# Kevin Myres on working class mindsets.



## Purple

Kevin Myers: Self-defeating working class tolerates lack of punctuality, fecklessness and low achievement
I agree with all of the points he makes (though I find some of the language grates).
What do other posters think?


----------



## Firefly

I agree with his viewpoints also, but it would have been nice if he offered some solution to the issues he raised.


----------



## Purple

Education is the nearest thing to an answer that the state can offer. I’m a big fan of the idea that what we need most is investment in very early stage education; up to second class.  If kids haven’t been made interested in learning by then it’s too late.

I strongly agree with Myers on another point; peer pressure, not bad teachers, class sizes or family income, is the biggest differential between children that do well and those that don’t. Basically if kids in school A get slagged for doing their homework and kids in school B get slagged for not doing it then the kids in school B will do better. Parents also have to make sure that their children do their homework and stay up to speed with what’s going on in class. If they don’t they are failing their children and doing a lousy job as a parent.       

Incidentally I also believe that the group that the state has failed most over the last few years is the families that have tried to get out of that disgusting “working class” mindset of underachievement and give their children a better future.


----------



## pixiebean22

Agree with you there Purple about parents being involved.

By the time I finished secondary school my mum (my dad was sole breadwinner so didn't have as much time as my mum to help) probably knew as much as I did about the curriculum from the amount of time she dedicated to helping me out and I do think that made a difference to my attitude to school and learning and putting the work in.  Day in, day out she knew what my classes were and who my teachers were and what subjects I found most difficult and I found this made a tremendous difference to me.  I think if I didn't have her constantly pushing I probably would've thought screw this and just been an average student.

And also agree that the earlier you start the better.


----------



## shnaek

I agree with Purple and Myers. Early intervention is key. I think Myers uses the language he does to get debate going. If he phrased it in PC language his topics wouldn't get the attention that they do. 

Another comment I'd make about the likes of Myers and O'Doherty and McWilliams - it never ceases to amaze me how people say 'Oh, I don't like X' or 'x is an a-hole', but the points they make, rather than the people themselves should be the focus of peoples ire or support. Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean they haven't got a valid point of view, or that you disagree with them on every point just because of who they are. Or perhaps people dislike them so much because what they say is often so close to the truth? Wasn't it Aristotle who said that if you are going to tell people the truth, you better make them laugh - otherwise they will kill you for it.

(actually it was George Bernard Shaw)


----------



## Bill Struth

Yet more of Myers insulting attention seeking nonsense.


----------



## PetrolHead

Sounds like he's been kept waiting in all day by a plumber that never turned up and he's got himself so wound up about the situation it becomes a problem with the whole of Irish culture...

He almost approaches a point I would agree with but as always, destroys his own argument by attempting over intelligent prose and descending into pettiness.


----------



## shnaek

Bill Struth said:


> Yet more of Myers insulting attention seeking nonsense.



That proves my point!


----------



## Bill Struth

shnaek said:


> That proves my point!


No, it doesn't.


----------



## Purple

Bill Struth said:


> Yet more of Myers insulting attention seeking nonsense.



Do you disagree with everything he said?


----------



## shnaek

Bill Struth said:


> No, it doesn't.



Yes it does...


----------



## Bill Struth

Purple said:


> Do you disagree with everything he said?


 Yes I do. 

I was that child from a working class area with a grammar school uniform on. My friends from primary school went to different schools. Did they single me out because of the school I was going to? No. Did anyone else? No. Did any adults? No. The only people that singled me out because of where I was from were the middle class students and teachers in the godforsaken school when I got there.

And the fact that he tries to offer 'insight' (as if he could) into the working class mindset because his plumber was late is simply laughable.


----------



## Purple

Bill Struth said:


> Yes I do.
> 
> I was that child from a working class area with a grammar school uniform on. My friends from primary school went to different schools. Did they single me out because of the school I was going to? No. Did anyone else? No. Did any adults? No. The only people that singled me out because of where I was from were the middle class students and teachers in the godforsaken school when I got there.
> 
> And the fact that he tries to offer 'insight' (as if he could) into the working class mindset because his plumber was late is simply laughable.



Was that in this country? (the grammer school reference is why I ask)


----------



## DB74

Purple said:


> Was that in this country? (the grammer school reference is why I ask)


 
I'm guessing Scotland


----------



## Mpsox

Personnally I think he is being a bit cheeky having a rant on the "working class" like this, given that fact that it is often the well-educated university types who got us into the financial mess the nation is in, via leading the banks or the incomptent regualtors.

I would partially agree with his comments on education though. There is a mob of feral children out there in every town in Ireland, running out of control because their parents don't give a monkey about their future and see no future beyond the next social welfare payments. Why work when the state provides? 
I'm not sure the issue though is the parents attitude to education, I think it is more to do with their attitide to work. I came from a small farming background, my Dad held a full time job as well. He worked 12-14 hours a day, every day of his working life and yet was also heavily involved in the community. That attitude rubs off on kids in the right way, in the same way as the attitude of many of our professional social welfare claimants rubs off on theirs. Never ceases to amaze me that there was over 100000 people on the dole during the boom years, yet all the Eastern Europeans could come over and get jobs easily. Why wouldn't the unemployed Irish take those jobs when they could have if they wanted to?


----------



## Bill Struth

Purple said:


> Was that in this country? (the grammer school reference is why I ask)


 Belfast.


----------



## z104

That is yet another wild idiotic generalisation from Myers.


----------



## Tinker Bell

Did Kevin's English tutor never hit him over the lughole with a copy of The Beano for spelling "CRAIC" as "crack"? Or was he talking about pharmaceuticals?


"We are more comfortable with Barrytown caricatures, with their horses going up in lifts, with their great good humour, and the endless crack." (The Indo)

Any English/Irish teachers out there to explain which is the right spelling?


----------



## Vanilla

I grew up in a rural area where none of what Myers is talking about would apply. We all went to the same schools- ie every child from every background. So what mattered was, as mpsox said, your parents' attitude to work or education leading to work. And while there was a certain deference- or more likely distance -perhaps to doctors, guards and priests ( my mother always said- be civil but strange to those three 'professions') I felt everyone else was pretty much on a level.  So maybe what he said was true of only certain parts of urban areas.


----------



## Imperator

I seem to recall Kevin Myers writing about the use of the word 'crack' before. If I'm not mistaken, his point was that 'crack' was already in use in the English langauage and became gaelicised afterwards as 'craic'.


----------



## DB74

Maybe he's talking about cocaine!


----------



## z104

DB74 said:


> Maybe he's talking about cocaine!


 
Maybe he is talking out of his crack.


----------



## PetrolHead

Mpsox said:


> Personnally I think he is being a bit cheeky having a rant on the "working class" like this, given that fact that it is often the well-educated university types who got us into the financial mess the nation is in, via leading the banks or the incomptent regualtors.




I take massive exception to this comment...

1 - Are you suggesting the "working class" don't go to university then?

2 - Are you suggesting the bubble was solely created from the top down?

3 - Are you suggesting that it wasn't a class-bridging national attitude of conspicuous consumption that lead to the bust?

4 - Are you suggesting the banks are the only ones responsible for the "financial mess"?


----------



## Chris

Mpsox said:


> I would partially agree with his comments on education though. There is a mob of feral children out there in every town in Ireland, running out of control because their parents don't give a monkey about their future and see no future beyond the next social welfare payments. Why work when the state provides?


Yes indeed, state welfare has always and everywhere failed. I have not found one shred of evidence that welfare programs actually reduce poverty levels and numbers. And it is plainly due to the fact that welfare programs are a total discouragement to trying to better your situation. A few months ago I heard a single mother interviewed, who was living in free social housing and came out with €350 a week; that's more than someone on minimum wage eanrs. So why on earth would you go to work?



Mpsox said:


> I'm not sure the issue though is the parents attitude to education, I think it is more to do with their attitide to work. I came from a small farming background, my Dad held a full time job as well. He worked 12-14 hours a day, every day of his working life and yet was also heavily involved in the community. That attitude rubs off on kids in the right way, in the same way as the attitude of many of our professional social welfare claimants rubs off on theirs. Never ceases to amaze me that there was over 100000 people on the dole during the boom years, yet all the Eastern Europeans could come over and get jobs easily. Why wouldn't the unemployed Irish take those jobs when they could have if they wanted to?



I think you make a very good point here. My father is a self employed business man who has spent a life time creating a medium sized manufacturing business. Like your dad, 12 hours days were/are normal. My dad's and granddad's generation would rather work for less money than accept a wellfare cheque. This was the right social attitude to have, not this sense of entitlement that has been created by ever increasing, disfunctional welfare programs.


----------



## Shawady

Chris said:


> A few months ago I heard a single mother interviewed, who was living in free social housing and came out with €350 a week; that's more than someone on minimum wage eanrs. So why on earth would you go to work?


 
I recently posted on AAM that one of my best friends receives €415 a week in social benefit (He has 3 children). He also receives other benefits.
He wants to work, but I reckon he would need a job with a salary of approx €40K to make it worth his while.
It is unlikely there will be too many jobs starting on that salary in the near future.


----------



## Shawady

People refusing jobs that pay 25K.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Firefly

Shawady said:


> People refusing jobs that pay 25K.
> 
> [broken link removed]


 

With much talk about bringing lower paid workers into the tax net, this issue needs to be overcome first - otherwise those on lower pay may just opt to go on the dole and those on the dole will be dis-incentivised to go back working.


----------



## Mpsox

PetrolHead said:


> I take massive exception to this comment...
> 
> 1 - Are you suggesting the "working class" don't go to university then?
> 
> 2 - Are you suggesting the bubble was solely created from the top down?
> 
> 3 - Are you suggesting that it wasn't a class-bridging national attitude of conspicuous consumption that lead to the bust?
> 
> 4 - Are you suggesting the banks are the only ones responsible for the "financial mess"?


 
no, I'm a working class guy who went to uni myself. What I am saying is that to me, Myers has an problem with what he perceives to be the feckless attitude of the working class when the reality is, the attitude is no different in many people who went to Blackrock or some other well to do fee paying school. 

Reality is that many people in Ireland, regardless of their background have a careless, couldn't give a damm attitude about them.


----------



## shnaek

Chris said:


> Yes indeed, state welfare has always and everywhere failed. I have not found one shred of evidence that welfare programs actually reduce poverty levels and numbers. And it is plainly due to the fact that welfare programs are a total discouragement to trying to better your situation. A few months ago I heard a single mother interviewed, who was living in free social housing and came out with €350 a week; that's more than someone on minimum wage eanrs. So why on earth would you go to work?
> 
> 
> 
> I think you make a very good point here. My father is a self employed business man who has spent a life time creating a medium sized manufacturing business. Like your dad, 12 hours days were/are normal. My dad's and granddad's generation would rather work for less money than accept a wellfare cheque. This was the right social attitude to have, not this sense of entitlement that has been created by ever increasing, disfunctional welfare programs.



Excellent points.


----------



## Complainer

Chris said:


> Yes indeed, state welfare has always and everywhere failed. I have not found one shred of evidence that welfare programs actually reduce poverty levels and numbers.


I suppose this depends on your measure of success/failure. If your sole measure of success is 'get people back to work' (usually in minimum wage roles with little or no effective employment rights), then perhaps they have failed. If your measure of success include stopping people from being hungry and providing families with basic light and heat that would otherwise be not there, then perhaps they could be considered to be more successful.


----------



## Chris

Shawady said:


> People refusing jobs that pay 25K.
> 
> [broken link removed]





> "I met 25 representatives of small business there, and there are real concerns that jobs being offered at €25,000 a year are not being taken up, and Eamon O'Cuiv and myself are sitting down and looking at how we can achieve this," he said.


Well that's great, they're going to sit down and figure it out. Is this guy, and his colleagues, so inept and ignorant of what's going on that he is taken by surprise about this?!?



> "Growth will be about 1 per cent of the economy this year - you're not going to get an immediate lift with the number of jobs to be created. Into next year, we're hoping that there will be an impact on jobs because we're going to have about 3 to 3.5 per cent growth in the economy."


Now there is some optimism, actually it isn't optimism; he claims that it is *certain* that we will not only have growth, but 3% growth. Do people actually still believe a word that these prevaricators come out with?


----------



## Chris

Complainer said:


> I suppose this depends on your measure of success/failure. If your sole measure of success is 'get people back to work' (usually in minimum wage roles with little or no effective employment rights), then perhaps they have failed. If your measure of success include stopping people from being hungry and providing families with basic light and heat that would otherwise be not there, then perhaps they could be considered to be more successful.



Actually neither. My claim is that welfare programs have not reduced the amount of people living below the poverty line, because the rules of welfare programs are such, that as soon as you work you lose your entitlements. And in many cases work will pay less than welfare, so there is no incentive to work. Unless you have a job you will not learn new skills or even be able to get a carreer off the ground.


----------



## Complainer

Chris said:


> Actually neither. My claim is that welfare programs have not reduced the amount of people living below the poverty line, because the rules of welfare programs are such, that as soon as you work you lose your entitlements.


That's just not true. You get to keep your medical card for two years. You will still qualify for FIS as long as you are in a low-paid job.



Chris said:


> Unless you have a job you will not learn new skills or even be able to get a carreer off the ground.


I don't come across many people who 'learn new skills' in their minimum wage jobs or manage to build a career from minimum wage jobs. The great 'American dream' is a myth, in America and in Ireland.


----------



## Firefly

Complainer said:


> I don't come across many people who 'learn new skills' in their minimum wage jobs or manage to build a career from minimum wage jobs. The great 'American dream' is a myth, in America and in Ireland.


 
IMO, if you are working a minimum wage where the dole is not available, you have a greater incentive to improve your lot than someone who is getting the dole for nothing.


----------



## DB74

Complainer said:


> That's just not true. You get to keep your medical card for two years. You will still qualify for FIS as long as you are in a low-paid job.


 
What happens after 2 years?


----------



## Chris

Complainer said:


> That's just not true. You get to keep your medical card for two years. You will still qualify for FIS as long as you are in a low-paid job.


What about all those people with no kids, what happens to them? And the FIS provides  a disincentive to earn above the threshold for family sizes, and usually only paid for 1 year.



Complainer said:


> I don't come across many people who 'learn new skills' in their minimum wage jobs or manage to build a career from minimum wage jobs. The great 'American dream' is a myth, in America and in Ireland.


Not every unemployed person, but there are plenty of people from so-called disadvantaged backgrounds, who have little or no education and skills. Unless they take any kind of job or undergo some training courses, they will not learn any/new skills. And if you are in a low or minimum wage job, you have an added incentive to increase your skills to get a better job.
The term "American Dream" is a total cliché. But it is not true that people cannot overcome any disadvantage and make good careers or businesses out of nothing. What people just don't realise is that it is not something that just falls in your lap. 
When I finished school I had just enough money to share a tiny apartment while working a minimum wage job. The only skill I had was being fluent in German which allowed me to take a call center job at slightly above minimum wage. I learnt some basic skills and invested some money in courses before I went on to do a degree by night. I'm far from being the "American Dream" millionaire, but none of this would have happened unless I had put in the work, time and money, all of which was my own. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I got my work ethic from my father, so accepting welfare was not an option I was willing to take. That left me with only one option, which was to work and find a way to build a career.
My father and brother set up businesses out of nothing. It's damn hard work but this is the only way. If you take away the incentive to even try and improve your situation then you end up in the situation where thousands of people get stuck in the "poverty trap".


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> I don't come across many people who 'learn new skills' in their minimum wage jobs or manage to build a career from minimum wage jobs. The great 'American dream' is a myth, in America and in Ireland.



I've met people who started off on very low paid jobs (I started off on a very low paid job) and did well.
What evidence do you have that the American dream (upward mobility through hard work and smarts) is a myth?
BTW, I support welfare programmes, even for the long term unemployed, but they should be skewed toward helping children get a better education, not giving cash to the parents and they should never leave people better off than they would be on a minimum wage job.


----------



## Complainer

DB74 said:


> What happens after 2 years?



You end up in the same position as many low and middle earners - your family get sick and you are unable to afford doctors fees and drug fees for anything but the most serious of conditions. If you are unlucky enough to have a serious condition, you might die while waiting for treatment.  But to be honest, you would probably have died on the medical card too. 



Chris said:


> What about all those people with no kids, what happens to them?


I didn't mention kids, so I'm not sure I get your question about kids? 



Chris said:


> And the FIS provides  a disincentive to earn above the threshold for family sizes, and usually only paid for 1 year.


Not true. FIS has no poverty trap. If you earn more, you do indeed lose the equivalent FIS, but you don't end up worse off. If you do have the opportunity to earn more (through overtime or promotion or whatever), there is no disincentive to progressing. 

FIS is not limited to one year. If you still qualify after one year, you have to reapply. http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Publications/SW22/Pages/10HowlongdoestheFISpaymentlast.aspx



Chris said:


> Not every unemployed person, but there are plenty of people from  so-called disadvantaged backgrounds, who have little or no education and  skills. Unless they take any kind of job or undergo some training  courses, they will not learn any/new skills. And if you are in a low or  minimum wage job, you have an added incentive to increase your skills to  get a better job.
> The term "American Dream" is a total cliché. But it is not true that  people cannot overcome any disadvantage and make good careers or  businesses out of nothing. What people just don't realise is that it is  not something that just falls in your lap.
> When I finished school I had just enough money to share a tiny apartment  while working a minimum wage job. The only skill I had was being fluent  in German which allowed me to take a call center job at slightly above  minimum wage. I learnt some basic skills and invested some money in  courses before I went on to do a degree by night. I'm far from being the  "American Dream" millionaire, but none of this would have happened  unless I had put in the work, time and money, all of which was my own.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, I got my work ethic from my father,  so accepting welfare was not an option I was willing to take. That left  me with only one option, which was to work and find a way to build a  career.
> My father and brother set up businesses out of nothing. It's damn hard  work but this is the only way. If you take away the incentive to even  try and improve your situation then you end up in the situation where  thousands of people get stuck in the "poverty trap".



It is of course possible for people of exceptional talent and commitment to develop and build a career or a business from modest roots. But most people don't have that talent, and get frustrated at the lack of fairness and equity in the system. They look around them and see those who get to move up the ranks because Daddy owns the business, or because they went to the 'right' school or they play on the 'right' rugby team. We are a long, long way off a fair and balanced system where talent and commitment bring fair rewards. But even if we had this perfect system with equal opportunities for everyone to develop, this still misses the point. Focus on the job or the post, not the person. In our current environment and system, no cleaner or kitchen hand is going to earn a living wage. So when one kitchen hand gets promoted, the problem just moves to his or her replacement - the new person getting the crappy wage.


----------



## Yachtie

I think that Mayers made some valid points but the layer of society his comments cover is a lot larger than the working class alone. 

For example, there is a lot of self-depreciation and self-defeatism amoung those families whose attitude and setting a poor example for their own young has lead them into perpetual poverty and dependance on the state. Just think of communities where every other 17 year old girl is pushing a pram, claiming the lone parent allowance (or whatever it's called) and is hoping to get a council house soon. 

Some middle-class workers are just as unpunctual, lazy and feckless as Myres' working class. I wonder if he has ever been seen by a GP or a dentist at the exact time of his appointment? Or, has he ever been ill advised by his accountant or has his solicitor ever 'forgotten' to get back to him?

I spoke to a building contractor a while ago and he insists that it's the land owners, estate agents, banks and *tradesmen* who drove the house prices up and up for years. He was saying that in thouse tough times for the industry, he has to micro-manage every sub-contractor he has otherwise they'd be hanging around all day (if they turned up for the job), not doing much or doing stuff wrong so they get a few days extra work (for which they'd demand to be paid) fixing their own mistakes. He told me that it's a shame that a lot of cowboy tradesmen were able to get away with murder during the good times and that the attitude hasn't changed much since. I believe that he's been in business for 20-odd years. You'd think that people would be keen to do any work they can get, especially now when carpenters / plumbers / electricians / ... are dime a dozen.


----------



## Husker

Yachtie said:


> Just think of communities where every other 17 year old girl is pushing a pram, claiming the lone parent allowance (or whatever it's called) and is hoping to get a council house soon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Less than 3 per cent of people on the lone parents allowance are under 20 years of age.
> 
> Another pointless, mean-spirited article from Myers, allowing him and others to indulge their prejudices.
Click to expand...


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Focus on the job or the post, not the person. In our current environment and system, no cleaner or kitchen hand is going to earn a living wage. So when one kitchen hand gets promoted, the problem just moves to his or her replacement - the new person getting the crappy wage.



This is where socialism is so half-baked and not thought through. It is not the responsibility of the employer to provide a living wage for an employee as this will vary depending on the needs and circumstances of said employee. The employer should pay what the market dictates and if society in general deems it desirable that the employee should have more income it should be provided through the welfare system. 
People should never be paid more than they are worth to an organisation (be they CEO’s or cleaners).

The notion of a living wage is just more equality of outcome "social justice", AKA communism.


----------



## micmclo

I was never fan of these working class/middle class generalizations

And until recently a tradesman would earn far, far more then a solicitor for example, a job which involves years of exams and qualifications.
And I thought in a republic all citizens were equal 



> Be honest now: when you book an Irish plumber or electrician, do you really expect him (and tragically, it's always a 'him') to turn up on time? Are you all that surprised if he doesn't turn up at all? But then you might get a phone call a couple of days later saying, sorry, he got tied up on another job, so he'll pop round tomorrow. Ask him why he didn't phone, and he'll throw you a few porkies.



Hell yeah!
And even if you got a good tradesman you'd be worried they'd drop you for a bigger job. 
It was done to me, ok supply and demand but if you tell somebody you'll do the job then you can't just drop someone.

If there is one good thing to come out of the recession it's that a lot of this messing from cowboy tradesmen won't be acceptable anymore.
My letterbox gets lots of flyers from tradesmen, they must be desperate for business so I haggle them down aggressively to get a good price.


----------



## Purple

micmclo said:


> And until recently a tradesman would earn far, far more then a solicitor for example, a job which involves years of exams and qualifications.



Solicitors have to train for years and pass exams as well you know.


----------



## micmclo

Purple said:


> Solicitors have to train for years and pass exams as well you know.



Was my post unclear? 
Actually it wasn't, maybe you should read it again

Of course they do, go to college and do the FE-1 exams and serve the two slots in an office before they are qualified


----------



## ajapale

micmclo said:


> ..and serve the two slots in an office before they are qualified



Do you mean "serve the two sloths..?"


----------



## micmclo

What you do mean sloths?

PPC1 and PPC2, two slots

I'm having to explain every post I make


----------



## Purple

micmclo said:


> Was my post unclear?
> Actually it wasn't, maybe you should read it again
> 
> Of course they do, go to college and do the FE-1 exams and serve the two slots in an office before they are qualified



Trades people have to train for years and pass exams as well. Your post had a whiff of elitism.


----------



## micmclo

Never said they didn't.
And my first post was I wasn't fan of labeling people into different classes based on their job so I can't see how I'm being elitist.
In a republic everyone is supposed to be equal, well that's my belief
Elitist am I?

Think I'll give this thread a miss, can't be back to explain my post again for a 4th time 



Purple said:


> Trades people have to train for years and pass exams as well.





Purple said:


> Solicitors have to train for years and pass exams as well you know.



I don't remember posting otherwise, I don't see your point or where I need to be corrected


----------



## Chris

Complainer said:


> You end up in the same position as many low and middle earners - your family get sick and you are unable to afford doctors fees and drug fees for anything but the most serious of conditions. If you are unlucky enough to have a serious condition, you might die while waiting for treatment.  But to be honest, you would probably have died on the medical card too.


What you are highlighting is a failure of the governments health system, the very institution that you put so much faith in when it comes running the economy. I've brought up the following calculation before:
Ireland spends about €3,500 per person on the health system, which as you said gives you long waiting lists, you still pay for GPs, dentists, opticians, prescriptions.
Switzerland has a private only health insurance system with public and private hospitals competing for the same patients (no taxes are collected to pay for health care). An adult pays about €250 per month or €3,000 per year for basic insurance. For this you have practically no waiting lists for even the simplest procedures, GP visits, some dental treatment and all prescriptions. And this in a country with higher wages and cost of living than Ireland. This is the most damning indictment of government incompetence, and superiority of private sector services.



Complainer said:


> I didn't mention kids, so I'm not sure I get your question about kids?


That's why I did. You only get FIS if you have kids. There are many unemployed that do not have kids.



Complainer said:


> Not true. FIS has no poverty trap. If you earn more, you do indeed lose the equivalent FIS, but you don't end up worse off. If you do have the opportunity to earn more (through overtime or promotion or whatever), there is no disincentive to progressing.
> 
> FIS is not limited to one year. If you still qualify after one year, you have to reapply. http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Publications/SW22/Pages/10HowlongdoestheFISpaymentlast.aspx


Here's a quick calculation that shows the disincentive of FIS for a low paid worker with 1 child:
20h*€10/h=€200/w
€506-€200=€306 (€506 is the threshold for 1 child family)
€306*0.6=€183.6
€183.6+€200=€383.6/w (income including FIS)
40h*10/h=€400
€506-€400=€106
€106*0.6=€63.6
€400+€63.6=€463.6
for and extra 20 hours work you get €80 or €4/h. While this is not as bad as getting the same for 25 hours minimum wage as for doing nothing on the dole, it is still a serious lack of incentive. As Mpsox already mentioned, there is a lack of work ethic in this country and combine that with a lack of incentives to actually work more and you're on a road to disaster.



Complainer said:


> It is of course possible for people of exceptional talent and commitment to develop and build a career or a business from modest roots. But most people don't have that talent, and get frustrated at the lack of fairness and equity in the system. They look around them and see those who get to move up the ranks because Daddy owns the business, or because they went to the 'right' school or they play on the 'right' rugby team. We are a long, long way off a fair and balanced system where talent and commitment bring fair rewards. But even if we had this perfect system with equal opportunities for everyone to develop, this still misses the point. Focus on the job or the post, not the person. In our current environment and system, no cleaner or kitchen hand is going to earn a living wage. So when one kitchen hand gets promoted, the problem just moves to his or her replacement - the new person getting the crappy wage.


You do not need some exceptional talent to get a career started or a job that pays closer to the average income. And most people do have enough brains, but are lacking work ethic and incentive. There are plenty of colleges that offer night courses for diplomas and degrees, and they are not prohibitively expensive.

And the majority of people that do well in their careers do so because of merit, not because of aristocracy or relations. There is no such thing as inherent unfairness, and people will always blame someone or something else if their work isn't rewarded as much as they think it should be. If someone gets a promotion, it's because of some bias or preferential treatment; if bad singers earn more than an excellent paramedic, that's unfair; the list goes on, but this completely ignores the fact that wages are directly related to productivity and the supply and demand for labour. 

The fact that a cleaner with essentially no skills earns very little is due to the fact that there is an abundance of people with no skills. And even when they manage to upskill, there are plenty of people in line with no skills that will take that job. Paying people this undefinable "living wage" for not having a skill does not solve the problem; it's simply all carrot and no stick.

If the education system actually worked and reduced the amount of unskilled workers, then unskilled wages would increase, while skilled wages would decrease. This would be a perfect, market driven distribution of income, without direct government intervention. But instead of governments highlighting their own failures and incompetence, they go on to appropriate ever more taxes to provide more welfare services, that provide less incentive.


----------



## cork

Vanilla said:


> I grew up in a rural area where none of what Myers is talking about would apply..



I did as well.

There is a lot of school snobbery in the cities.


----------



## Purple

micmclo said:


> Never said they didn't.
> And my first post was I wasn't fan of labeling people into different classes based on their job so I can't see how I'm being elitist.
> In a republic everyone is supposed to be equal, well that's my belief
> Elitist am I?
> 
> Think I'll give this thread a miss, can't be back to explain my post again for a 4th time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't remember posting otherwise, I don't see your point or where I need to be corrected



Relax micmclo, I was trying to be funny. Obviously it didn't work!


----------



## Latrade

Purple said:


> I agree with all of the points he makes


 
I have to ask: what points does he make? I honestly see none other than some very dubious links between "scangers" (my term) and punctuality. 

First, I thought the Irish slightly relaxed view to punctucality was celebrated, you know that's just how it is, you get used to it.

Basically, once every so often someone lets us down. It could be anyone in any trade or profession. But no, a working class person is late in fixing the plumbing and that's indicative of every tradesperson, every working class person, every deprived region of the country. As a result, all of Roddy Doyle's work (except the only true to life one where it's about domestic abuse) is rubbished...Q.E.D. What? Is he serious? That life in a working class area is only about guns, drugs and dad kicking 7 cans out of the family? It's wrong that someone shows that people in a working class area actually are just normal people?

So every working class household pays no attention to education. Every one. Roddy Doyle's characterisation is all bull, no working class area really has cute hooers and cheeky characters, Kev says in reality it's all drugs, guns, staying away from school and getting beaten up if you do your homework. 

Again, just what point exactly is he making? That the true ruination of the country was tardiness of the working classes? He names estates in Dublin, estate I have good friends living in and if I just listened to him I wouldn't go near them without an armed guard. Except, those same estates, I see I far greater sense of community than my "middle class" estate. I see neighbours chatting to neighbours, doors open and people popping in for a cuppa. I see kids hitting the books and sports and socialising with neighbours. I see none of that on my estate, it's a good day if a neighbour even acknowledges my presence when I put the bin out. Maybe it's just the streets my friends live on and every other street it's guns, drugs and domestic violence. 

Yup, Kev makes a real good point there.


----------



## Purple

The smartest person I ever met was the woman who minded our first child. She got married and had children young. Her husband was (and still is) a waster who hardly worked a day in his life. He is happy to scam the system and sit on his backside. Because of this she worked as a cleaner early each morning and late each evening and spent the rest of her time making sure that her two sons did well in school and, despite the influence of their father and neighbours, grew up appreciating education and hard work. She did their homework with them, cooked their meals and made sure they got to after school activities. Both of them have done very well for themselves.
She is now in her 50’s and despite having (in my opinion) huge intellectual capabilities she doesn’t have the self confidence to go back to education. Her husband laughed at the idea and ridiculed her for even thinking about it. In my experience going to school with children from the areas that Myers is talking about and later working with people from such areas there is still a social stigma associated with wanting education. 

I fully accept that it was the supposed great and good that were running things when Ireland hit the rocks but to ignore the anti-educational bias amongst large sections of the population is not going to get us anywhere. So called Working Class pride; “I have nothing, my kids will have nothing and I’m proud of that.”  
Poverty is more a social problem than an economic one. While we pretend otherwise we won’t solve out poverty issued.


----------



## Latrade

Purple said:


> I fully accept that it was the supposed great and good that were running things when Ireland hit the rocks but to ignore the anti-educational bias amongst large sections of the population is not going to get us anywhere. So called Working Class pride; “I have nothing, my kids will have nothing and I’m proud of that.”
> Poverty is more a social problem than an economic one. While we pretend otherwise we won’t solve out poverty issued.


 
I don't buy that for a second and I don't buy that this is Myer's point. You really think that all, or even a majority of working class people are proud that their kids have nothing? Really? Sure, there are some, but Myers is indicating this is the mindset of the majority and that's bull. It's bull because of all the working class families I know (including my own) the vast majority of parents want to give everything they can just so their kids have something and don't have the life they did as children and that includes education. 

I see no pride whatsoever in the majority of people who saw their parents struggle when they were young and I certainly don't see that transferred to their kids. I do see an acknowledgement that the odds are against them from the start, like they can't afford the best pre-school, schools, tutors, etc and so immediately their kids are going to have to work that bit harder to compete. I see acceptance that it'll be harder to get to college. I see an acceptance that there's still prejudice in certain "middle class" professions where the right school, the right college  and the right “postcode” still counts. Some occasional working class upstart gets through the system, but they’relabelled as having a chip on their shoulder. To insinuate that the vast majority of working class parents are happy to see their kids do nothing and claim off the state is just pathetic and abhorrent. 

And are we to believe that every middle class person take's their child's education seriously? That their only motivation is their child? I call bull on that too. Here's my own sweeping generalisation, but the vast majority of that stuff is competing with other parents and bragging rights, nothing to do with the child at all. Its look how great I am I've put my child through the best school and how brainy my genetic material is. "My son the engineer". 

Myers has no point at all in his article, nothing. The only point he makes is that Roddy Doyle has only ever written one accurate representation of being working class.


----------



## Purple

Latrade said:


> I don't buy that for a second and I don't buy that this is Myer's point. You really think that all, or even a majority of working class people are proud that their kids have nothing? Really? Sure, there are some, but Myers is indicating this is the mindset of the majority and that's bull. It's bull because of all the working class families I know (including my own) the vast majority of parents want to give everything they can just so their kids have something and don't have the life they did as children and that includes education.



I can only speak from my own experience growing up and, as an adult, working in a manual trade in a lower socioeconomic area. I see people who would rather spend their money in the pub and the bookies than on their children’s education. No the majority of people but a large enough proportion to perpetuate the cycle of chronic underachievement.  
I do think that the boom years have left us with a legacy of people from poorer areas wanting more for themselves and their children. I have posted here before that in my opinion these are the people who have been betrayed most by our leaders over the last 10 years. 



Latrade said:


>





Latrade said:


> I see no pride whatsoever in the majority of people who saw their parents struggle when they were young and I certainly don't see that transferred to their kids. I do see an acknowledgement that the odds are against them from the start, like they can't afford the best pre-school, schools, tutors, etc and so immediately their kids are going to have to work that bit harder to compete. I see acceptance that it'll be harder to get to college. I see an acceptance that there's still prejudice in certain "middle class" professions where the right school, the right college  and the right “postcode” still counts. Some occasional working class upstart gets through the system, but they’relabelled as having a chip on their shoulder. To insinuate that the vast majority of working class parents are happy to see their kids do nothing and claim off the state is just pathetic and abhorrent.


A friend of mine grew up in Tallaght, very close to where I was born. His parents sent him and his brother to a private school. They scrimped and saved to do so. The people who gave them a hard time about it weren’t the other kids in his school or the parents of those children, it was their neighbours. I remember his getting abused by his friends father because supposedly he thought he was too good for the local school.
Lots of people aren’t happy with their lot in life but they resign themselves to the fact that it’s helpless and there’s nothing they can do about it. When somebody else shows them that’s not the case they are resented.   




Latrade said:


> And are we to believe that every middle class person take's their child's education seriously? That their only motivation is their child? I call bull on that too. Here's my own sweeping generalisation, but the vast majority of that stuff is competing with other parents and bragging rights, nothing to do with the child at all. Its look how great I am I've put my child through the best school and how brainy my genetic material is. "My son the engineer".


  I agree to a certain extent there; nobody is perfect. Personally I find the whole “Working Class” and “Middle Class” tags very distasteful in a Republic.


----------



## Latrade

But those examples are just examples of being a lazy human, not exclusive examples of a particular socio-economic banding.

I've seen the "lazy" working class, the criminals (petty and major) and the scroungers. But I've seen far far more parents who have more or less given the shirt off their backs to make sure their kids had what they didn't. And living around the part of the world I do (epitome of upper middle class) I see whole generations where everything is handed to them by Daddy/Mummy. I see the same sense of "right to behave that way" and attitude in those circles. I see similar issues when it comes to schooling, for resentment see isolation, remarks and judgement because some can't afford the right school. It's a different side of the same thing.

Maybe it's a chip on my shoulder, but to read that wholesale knocking of a group of people just because a plumber is late is the kind of ill informed snobbery I expect on an internet forum, not a journalist, even Myers.


----------



## Purple

Latrade said:


> But those examples are just examples of being a lazy human, not exclusive examples of a particular socio-economic banding.
> 
> I've seen the "lazy" working class, the criminals (petty and major) and the scroungers. But I've seen far far more parents who have more or less given the shirt off their backs to make sure their kids had what they didn't. And living around the part of the world I do (epitome of upper middle class) I see whole generations where everything is handed to them by Daddy/Mummy. I see the same sense of "right to behave that way" and attitude in those circles. I see similar issues when it comes to schooling, for resentment see isolation, remarks and judgement because some can't afford the right school. It's a different side of the same thing.
> 
> Maybe it's a chip on my shoulder, but to read that wholesale knocking of a group of people just because a plumber is late is the kind of ill informed snobbery I expect on an internet forum, not a journalist, even Myers.



I really haven’t seen that sort of snobbery against people who struggle financially where I live (middle-income suburbia) in fact about 8 years ago a family in the area were in danger of losing their house due to illness related income loss and a bunch of neighbours got together and paid their mortgage for over a year and a half. I wasn’t involved; I only heard about it by accident this year. 
I do think that there is less sense of community in more affluent areas but that’s because nowadays both parents are working and chances are few people who live there were born in the area.


----------



## shnaek

Purple said:


> Personally I find the whole “Working Class” and “Middle Class” tags very distasteful in a Republic.


Distasteful, and worthless - for when people speak of "Working Class" they tend to mean people on social welfare. The class system, if it ever existed in Ireland, does not exist any more. We have the rich and the poor, and most of us somewhere inbetween.


----------



## censuspro

*Poverty line*



Chris said:


> Actually neither. My claim is that welfare programs have not reduced the amount of people living below the poverty line, because the rules of welfare programs are such, that as soon as you work you lose your entitlements. And in many cases work will pay less than welfare, so there is no incentive to work. Unless you have a job you will not learn new skills or even be able to get a carreer off the ground.


 
Can anyone tell me what the definition of the poverty line is?


----------



## Purple

censuspro said:


> Can anyone tell me what the definition of the poverty line is?



Those earning less than 60% of median income. It is, in this country, a measure of income distribution rather than income itself.

That said the Office of Social Inclusion (Orwellian name or what!) offers a more comprehensive definition.


----------



## cork

Underachievement - How many have interesting career paths?

You have peoplewith post grad qualifications working in McDolands or in Super Valu.

What is wrong with this?

There is too much job snobbery in this country.

Snobbery about house locations, colleges, schools etc.


----------



## Purple

+1 Cork


----------



## Chris

Purple said:


> Personally I find the whole “Working Class” and “Middle Class” tags very distasteful in a Republic.



Yes indeed, as has been mentioned, people in a "working class job" often are wealthier than people in "middle class jobs".
Class designation is an invention of Marxism and Socialism. Before free market capitalism there were aristocratic landowners and serfs. There was no way for a serf to get a better life or become a land owner through hard work and savings. 
With the dawn of free market capitalism, which no longer exists, people's status in life is purely down to what they achieve through being productive. There is no barrier to becoming reasonably wealthy. The Marxist class system is based on the idea that there is no way for someone in a "lower" class to progress into a "higher" class. And because of this the working class needs to take control and ownership of all means of production. And history has proven how well that worked out and how wrong the theory is.


----------



## Purple

Chris said:


> And history has proven how well that worked out and how wrong the theory is.



Indeed, Marx never foresaw the emergence of a property owning "middle class".


----------



## ali

cork said:


> Underachievement - How many have interesting career paths?
> 
> You have peoplewith post grad qualifications working in McDolands or in Super Valu.
> 
> What is wrong with this?
> 
> There is too much job snobbery in this country.
> 
> Snobbery about house locations, colleges, schools etc.


 
I think this is very interesting. I have a degree and two further post grad qualifications and I now work in a restaurant. By choice. I did approximately 17 years in the corporate world, including 12 years in a prestigious and much sought after job I really disliked. I stayed due to the great money, company car, petrol, VHI, bonuses etc.

 After each maternity leave, I would say I'm not coming back and I'd be tempted back. I used to dream about having a job packing bags in Tescos where you did your job, left it and forgot about it. No constantly travelling for business or getting work related calls or emails on the weekends or holidays. I now make a very respectable amount of money working set hours 3 days a week and never think about the job from when I leave it until I come back in.

It actually took a huge amount of courage for me to do this and I still get a funny reaction from friends and former colleagues who consider this a huge step down. Me - I've never been happier. 

A.


----------



## cork

I agree. I hate my current job. It is a bore. There is no prospects with it.

If it wound up - I would consider restaurant work.

People have funny atitudes to work and jobs.


----------



## Purple

ali said:


> I used to dream about having a job packing bags in Tescos where you did your job, left it and forgot about it. No constantly travelling for business or getting work related calls or emails on the weekends or holidays. I now make a very respectable amount of money working set hours 3 days a week and never think about the job from when I leave it until I come back in.
> 
> It actually took a huge amount of courage for me to do this and I still get a funny reaction from friends and former colleagues who consider this a huge step down. Me - I've never been happier.
> 
> A.



I'd love to do that!


----------



## shopgirl

Then do it! Life is short.


----------



## Purple

shopgirl said:


> Then do it! Life is short.



The mortgage is too big and the kids are too young; I need the money at the moment. When I don't I'll be gone!


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> I'd love to do that!


 
No offence, but I'm not sure you'd get many tips!!


----------



## Purple

Firefly said:


> No offence, but I'm not sure you'd get many tips!!



Lol 

I'm not this bad in real life!


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> Lol
> 
> I'm not this bad in real life!


 
House angel, street devil  - big softie I reckon!


----------



## Purple

Firefly said:


> House angel, street devil  - big softie I reckon!



You have me pegged.


----------



## cork

But it funny that some "dream jobs" are far from it.

Underachievement - might mean a job that is badly perceived but it might be ok.

There is so much job snobbery in Ireland. 

Even with schools here in Cork.


----------



## z104

I came across a blog which sums up my notion of working class and is very different from Myers. A good read.

http://snifflecry.wordpress.com/2010/09/03/work/


----------



## Complainer

Chris said:


> With the dawn of free market capitalism, which no longer exists, people's status in life is purely down to what they achieve through being productive. There is no barrier to becoming reasonably wealthy.


This is fiction. The real world does not fit your beautiful theories. 

Check out today's Examiner article about the ESRI report, e.g. "their analysis highlights the longer term social processes that underlie poverty risks, such as low educational attainment, social background, ill health and disability, household coposition and exclusion from the labour market". We are a long, long way off an even playing field for all.


----------



## lightswitch

Wouldn't it be an excellent social experiment to place Myers living in a working class estate for a period of 3 months or so. He would of course have to interact with the locals and get involved in the community, shop in the local shops, eat in the local eateries and what ever else it would entail for him to be able to form informed opinions of what it is really like to live "on the other side". He could help out with after school clubs, gaa teams, elderly activities (will be relevant to him very soon). 

I wonder would he be up for it? I would be most interested in reading his articles afterwards.


----------



## onq

It would be worth it just to shut him up for three months...



Although, skilled as he is at taking the colour or his environment to heart (!) the turn of phrase might be more interesting when he returns.

The title of how new column would be _'Story?_ and the rest of it could be written in text speak from his mobile somewhere in Dublin 1.

A street-credible Myers - what a shocker - will complement Vinnie Brawn in "The Soup Kitchen" replacing "The Restaurant"t.

"Moore Street Traders" will replace "Dragons's Den" and "Jobsround" will replace "Newsround".

ONQ.


----------



## Complainer

lightswitch said:


> Wouldn't it be an excellent social experiment to place Myers living in a working class estate for a period of 3 months or so. He would of course have to interact with the locals and get involved in the community, shop in the local shops, eat in the local eateries and what ever else it would entail for him to be able to form informed opinions of what it is really like to live "on the other side". He could help out with after school clubs, gaa teams, elderly activities (will be relevant to him very soon).
> 
> I wonder would he be up for it?


Maybe he could do an Irish 'wife swap' exercise, and have it filmed in all its glory. I'd quite like to see him taking four kids to four different schools without his land rover.

TBH, it doesn't really matter if Kevin is up for it. Could you find a working class estate/family that would be willing to take him in for 3 months? Unlikely...


----------



## Firefly

Complainer said:


> This is fiction. The real world does not fit your beautiful theories.
> 
> Check out today's Examiner article about the ESRI report, e.g. "their analysis highlights the longer term social processes that underlie poverty risks, such as low educational attainment, social background, ill health and disability, household coposition and exclusion from the labour market". We are a long, long way off an even playing field for all.


 
Most of these obstacles IMO can be overcome by *taking personal responsibility for your future*.

Education - do an evening course, apprentice ship etc
Social Background - plenty people have come from the wrong side of the tracks have done well for themselves.
Ill Health - Reducing consumption of alcohol, giving up cigarettes and not eating prepared / take away meals regularly would significantly add to a household coffers. Again, this is a personal choice
There are other health issues obviously and I'm no expert, but if the vices I've listed above were dropped poor people would have more money to spend on investments such as books, education or a savings account.
Exclusion from the labour market - see education and social background


Disabilities IMO is very valid if you're already poor and I am all for giving people, already misfortunate enough in this situation, all the help they need.

Household Composition - way to complex for me to even offer my opinion on, except to say that a reduction in the reliance on alcohol by many people would probably help.


----------



## Complainer

Firefly said:


> Most of these obstacles IMO can be overcome by *taking personal responsibility for your future*.


So you reckon the sole reason for the strong coorelation between poverty and the factors mentioned is just that these people don't bother getting up off their arses and taking responsibility for their futures?


----------



## Latrade

Firefly said:


> Most of these obstacles IMO can be overcome by *taking personal responsibility for your future*.
> 
> Education - do an evening course, apprentice ship etc
> Social Background - plenty people have come from the wrong side of the tracks have done well for themselves.
> Ill Health - Reducing consumption of alcohol, giving up cigarettes and not eating prepared / take away meals regularly would significantly add to a household coffers.
> Exclusion from the labour market - see education and social background.


 
In order to point to personal resposibility, there has to be an equal system with equal access, then and only then is it a case that people have the same opportunities. That system doesn't exist.

Education, actually there's a huge uptake of evening courses and people do go through that effort. But what evening courses and what ones give them access to jobs. But then that's only a small part of it, education goes back to the beginning, not just later on in life. There isn't the same opportunity/access to the same quality of education for those in a deprived area as there is in a middle class area. 

Health conditions aren't just about smoking, drinking and diet, it's also about some conditions that affect those in deprived areas more because of access to medical attention. TB is a classic example of that. But are you saying there isn't a two tier system? Poor diets and lifestyle aren't the sole preserve of the working class, the difference is, those who can afford it or have health insurance stand a better chance of recovery due to quicker diagnosis and treatement. 

It's not about everyone starting at the same level, but a society where there aren't barriers as there are now.


----------



## Firefly

Complainer said:


> So you reckon the sole reason for the strong coorelation between poverty and the factors mentioned is just that these people don't bother getting up off their arses and taking responsibility for their futures?


 
I never said that and I don't have a silver bullet. What I'm saying is that by taking personal responsibility a lot of "poor" people could better their situation. An easy example. A person smoking 20 fags a day (and I would bet that there are plenty poor people who do so) are spending 3,285 euro (9 euro a pack) a year on cigarettes. It's a personal decision to smoke.

Equally, someone who drinks 5 pints a week in the boozer - again I would guess a lot of (not most) poor people would fall into this category spend 1,170 euro (at 4.50 a pint). It's a personal decision to go to the pub.

I'm not saying for a minute that only poor people smoke and drink - others do too but they can afford it.


----------



## Firefly

Latrade said:


> In order to point to personal resposibility, there has to be an equal system with equal access, then and only then is it a case that people have the same opportunities. That system doesn't exist.
> .


 
I agree that the system isn't perfect, but look at what Bill Cullen (an extreme example I know) was able to do for himself. I'm just saying, by and large, it's not _impossible_ for poor people to get themselves out of poverty. Life isn't fair, but by putting the head down in a country like this it should be possible to have a decent life



Latrade said:


> There isn't the same opportunity/access to the same quality of education for those in a deprived area as there is in a middle class area.
> .


 
Totally agree, but there is _enough _access to education to get yourself educated/qualified. The library is free and also has free internet access. If a prisoner (cliche I know) can get a degree in law, it's not unreasonable to ppropose that anyone of average intelligence cannot do something similiar.



Latrade said:


> Health conditions aren't just about smoking, drinking and diet, it's also about some conditions that affect those in deprived areas more because of access to medical attention. TB is a classic example of that. But are you saying there isn't a two tier system? Poor diets and lifestyle aren't the sole preserve of the working class, the difference is, those who can afford it or have health insurance stand a better chance of recovery due to quicker diagnosis and treatement.
> .


 
I totally agree with TB and other issues and i've stated I'm no expert. However, in the areas of smoking, drinking and poor diet every adult in this country has a choice.


----------



## Purple

Latrade said:


> In order to point to personal resposibility, there has to be an equal system with equal access, then and only then is it a case that people have the same opportunities. That system doesn't exist.



While we keep trying to engineer a system that provides equality of outcomes we will never have one that gives equality of access. 
The smoked salmon socialists who bleat about “The Poor” can’t get their head around the fact that poor people are not stupid lesser beings that require the help of the enlightened suburbanite pinkos. The pinkos are well meaning in the same way as the members of the various African Support groups around the UK were two hundred years ago when they talked about "the white man’s burden". Poor people are not part of some homogeneous group of halfwits who need to be let through life, they simply need, in so far as is possible, the same chances as everyone else. If they choose not to take them then that’s their own hard luck and they deserve no sympathy.


----------



## Latrade

Purple said:


> While we keep trying to engineer a system that provides equality of outcomes we will never have one that gives equality of access.
> The smoked salmon socialists who bleat about “The Poor” can’t get their head around the fact that poor people are not stupid lesser beings that require the help of the enlightened suburbanite pinkos. The pinkos are well meaning in the same way as the members of the various African Support groups around the UK were two hundred years ago when they talked about "the white man’s burden". Poor people are not part of some homogeneous group of halfwits who need to be let through life, they simply need, in so far as is possible, the same chances as everyone else. If they choose not to take them then that’s their own hard luck and they deserve no sympathy.


 
That's a bit of a mashup of concepts. The last bit is the important bit, which is what I would argue for that they get the same chance as everyone else. They don't and not just in social provisions and policy but also culturally (which is harder to change).

As an example, not everyone can have access to the best schools because there's only so many "top" schools, but we need to do more about the other schools.

The smoked samon socialists can be as hypocritical, well meaning and wrong as they want, however their existience and basic fallacies doesn't mean the divide and lack of opportunity doesn't exist.

When those opportunities exist for the majority in deprived areas, then I will stand up and say that it's all only about personal responsibility.


----------



## Firefly

Latrade said:


> As an example, not everyone can have access to the best schools because there's only so many "top" schools, but we need to do more about the other schools.


 
I agree, but the quality in the other schools is good enough to provide a decent education. As mentioned, the libraries are full of free books and internet access. Take the area I work in, IT, for example. Anyone with an interest and application can study from online materials and become (at least partially) certified in a Microsoft field.


----------



## cork

Schools and colleges are shut over the summer - why they are not utilised beggers belief.

FAS needs to be revamped.

The Institutes of Technology do great work.

When you do courses - you have choice.


----------



## Complainer

Firefly said:


> I agree that the system isn't perfect, but look at what Bill Cullen (an extreme example I know) was able to do for himself. I'm just saying, by and large, it's not _impossible_ for poor people to get themselves out of poverty. Life isn't fair, but by putting the head down in a country like this it should be possible to have a decent life


Yes, fair play to Bill. It is great that he has built up his personal empire on the back of Government subsidies (scrappage schemes for the garages, FAS/NDP/EU funding for his Europa academy, artists tax break for his autobiography). Perhaps he should be giving classes to inner-city kids on how to extract money from the public coffers without ever entering a social welfare office?



Firefly said:


> I never said that and I don't have a silver bullet. What I'm saying is that by taking personal responsibility a lot of "poor" people could better their situation. An easy example. A person smoking 20 fags a day (and I would bet that there are plenty poor people who do so) are spending 3,285 euro (9 euro a pack) a year on cigarettes. It's a personal decision to smoke.
> 
> Equally, someone who drinks 5 pints a week in the boozer - again I would guess a lot of (not most) poor people would fall into this category spend 1,170 euro (at 4.50 a pint). It's a personal decision to go to the pub.
> 
> I'm not saying for a minute that only poor people smoke and drink - others do too but they can afford it.


Indeed, smokes and booze do cause many health problems. But there are also many, many health problems NOT related to smokes and booze. It seems just a tad harsh to single out one social group for their health habits, without looking at the overall picture.



Firefly said:


> I agree, but the quality in the other schools is good enough to provide a decent education. As mentioned, the libraries are full of free books and internet access. Take the area I work in, IT, for example. Anyone with an interest and application can study from online materials and become (at least partially) certified in a Microsoft field.


Let's not lose track of ourselves. The library is indeed full of free books, but only for 3 weeks at a time (if someone else is waiting for that book). There is free Internet access in many libraries, for an hour a go, and then it is back to the end of the queue.

It is indeed possible to get a Microsoft or Cisco qualitification with online study, though the exam fees are fairly punitive. But it is a lot easier to get the qualification if Daddy pays for your course at the grind college (and of course the obligatory car to commute to/from college too).


----------



## Firefly

Complainer said:


> Yes, fair play to Bill. It is great that he has built up his personal empire on the back of Government subsidies (scrappage schemes for the garages, FAS/NDP/EU funding for his Europa academy, artists tax break for his autobiography). Perhaps he should be giving classes to inner-city kids on how to extract money from the public coffers without ever entering a social welfare office?
> .


I presume whatever subsidies/grants he got are/were available to anyone else? Do you think he'd still be poor if it weren't for the these subsidies because I certainly to not. 



Complainer said:


> Indeed, smokes and booze do cause many health problems. But there are also many, many health problems NOT related to smokes and booze. It seems just a tad harsh to single out one social group for their health habits, without looking at the overall picture.
> .


 

As mentioned there are other health issues. Isn't smoking one of the main causes of death in this country though? 



Complainer said:


> Let's not lose track of ourselves. The library is indeed full of free books, but only for 3 weeks at a time (if someone else is waiting for that book). There is free Internet access in many libraries, for an hour a go, and then it is back to the end of the queue.
> .


 
I think I would get what I need from a book in 3 weeks if I spent 5 days a week 8 hours a day (ie a real working week) reading it and taking notes. OK there's an hour limit for internet access, but there are plenty internet cafe's around for a small cost ( 1 euro an hour in Cork for example).




Complainer said:


> It is indeed possible to get a Microsoft or Cisco qualitification with online study, though the exam fees are fairly punitive.


 
The initial ones aren't usually. Someone who IMO has got off their backside and got the first few exams should be able to get a junior support position in a call centre / helpdesk somewhere. From there the money coming in would cover the later exams



Complainer said:


> But it is a lot easier to get the qualification if Daddy pays for your course at the grind college (and of course the obligatory car to commute to/from college too).


 
Course it's easier, doesn't make it impossible for poor people though.


----------



## truthseeker

Complainer said:


> But it is a lot easier to get the qualification if Daddy pays for your course at the grind college (and of course the obligatory car to commute to/from college too).


 
Thats a different extreme. The 'working class' may not have Daddy paying for grind college and the obligatory car commute - but neither do most other people, sure, some rich kids might get treated that way but the vast majority just get on with things walking to and from school and not doing grinds.


----------



## Complainer

Firefly said:


> I presume whatever subsidies/grants he got are/were available to anyone else? Do you think he'd still be poor if it weren't for the these subsidies because I certainly to not.
> 
> As mentioned there are other health issues. Isn't smoking one of the main causes of death in this country though?
> 
> I think I would get what I need from a book in 3 weeks if I spent 5 days a week 8 hours a day (ie a real working week) reading it and taking notes. OK there's an hour limit for internet access, but there are plenty internet cafe's around for a small cost ( 1 euro an hour in Cork for example).
> 
> The initial ones aren't usually. Someone who IMO has got off their backside and got the first few exams should be able to get a junior support position in a call centre / helpdesk somewhere. From there the money coming in would cover the later exams
> 
> Course it's easier, doesn't make it impossible for poor people though.


You're joking about the junior support position - right? Maybe that was the case three years ago, but I know of folk with diplomas, or degress or master's degrees who are unable to get the most basic call centre support role in the current environment.

But regardless, you are missing the point (possibly deliberately so). No-one is suggesting that it is absolutely impossible for some focused, dedicated people from working class backgrounds to work their asses off and develop a good career. I'm not too far off that background myself, and I know some others that fit the description.

The real issue here is the fundamental unfairness that is built into our system at the moment. Yes, you might get be able to get some IT qualifications via the library, but it will be a lot easier if you have a fast PC and fast broadband at home, and you can buy the course books/notes/grinds. It is a lot easier if you have a spare room that you can use for studying, instead of sharing a bedroom with siblings. 

The idea of getting on at the bottom rung of the ladder of flawed too. Given the gap between the wages paid at the bottom rung of the ladder and what it takes to survive in Ireland today, you're probably going to need two or three minimum wage jobs just to keep food on the table and a roof over your head. Evening classes aren't really feasible when you spend the evenings working in a bar.

Our current systems often reinforce the disadvantages experienced by many. We are close to the bottom of the OECD table for spending on education, and education is generally seen as the key to personal and economic development.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> It is indeed possible to get a Microsoft or Cisco qualitification with online study, though the exam fees are fairly punitive. But it is a lot easier to get the qualification if Daddy pays for your course at the grind college (and of course the obligatory car to commute to/from college too).


    As an upper middle class public servant living in an exclusive south Dublin leafy suburb will you even pay for one of your children to attend a grind school because their teacher is no good at their job? Or will you let your child suffer because of the shortcomings of their teacher while defending the un-sack-ability of that teacher to your distressed child? I don't know any parent (Father or Mother) who wouldn't help their child through school.

By the way, your constant reference to "Daddy" paying for things for their children is very sexist. I know plenty of women who earn more than their husband (including mine).


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Our current systems often reinforce the disadvantages experienced by many. We are close to the bottom of the OECD table for spending on education, and education is generally seen as the key to personal and economic development.



Given the collapse in our GDP and GNP those fugures will look great next year (lies, damned lies and statistics).


----------



## Firefly

Complainer said:


> You're joking about the junior support position - right? Maybe that was the case three years ago, but I know of folk with diplomas, or degress or master's degrees who are unable to get the most basic call centre support role in the current environment.


 
Granted it's difficult at the moment. What about the past 10 years though? What about when things pick up again - only last week I heard that the number of IT vacancies were on the up. What about other industries?



Complainer said:


> Yes, you might get be able to get some IT qualifications via the library, but it will be a lot easier if you have a fast PC and fast broadband at home, and you can buy the course books/notes/grinds. It is a lot easier if you have a spare room that you can use for studying, instead of sharing a bedroom with siblings.


 
Course it's easier if you have your own room with a fast PC and broadband..easier still if you shell out 3k for a Microsoft course. Doesn't make it even close to impossible if you don't though. I know plenty people who shared bedrooms with siblings who got to university though hard work.



Complainer said:


> The idea of getting on at the bottom rung of the ladder of flawed too. Given the gap between the wages paid at the bottom rung of the ladder and what it takes to survive in Ireland today, you're probably going to need two or three minimum wage jobs just to keep food on the table and a roof over your head. Evening classes aren't really feasible when you spend the evenings working in a bar.


 
The commitment to getting (even partially) qualified in many areas is less than 1 or 2 years...Hardly the end of the world. 



Complainer said:


> Our current systems often reinforce the disadvantages experienced by many. We are close to the bottom of the OECD table for spending on education, and education is generally seen as the key to personal and economic development.


 
That may be true, but for someone who applies themselves, the education on offer is good enough IMO to give them a good enough start. Nothing stopping someone from reading extra material themselves.


----------



## cork

There is hardly any support in this country for part time study.

This is a disgrace.

Incentives for cars, property & horses is ok but part time study - there is nothing.

The internet could be used to facilitate courses.


----------



## Green

Complainer said:


> Yes, fair play to Bill. It is great that *he has built up his personal empire* on the back of Government subsidies (scrappage schemes for the garages, FAS/NDP/EU funding for his Europa academy, artists tax break for his autobiography). Perhaps he should be giving classes to inner-city kids on how to extract money from the public coffers without ever entering a social welfare office?


 
Do you have any actual proof that Bill Cullen built up his empire this way and not from his own industrious efforts in selling cars?


----------



## cork

What I find annoying is the government talking about the smart enonomy and the cutting back training courses.

ESF grant funding unclaimed and 430,000+ people out of work.


----------



## Chris

Complainer said:


> This is fiction. The real world does not fit your beautiful theories.
> 
> Check out today's Examiner article about the ESRI report, e.g. "their analysis highlights the longer term social processes that underlie poverty risks, such as low educational attainment, social background, ill health and disability, household coposition and exclusion from the labour market". We are a long, long way off an even playing field for all.



Any perception of an uneven playing field is not due to capitalism, and certainly not free market capitalism. Let me reiterate, we do *not* have free market capitalism; we have a corrupted version more aptly called crony capitalism and interventionism.
The reason the playing field is perceived as not level, is because those things that government, and not capitalism, is responsible for, are so totally inadequate, with education being the biggest problem.
There are many theories why people from less well off areas achieve less from an educational point of view than people from well off areas. Bottom line is that school education in deprived areas does not function well enough. Not only is the early drop out rate higher, but the number of people seeking further 3rd level education is lower. But access to education cannot be blamed, neither affordability.
All the items you quote above can be solved through education. But for this to happen politicians would have to admit that their system has failed for all these years, and does not give them reason to introduce yet another agency or committee to deal with the problem. Social problems are a direct result of bad and big government, and giving government ever increasing powers to expand their meddling in the economy and lives of citizens is only going to make things worse.


----------



## Firefly

Chris said:


> Bottom line is that school education in deprived areas does not function well enough. Not only is the early drop out rate higher, but the number of people seeking further 3rd level education is lower. But access to education cannot be blamed, neither affordability.


 
For me the issue is with parenting (or lack of) and peer pressure. The schools are there & the teachers are qualified. Perhaps the "rich" schools have better teachers, but surely the teachers in poorer schools are good enough to at least get their pupils through the Leaving Cert if all of the pupils were willing?   

Regarding parenting : how parents try to raise their children is a personal choice.
Regarding peer pressure : this is more difficult to overcome, but with good parenting from the outset most children will see that the eejits and bullies in the yard are just eejits and bullies. Again, a personal choice.


----------



## cork

Parents are vital.

When I was at primary school - I was written off by teachers.

This was not the fault of my parents or myself.

Secondary school was grand.

But without support from parents - I would have been lost.


----------



## shnaek

I have long believed that education is key - but education comes from both state institutions and from parents. Parents are supposed to teach us values, while school gives us knowledge. Education is often spoken of as if it were just the acquisition of knowledge - but the application of this knowledge is even more important, and often ignored. It is not enough that we teach people how to earn a living, we must also strive to show the value of making a life. And, of course, the importance of respecting the lives of others.


----------



## Chris

Firefly said:


> For me the issue is with parenting (or lack of) and peer pressure. The schools are there & the teachers are qualified. Perhaps the "rich" schools have better teachers, but surely the teachers in poorer schools are good enough to at least get their pupils through the Leaving Cert if all of the pupils were willing?
> 
> Regarding parenting : how parents try to raise their children is a personal choice.
> Regarding peer pressure : this is more difficult to overcome, but with good parenting from the outset most children will see that the eejits and bullies in the yard are just eejits and bullies. Again, a personal choice.


Yes indeed, and the issue of parenting has been raised by some on this thread. The problem I see is that there is a vicious circle, which needs to be broken. Of course schools and teachers can only go so far, but it is one place where some difference can be made.
From teachers I have talked to I have gathered that pupils' behaviour is far more difficult to control in socially deprived areas than in "middle-class" areas, and that the more behavioural problems you have in a class, the smaller the class size needs to be for teachers to make a difference. 



shnaek said:


> I have long believed that education is key - but education comes from both state institutions and from parents. Parents are supposed to teach us values, while school gives us knowledge. Education is often spoken of as if it were just the acquisition of knowledge - but the application of this knowledge is even more important, and often ignored. It is not enough that we teach people how to earn a living, we must also strive to show the value of making a life. And, of course, the importance of respecting the lives of others.



You are right, education alone will not make a difference, it is a general change in attitude that is needed. It is also simplistic for government to say that in order to create an "economy of the future" or the "knowledge economy", all that is needed is more educated people. The Soviet Union had a higher number of engineers and scientists than the west did, but this did not bring economic prosperity.
Education combined with economic freedom and opportunity are needed, but governments are doing everything they can to interfere in economic freedom and mortgage future opportunities.


----------



## Complainer

Chris said:


> Any perception of an uneven playing field is not due to capitalism, and certainly not free market capitalism. Let me reiterate, we do *not* have free market capitalism; we have a corrupted version more aptly called crony capitalism and interventionism.
> The reason the playing field is perceived as not level, is because those things that government, and not capitalism, is responsible for, are so totally inadequate, with education being the biggest problem.
> There are many theories why people from less well off areas achieve less from an educational point of view than people from well off areas. Bottom line is that school education in deprived areas does not function well enough. Not only is the early drop out rate higher, but the number of people seeking further 3rd level education is lower. But access to education cannot be blamed, neither affordability.
> All the items you quote above can be solved through education. But for this to happen politicians would have to admit that their system has failed for all these years, and does not give them reason to introduce yet another agency or committee to deal with the problem. Social problems are a direct result of bad and big government, and giving government ever increasing powers to expand their meddling in the economy and lives of citizens is only going to make things worse.


I'm not sure if you are trying to evade or spin this issue by talking about 'perceptions'. This is not a matter of perception. The playing field is very, very unlevel. 

As it happens, I agree with you that education is the solution. Perhaps the fact that we are down the bottom of the OECD league for spending on education might be part of that problem.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Perhaps the fact that we are down the bottom of the OECD league for spending on education might be part of that problem.



In the light of the economic collapse we will be right up that table again next year.


----------



## Firefly

Chris said:


> The problem I see is that there is a vicious circle, which needs to be broken.


 
This vicious circle is being perpetuated, let's not forget, by adults who are making personal decisions regarding their own and their children's future. Granted, some may have had a bad upbringing themselves, but there's nothing stopping them from saying "How can I give my children what I didn't have?"


----------



## mtk

I see the following as 3 (true) stereotype upper middle class 
obsessions/preocupations

Obsession with Private schools
Obsession with Private health care
Obsession with Accents

They seem to me to be the main every day definers of class


----------



## Arabella

Yes, I'd go with that. And the fear that daughter will become emotionally embroiled with some untermensch either here or on holliers.


----------



## Leper

Nice one mtk, I'll run with that and add in another of their obsessions "We're always right"


----------



## Leper

Just thinking of some isolated observations on Kevin Myers which for some reason stuck in the back of my mind.

Years and years ago RTE television ran a sort of university quiz show.  One of the mainstream universities met the Garda Training College in the final.  Myers was the quiz master and introduced both teams.  His body language and use of English welcomed the mainstream university and while introducing the Garda Training team practically told them they had no chance.  The same occurred during the programme itself.  One could not help seeing the expression in Myers face when the Garda Training College won.

Then there was the occasion of his dreadful newspaper article concerning the right of people to compete in the "Special" Olympics.  Apparently, he was not comfortable with people with physical defects competing publicly and the sight of people with physical defects offended him.  He apologised afterwards, but only after a groundswell of public opinion against him.

I agree with free speech, but with opinions around like those of Myers (he wasnt the only person ever to wait for a plumber, big deal) I have to think of the gullibility of some.  All you got to do is look at some opinions on this thread before throwing your eyes to heaven.


----------



## Chris

Complainer said:


> I'm not sure if you are trying to evade or spin this issue by talking about 'perceptions'. This is not a matter of perception. The playing field is very, very unlevel.
> 
> As it happens, I agree with you that education is the solution. Perhaps the fact that we are down the bottom of the OECD league for spending on education might be part of that problem.



The reason I chose the word perception is because there is essentially nothing stopping someone from a poor background joining various courses that will increase chances of higher wages and a better standard of living. We do indeed agree on the fact that primary and secondary education in socially deprived areas is completely failing. And this certainly contributes to the fact that less people go on to 3rd level education. But this does not mean that there is an inherent barrier to further education and opportunities set by the "unfairness" of capitalism. I believe it is mainly down to a general attitude and belief that the world is unfair and that poor people cannot overcome poverty.


----------



## Complainer

Chris said:


> The reason I chose the word perception is because there is essentially nothing stopping someone from a poor background joining various courses that will increase chances of higher wages and a better standard of living.


It can a bit hard to do evening courses if you are already working 2 or 3 jobs to keep your head above water. Why do you think people from poor backgrounds generally have poor jobs and poor education?


----------



## Firefly

Complainer said:


> It can a bit hard to do evening courses if you are already working 2 or 3 jobs to keep your head above water. Why do you think people from poor backgrounds generally have poor jobs and poor education?


 
I would imagine most people who are working 2 or 3 jobs already are probably on their way out of poverty, however long it takes them, given their hard working attitude. It's the people who prefer to draw the dole that need the attention.


----------



## Firefly

mtk said:


> I see the following as 3 (true) stereotype upper middle class
> obsessions/preocupations
> 
> Obsession with Private schools
> Obsession with Private health care
> Obsession with Accents
> 
> They seem to me to be the main every day definers of class


 
Obsession is a strong word but:

Private schools have a reputation for very good LC results - given how important education is, is this not a good option for parents who can afford it?

Private healthcare is a must in this country IMO. Again is this not a prudent decision for those who can afford it?

By the way, I've posted before that a solution to the 2 tier health system is to ban private health care (thus forcing everyone from B Cowen down though the public system - no preferential treatment). I'm sure it wouldn't take too long for the "important" people of this country to force the HSE into action. The same would hold true (to a lesser agree) for private schools. Until those days arise (which I doubt never will), I think for those who can afford it, private schools & private healthcare are good choices...I'm not saying it's fair!

Accents are neither here nor there.


----------



## lightswitch

Firefly said:


> Obsession is a strong word but:
> 
> Private schools have a reputation for very good LC results - given how important education is, is this not a good option for parents who can afford it?
> 
> Private healthcare is a must in this country IMO. Again is this not a prudent decision for those who can afford it?
> 
> By the way, I've posted before that a solution to the 2 tier health system is to ban private health care (thus forcing everyone from B Cowen down though the public system - no preferential treatment). I'm sure it wouldn't take too long for the "important" people of this country to force the HSE into action. The same would hold true (to a lesser agree) for private schools. Until those days arise (which I doubt never will), I think for those who can afford it, private schools & private healthcare are good choices...I'm not saying it's fair!
> 
> Accents are neither here nor there.


 

+100,  couldn't agree with you more Firefly.  Sort these two things out and we will have a fairer society in a very short period of time.


----------



## Purple

lightswitch said:


> +100,  couldn't agree with you more Firefly.  Sort these two things out and we will have a fairer society in a very short period of time.



I like the national health insurance model. Those who can afford it pay for private healthcare and those that can't have it paid for by the state. That way all patients are the same as far as the hospital is concerned; all are a source of revenue. At the moment hospitals get a fixed budget from the state and so they see public patients as a drain on revenue. As long as that's the case there will always be a two tier health service. The added bonus is that private and public hospital would be in competition with each other which should, as long as it's set up correctly, improve standards and reduce costs.

Private education subsidised public education in that if all of the students in private schools were attending public schools the state would have to cover the full cost of their education. At the moment the state only covers part of it.
The same is true for private healthcare.


----------



## csirl

> Private education subsidised public education in that if all of the students in private schools were attending public schools the state would have to cover the full cost of their education. At the moment the state only covers part of it.


 
Are you sure about this? I though that private schools got the same capitation as any other school, and also have the additional revenue of fees. 

Interestingly, I had a conversation with a couple of old college friends about private education recently. One thing that occurred to all of us was that there was a very high drop out rate among kids from private schools when we were in college. While private schools send a higher number of kids to college, it doesnt follow that all of these kids will do well in college. Very evident that some only got in due to extra attention they get in these schools and were genuinely not able for the course in college.

In addition to the above, there seemed to be another factor at work. Kids from rich backgrounds didnt seem to have the same hunger to suceed as kids from other backgrounds thus contributing to a higher failure/drop out rate. If you're from a rich background and daddy will sort you out for a job, there's no incentive to work in college.

Anecdotally, there was consensus among us that the kids who did best were the ones from middle income families who attended the good public schools. These kids seem to be a lot more aware of the power that getting a good education gives them. They also have more family support. As one of my friends put it - these people are within touching distance of a good life - can see the possibilities - but dont have the safety net of family weath to fall back on - so they are really motivated.


----------



## Complainer

csirl said:


> I though that private schools got the same capitation as any other school, and also have the additional revenue of fees.


Absolutely true.

I mostly agree with Firefly. The State needs to stop subsidising private healthcare and private education. No more tax relief in health insurance, no more special tax relief to developers of private health clinics. No more tax relief on private school/college/doctor fees.

If people want to avail of these services, they are welcome to do so - provided they pay the full cost.


----------



## orka

Complainer said:


> No more tax relief on private school/college/doctor fees.


I don't think there is any tax relief on private school fees.


----------



## Purple

csirl said:


> Are you sure about this? I though that private schools got the same capitation as any other school, and also have the additional revenue of fees.



Yes, they get the same capitation grant but they don’t get funding for school buildings etc. There is considerable cost in running a school and the state funds a lot more than wages and capitation grants in public schools.


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Absolutely true.
> 
> I mostly agree with Firefly. The State needs to stop subsidising private healthcare and private education. No more tax relief in health insurance, no more special tax relief to developers of private health clinics. No more tax relief on private school/college/doctor fees.
> 
> If people want to avail of these services, they are welcome to do so - provided they pay the full cost.



At the moment those people with private health insurance are funding the majority of their healthcare costs through their insurance companies. If there was no private healthcare the state would have to shoulder the full cost. Giving limited tax breaks to people to fund something themselves which would otherwise be funded by the state is eminently sensible and offers a huge net saving to the state. Only those who are ideologically blinkered would thing otherwise.
There are huge problems with the public health system. Moth of the problems are caused by management and healthcare workers themselves. The solution proposed by the socialists is to make everyone suffer the same. This is simple begrudgery. The real solution is to fix the public healthcare system, not abolish the private one. Again, a national health insurance scheme would level the playing field and force hospitals to compete or close.


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> Again, a national health insurance scheme would level the playing field and force hospitals to compete or close.


 
I've just read a bit about the Swiss model and it looks good for urban areas. How would it work though in rural areas, where there is no incentive for private investors to spend hundreds of millions building a new hospital to compete with a small, rural hospital? Surely, in such a model, the rural, public hopsital could charge what they like?


----------



## Purple

Firefly said:


> I've just read a bit about the Swiss model and it looks good for urban areas. How would it work though in rural areas, where there is no incentive for private investors to spend hundreds of millions building a new hospital to compete with a small, rural hospital? Surely, in such a model, the rural, public hopsital could charge what they like?



Small rural hospitals are now, and always will be, socond rate. It doesn't matter what funding model is used the best staff will want to work in large teaching hospitals. In general if you go and see a consultant in Portiuncula Hospital that there is a very good chance that they are working there because they weren't good enough to get a job in a major hospital. In an island this small there is no need for small rural hospitals.


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> Small rural hospitals are now, and always will be, socond rate. It doesn't matter what funding model is used the best staff will want to work in large teaching hospitals. In general if you go and see a consultant in Portiuncula Hospital that there is a very good chance that they are working there because they weren't good enough to get a job in a major hospital. In an island this small there is no need for small rural hospitals.


 
Whether they are second rate or whether there is any justification for them is irrelevant...under the Swiss model they can surely charge what they like as there won't be any competition? Or else the will close themselves due to lack of business - surely not fair for people living in remote areas?


----------



## Purple

Firefly said:


> Whether they are second rate or whether there is any justification for them is irrelevant...under the Swiss model they can surely charge what they like as there won't be any competition? Or else the will close themselves due to lack of business - surely not fair for people living in remote areas?



The model used in Belgium (the country with the best healthcare in Europe) is a reimbursement system where insurance companies agree a set fee per procedure/ overnight stay etc. The hospital has to find a way to cover its costs within that charge. Obviously there are cases where this does not happen but there are also cases where a profit is made. The function of the state is then to audit and police quality levels. A simple ISO 9000 based quality system would suffice as a framework here.
Therefore small rural hospitals can only charge what the insurance companies are willing to pay. the state will, obviously, have some part to play here as a community rated system would be necessary. There would be no reason for the state to insure anyone, just pay the premiums for those that can't afford to pay their own.


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> The model used in Belgium (the country with the best healthcare in Europe) is a reimbursement system where insurance companies agree a set fee per procedure/ overnight stay etc. The hospital has to find a way to cover its costs within that charge. Obviously there are cases where this does not happen but there are also cases where a profit is made. The function of the state is them to audit and police quality levels. A simple ISO 9000 based quality system would suffice as a framework here.
> Therefore small rural hospitals can only charge what the insurance companies are willing to pay. the state will, obviously, have some part to play here as a community rated system would be necessary. There would be no reason for the state to insure anyone, just pay the premiums for those that can't afford to pay their own.


 
This sounds a lot better. 

And as it's the best thing for the people of this country I'm sure the unions will be all for it.


----------



## Purple

Firefly said:


> This sounds a lot better.
> 
> And as it's the best thing for the people of this country I'm sure the unions will be all for it.



Right, I've sorted out the health system. You do education.


----------



## Firefly

purple said:


> right, i've sorted out the health system. You do education. :d


 
lol


----------



## Chris

Purple said:


> At the moment those people with private health insurance are funding the majority of their healthcare costs through their insurance companies. If there was no private healthcare the state would have to shoulder the full cost. Giving limited tax breaks to people to fund something themselves which would otherwise be funded by the state is eminently sensible and offers a huge net saving to the state. Only those who are ideologically blinkered would thing otherwise.
> There are huge problems with the public health system. Moth of the problems are caused by management and healthcare workers themselves. The solution proposed by the socialists is to make everyone suffer the same. This is simple begrudgery. The real solution is to fix the public healthcare system, not abolish the private one. Again, a national health insurance scheme would level the playing field and force hospitals to compete or close.


Have read up about the Swiss system quite a bit, and friend of mine has been living there for a while and thinks it's great. As long as the national health insurance scheme, i.e. the insurance part is run by private enterprises and *not* government I'm all in favour of it. I've posted before about how the private Swiss system costs less than the Irish public system and provides far more.



Firefly said:


> Whether they are second rate or whether there is any justification for them is irrelevant...under the Swiss model they can surely charge what they like as there won't be any competition? Or else the will close themselves due to lack of business - surely not fair for people living in remote areas?


Hospitals can only charge as much as the insurance company is willing to pay. There is also nothing to say that a small private clinic would not be set up as soon as a public one started charging huge prices. The higher the profit margin the more attractive the area becomes to competition.


----------



## Firefly

Chris said:


> There is also nothing to say that a small private clinic would not be set up as soon as a public one started charging huge prices. The higher the profit margin the more attractive the area becomes to competition.


 
The publicly-owned hospital (with government reserves/backing) is the incumbant here where there is a very high barrier to entry (building costs). Nothing stopping the publicly-owned hospital from operating at a loss for a few years to force the closure of a newly opened (highly indebted) private clinic.


----------



## Chris

Firefly said:


> The publicly-owned hospital (with government reserves/backing) is the incumbant here where there is a very high barrier to entry (building costs). Nothing stopping the publicly-owned hospital from operating at a loss for a few years to force the closure of a newly opened (highly indebted) private clinic.



Absolutely true, my point was in regard to small public hospitals overcharging. But running at a loss through taxpayer funds is a serious problem in all government services. And the common solution to a nonfunctioning public service to to throw more money at it.


----------



## Purple

Firefly said:


> The publicly-owned hospital (with government reserves/backing) is the incumbant here where there is a very high barrier to entry (building costs). Nothing stopping the publicly-owned hospital from operating at a loss for a few years to force the closure of a newly opened (highly indebted) private clinic.



The government should not allow it's hospitals to run at a loss. Their only source of revenue should be from the insurance companies.
If they want money for capital development they can just borrow it like any other business.


----------



## csirl

Purple said:


> The government should not allow it's hospitals to run at a loss. Their only source of revenue should be from the insurance companies.
> If they want money for capital development they can just borrow it like any other business.


 
There are very few publically owned hospitals in Ireland. The majority are privately owned by religious organisations. If we were moving to the Swiss model, these hospitals would no longer receive lump sums from the Government (as currently happens) and would operate as normal private hospitals.


----------



## Purple

csirl said:


> There are very few publically owned hospitals in Ireland. The majority are privately owned by religious organisations. If we were moving to the Swiss model, these hospitals would no longer receive lump sums from the Government (as currently happens) and would operate as normal private hospitals.



Exactly. While the hospitals are owned by some group of nuns or other in practice they are state owned as the state foots all the bills.


----------



## Jim Davis

Here is another example of working class mindsets


----------



## Firefly

Purple said:


> The government should not allow it's hospitals to run at a loss. Their only source of revenue should be from the insurance companies.
> If they want money for capital development they can just borrow it like any other business.


 
Sounds good to me.


----------



## csirl

Jim Davis said:


> Here is another example of working class mindsets


 
More likely non-working class.


----------



## cork

A lot of the working class thing is snobbery.

eg. address, schools, colleges, place of work.

Who isn't working class?

But take a guy wearing a tracksuit with a tight hair cut - why is it persumed that he is working class?


----------



## Jim Davis

cork said:


> A lot of the working class thing is snobbery.
> 
> eg. address, schools, colleges, place of work.
> 
> Who isn't working class?
> 
> But take a guy wearing a tracksuit with a tight hair cut - why is it persumed that he is working class?


 
Because 9 out of 10 scumbags wear tracksuits and have tight hair cuts.


----------



## Complainer

Jim Davis said:


> Because 9 out of 10 scumbags wear tracksuits and have tight hair cuts.


Quite a lot of them wear snazzy suits, perma-tans, cigars  and drive new Mercs


----------



## Purple

Complainer said:


> Quite a lot of them wear snazzy suits, perma-tans, cigars  and drive new Mercs



I now have an image in my head of a fat guy in drag smoking a cigar while driving a merc... thanks a lot!


----------



## cork

Jim Davis said:


> Because 9 out of 10 scumbags wear tracksuits and have tight hair cuts.




Many wear sports gear.

Mamy have an obsession about having having tight hair cuts.

I have seen people with tight hair cuts queueing at the barbers.

There is a problem across the board about personal budgeting. 

Many need the iphone, premium sky packages and the car.


----------



## cork

Do Irish adults lack ambition?

Do people prefer to invest in a car, games console and posh runners instead of doing  study?


----------



## cork

It is funny that amount of people wearing sports gear.

There is a move from shoes to runners.


----------

