release a report like that into the public domain and not be able to stand over the figures is disgraceful. Time for the ERSI to vanish as this is not the first time.


Appears to have been pulled for political reasons.
Richard Tol wrote the paper.
The ESRI say that it was pulled as there was need for significant correct - as stated by a journal where it was to be published.
The correction appears to be in terms of written style only, according to Richard Tol.
The ESRI say that it was not peer reviewed.
Richard Tol says that working papers in the ESRI were never peer reviewed, they were informally reviewed only and this had happened.
Richard then says the paper is being rewritten to deal with the errors in written style mentioned by the journal.

Again it seems like the ESRI are worried about creating headaches for the politicians - not about truth.

EDIT:
The ESRI themselves define "working papers" as:
_ESRI working papers represent un-refereed work-in-progress by researchers who are solely responsible for the content and any views expressed therein. Any comments on these papers will be welcome and should be sent to the author(s) by email. Papers may be downloaded for personal use only._
So their complaint that this particular working paper had to be removed because it was not "peer reviewed" appears even more ludicrous.


----------



## cork (13 Jun 2012)

Superman said:


> Again it seems like the ESRI are worried about creating headaches for the politicians - not about truth.



Pretty typical of the ESRI.

The lack of warning signs / alarm bells about the property bubble/banking sector was telling.


----------



## shnaek (13 Jun 2012)

cork said:


> Pretty typical of the ESRI.
> 
> The lack of warning signs / alarm bells about the property bubble/banking sector was telling.



Absolutely. The ESRI are another useless quango that should be disbanded immediately.


----------



## TarfHead (13 Jun 2012)

circle said:


> _A childless worker would need €7,000 a year to cover expenses such as lunches and commuting - working out at €140 per week._


 
I live in Dublin North East and work in South County Dublin. My DART & LUAS fares total €42.50 a week. If I drove, petrol, tolls & parking charges would total a similar figure.

I make my own sandwiches for my lunch. That's less easy to cost, but probably around €10 per week.

What am I missing out on by not spending €80/€90 difference between my costs and those suggested by a body of professionals ?


----------



## Shawady (13 Jun 2012)

I have a friend that was living in Kildare and worked in North Dublin. He reckoned he spent over €100 a week on petrol and tolls.
People that live in commuter towns and have to drive to work in Dublin must be spending big money on petrol.


----------



## DB74 (13 Jun 2012)

Professor Richard Tol stands over findings of original report

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0613/author-stands-by-working-paper-findings-on-welfare.html


----------



## homeowner (13 Jun 2012)

TarfHead said:


> I live in Dublin North East and work in South County Dublin. My DART & LUAS fares total €42.50 a week. If I drove, petrol, tolls & parking charges would total a similar figure.
> 
> I make my own sandwiches for my lunch. That's less easy to cost, but probably around €10 per week.
> 
> What am I missing out on by not spending €80/€90 difference between my costs and those suggested by a body of professionals ?



Do you need specific work clothes (suits, uniform)?  Dry cleaning of work clothes?  Lunch out with work mates on fridays?  Donations for leaving presents for people?  

All these things add up.


----------



## TarfHead (13 Jun 2012)

homeowner said:


> All these things add up.


 
True. As do shop-bought coffees and cupcakes and other luxuries that some people class as daily spend. The number of people I see using the DART and LUAS each day and the number of people I see eating their own home-made lunch suggest to me that my experience is not unique.

While there are people who are faced with ridiculous commutes through bad planning, I believe the 7K is not too high be be accepted as representative.


----------



## micmclo (13 Jun 2012)

Firefly said:


> Hi micmclo,
> 
> Thanks for that, I needed a lift this morning
> 
> Firefly.



I was being serious


----------



## Purple (13 Jun 2012)

micmclo said:


> I was being serious


 I thought it was a joke as well!


----------



## micmclo (13 Jun 2012)

I believe the State should be stepping in and providing top class services but also ensuring value for money
No wastage with taxpayers money 


You two are awful cynical...........in your old age


----------



## blueband (13 Jun 2012)

shnaek said:


> Absolutely. The ESRI are another useless quango that should be disbanded immediately.


totally agree, seems like now they are rowing back on the story, saying its not a report but a 'work in progress'  also it turns out the figures they are useing are seven years old!.....and we pay these donkeys.


----------



## Purple (13 Jun 2012)

micmclo said:


> I believe the State should be stepping in and providing top class services but also ensuring value for money
> No wastage with taxpayers money


 
Maybe it's because they've never done to before. anywhere. ever. Maybe it's that that's making me cynical.


----------



## Marion (13 Jun 2012)

> Maybe it's because they've never done to before. anywhere. ever.



Link please 

Marion


----------



## demoivre (14 Jun 2012)

Purple said:


> Considering the state the country is in I’d be in favour of cuts to child benefit (and it’s removal from high income families) and large reductions to maternity and parental leave.



What's your definition of a high income family?


----------



## Purple (14 Jun 2012)

demoivre said:


> What's your definition of a high income family?


 Good question but, for example, families with a household income over €200k shouldn't be getting welfare.


----------



## Delboy (14 Jun 2012)

Purple said:


> Good question but, for example, families with a household income over €200k shouldn't be getting welfare.



how many families in Ireland with that sort of income and with kids under 16? It'd make a point I suppose to stop payments to families like that, but it'd just be a drop in the ocean of the Social Welfare bill


----------



## Sunny (14 Jun 2012)

How about doing something similar to what they are trying in Britain and place a household cap on any sort of welfare benefit that be received e.g. No household should receive more than say 30k from the State including child benefit, medical card, jobseekers, rent allowance etc. (number is plucked from the sky).

I haven't looked at pros and cons by the way. Just throwing it out there.


----------



## Purple (14 Jun 2012)

Delboy said:


> how many families in Ireland with that sort of income and with kids under 16? It's make a point I suppose to stop payments to families like that, but it'd just be a drop in the ocean of the Social Welfare bill


 
I'm not best positioned to say at what level payments should stop, maybe €80'000 is a better level. Maybe existing payments should be taxable. Maybe a refundable tax credit would be best as there would be far less administration involved.


----------



## demoivre (14 Jun 2012)

Purple said:


> Good question but, for example, families with a household income over €200k shouldn't be getting welfare.





Delboy said:


> how many families in Ireland with that sort of income and with kids under 16? It's make a point I suppose to stop payments to families like that, but it'd just be a drop in the ocean of the Social Welfare bill



Even if you take a lower salary eg 100k, it doesn't necessarily mean the family in question is "better off" than the same size family on 50k  because mortgage debt is so significant in Ireland ! The 100k family might be servicing a 300k mortgage with childcare cost on top, whereas the 50k family might have no mortgage and kids in secondary school.


----------



## Leo (14 Jun 2012)

demoivre said:


> Even if you take a lower salary eg 100k, it doesn't necessarily mean the family in question is "better off" than the same size family on 50k because mortgage debt is so significant in Ireland ! The 100k family might be servicing a 300k mortgage with childcare cost on top, whereas the 50k family might have no mortgage and kids in secondary school.


 
Mortgage debts shouldn't come into it. People should not be rewared and subsidised for making poor decisions.


----------



## Purple (14 Jun 2012)

Leo said:


> Mortgage debts shouldn't come into it. People should not be rewared and subsidised for making poor decisions.


 I agree (and my mortgage is much bigger than €300K!).


----------



## Protocol (14 Jun 2012)

For information, here is a link to the Working Paper:

[broken link removed]

Here is the CSO's Household Budget Survey, from whcih the data was drawn:

[broken link removed]


----------



## Protocol (14 Jun 2012)

I don't know why Tol used the 2004/05 HBS for data, rather than the more recent 2009/10 HBS, see below:

[broken link removed]

I suspect it's because only some data from the 2009/10 HBS has been released so far.


----------



## shnaek (15 Jun 2012)

*ESRI refuses to reveal data that 'contradicts' Tol's claims*

The craic continues:

http://www.independent.ie/national-...ata-that-contradicts-tols-claims-3139240.html


----------



## DB74 (15 Jun 2012)

Desperation stuff from the ESRI there

What's next, Professor Tol has to go to bed early without his supper if he doesn't "correct" his findings!


----------



## Purple (15 Jun 2012)

DB74 said:


> Desperation stuff from the ESRI there
> 
> What's next, Professor Tol has to go to bed early without his supper if he doesn't "correct" his findings!


 
The last thing we need is experts in publically funded bodies giving honest opinions which may influence public debate and government policy. That sort of negativity can make governments unpopular so people like that should go an em, kill demselves. 

If that sort of thing was allowed we would have had people from the department of finance telling us our economy was overheated and we had a property bubble and all that, no no no, down with that sort of thing.


----------



## Kine (15 Jun 2012)

In all fairness, does anyone think anything will come of this report? 

If Professor Tol is totally correct and all his numbers stand up to scrutiny, like most revelations, in about 2 months time there will be something else. Hosehold Tax springs to mind - whilst still an issue with 600,000 houses not paid for, it isn't front page news at the moment either.


----------



## Shawady (15 Jun 2012)

I thought it was ironic that on the same week it was revealed that the Croke park agreement was issuing savings, a government minister (Varadker) couldn't wait to talk about compulsory redundacies in the public sector. Yet when a report is issued actually criticising the social welfare system, it is just ignored.


----------



## Purple (15 Jun 2012)

Shawady said:


> I thought it was ironic that on the same week it was revealed that the Croke park agreement was issuing savings, a government minister (Varadker) couldn't wait to talk about compulsory redundacies in the public sector. Yet when a report is issued actually criticising the social welfare system, it is just ignored.


 
Yes, the Croke Park agreement has given us savings of €0.5 billion when we are borrowing €15 billion a year. 3.5%. We're saved!


----------



## Shawady (15 Jun 2012)

Purple said:


> Yes, the Croke Park agreement has given us savings of €0.5 billion when we are borrowing €15 billion a year. 3.5%. We're saved!


 
How much do you think the social welfare bill is?
Do you think the whole 15 billion is going to come from the CPA?

My point is that this year's report has seen savings that on schedule. Will future year's be the same, possibly not. But the government likes to be seen to talk tough on the public sector. Fair enough , but be consistent.
The social welfare bill is higher but the minister has commited to not cutting rates. So when a report is issued highlighting the anomalus situation regards some families being better off on the dole, it is just basically ignored. 
Certainly didn't hear the minister say "Well we may have to revisit our policy of not cutting rates". because it's not popular


----------



## DB74 (15 Jun 2012)

We should only allow people who are working to vote. Then we can cut the social welfare bill. You should have to bring a recent payslip with you to the polling booth.


----------



## blueband (15 Jun 2012)

Shawady said:


> So when a report is issued highlighting the anomalus situation regards some families being better off on the dole, it is just basically ignored.


maybe thats because even the government dont believe a word the ERSI say!..........is not they have a reputation for calling it right!


----------



## shnaek (18 Jun 2012)

blueband said:


> maybe thats because even the government dont believe a word the ERSI say!..........is not they have a reputation for calling it right!



If that's the case, then why are they (WE) continuing to fund it?


----------



## blueband (18 Jun 2012)

same reason we are paying for all the other usless quangos, or as i call them jobs for the boys clubs!


----------



## Complainer (18 Jun 2012)

cork said:


> Pretty typical of the ESRI.
> 
> The lack of warning signs / alarm bells about the property bubble/banking sector was telling.


You have a very short or perhaps selective memory.

They gave the advice. Others chose not to listen;
http://youtu.be/THWbrFy5NWM



DB74 said:


> We should only allow people who are working to vote. Then we can cut the social welfare bill. You should have to bring a recent payslip with you to the polling booth.


Hell, why don't we go the whole hog and limit posting to straight, white, male Askaboutmoney.com posters.


----------



## DB74 (19 Jun 2012)

Complainer said:


> Hell, why don't we go the whole hog and limit posting to straight, white, male Askaboutmoney.com posters.



Don't forget "God-fearing"!


----------



## Firefly (19 Jun 2012)

DB74 said:


> Don't forget "God-fearing"!


 
And Right-wing, "evil" business owners


----------



## Purple (19 Jun 2012)

Complainer said:


> Hell, why don't we go the whole hog and limit posting to straight, white, male Askaboutmoney.com posters.



I'm a lesbian trapped in a mans body. Do I get a vote?

I'm all for everyone over the age of 18 having a vote, even well-heeled upper middle class urbanite socialists.


----------



## delgirl (20 Jun 2012)

They're covering the 'better off on the dole' story tonight on Midweek - not sure how thorough the investigation will be, but still might be worth watching.

Remember this one on 'Show Me The Money' in 2006? Eddie Hobbs was surprised that the former bank worker with a wife and 2 kids was better off on social welfare than in paid employment.


----------



## Delboy (20 Jun 2012)

just saw it on TV3 there....the girl at the start made the point that work does'nt pay. 

Her family (bf and 1 child) are down €125 per week + petrol money (160km commute a day)...and she's on a salary well above the average wage but her partner lost his benefits when she got a job. I did'nt hear her say she had to pay creche fees so I presume she does'nt with the bf at home


----------

