# "The one million suckers who are paying for bailout have taken enough"



## Brendan Burgess (9 Mar 2016)

Good opinion piece by Charlie Weston here: 

The one million suckers who are paying for bailout have taken enough

"the political agenda has been hijacked by those who want to abolish any tax or charge that they don't like, and instead impose the costs on middle earners.


The betrayal of middle Ireland is galling.

Throughout the near collapse of the financial system, it has been ordinary middle-income families that have rescued the situation.

Tax-paying, education-promoting and law-abiding, the sat-upon middle-income families have been the stout defenders of the system.

Who paid for the outrageous bailout of the banks, the shoring up of the public finances, and the cost of keeping the social welfare system largely in tact?

The cost has been enormous.

Most middle-income people paid their water charges, realising it is unpalatable but necessary to fund vital infrastructure, and broaden the tax base."


----------



## Brendan Burgess (9 Mar 2016)

He raises a very interesting point.

There isn't any political party which strongly advocates the majority opinion in this country which is law abiding and tax paying.  The people who understand that water has to be paid for and should be paid for according to usage.  These are the people who are paying for the very high rates of social welfare which discourages people from working.

It's been raised elsewhere on askaboutmoney.  People who are paying into pensions now, might well find that it was a waste of money because the OAP is unaffordable and will probably end up being means tested. Those who don't bother working and don't contribute to the Social Insurance Fund will have nothing, so they will get a pension, whereas the majority who have worked and who have contributed to a pension fund will get nothing from the state despite having contributed to the fund for years. 

Most mortgage holders are responsible and pay their mortgage in full. Many responsible mortgage holders who are in financial difficulty continue to pay as much as they can under very difficult circumstances. But I estimate that around 20,000 people are taking advantage of the system and paying nothing when they could afford to pay something. The responsible borrowers are paying higher mortgage rates , in part due to the cost of subsidising those who won't pay their mortgages.

Brendan


----------



## odyssey06 (9 Mar 2016)

Renua?


----------



## staff (9 Mar 2016)

That would be why they didn't get a single seat in the election - not even Lucinda managed to get re-elected.


----------



## 44brendan (9 Mar 2016)

The middle class revolt!! A bit like being savaged by a sheep. As in most of us in that bracket have neither the time nor the inclination to march on the streets or unite on issues that effect us far more severely that a multitude of water charges.
Those of us who pay pensions and health insurance are viewed by the Socialist parties as being elitist and queue skippers. the realism as in who predominately supports the health system and the SW system are probably those who benefit least from it is never stated.
Historically we voted for FF/FG who have consistently let us down by pandering more to the left leaning voters.
The "high earner" badge is also an indication of a fleece to be sheared rather than a high contributor to existing tax revenue.

Like many others I do not begrudge the tax I pay and I fully support the need for a major input to social housing and HSE reform. However I totally emphasise with the points made by Charlie Weston in this article and the fact that many of us are the forgotten people by the majority of the parties in their pandering to the electorate.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (9 Mar 2016)

44brendan said:


> Those of us who pay pensions and health insurance are viewed by the Socialist parties as being elitist and queue skippers.





44brendan said:


> Historically we voted for FF/FG who have consistently let us down by pandering more to the left leaning voters.



I agree with you but I can't understand why FG in particular panders to the welfare classes?  The constituency of responsible, law abiding people, must be larger than the irresponsible who won't pay their bills and who want to depend on welfare rather than work.

I can understand Labour pandering to them, although it didn't do Labour any good in the election.

The people on the water protests were never going to vote for Labour, never mind Fine Gael, so why did the parties pander to them? 

Brendan


----------



## T McGibney (9 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> I agree with you but I can't understand why FG in particular panders to the welfare classes?  The constituency of responsible, law abiding people, must be larger than the irresponsible who won't pay their bills and who want to depend on welfare rather than work.
> 
> I can understand Labour pandering to them, although it didn't do Labour any good in the election.
> 
> The people on the water protests were never going to vote for Labour, never mind Fine Gael, so why did the parties pander to them?



Hi Brendan

The main parties pander to them in the hope of getting their voters' no. 2, no. 3, no. 4 or no. 5 preference votes in the next election. The Irish PRSTV system means that a party that doesn't attempt to pander to all sections of the electorate will have limited success.


----------



## Firefly (9 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> People who are paying into pensions now, might well find that it was a waste of money because the OAP is unaffordable and will probably end up being means tested.



Welcome to my world!


----------



## monagt (9 Mar 2016)

> ="The people on the water protests were never going to vote for Labour, never mind Fine Gael, so why did the parties pander to them?



Not so. While the Shinners and Left Loonies were the most visible, a lot of the silent majority attended the marches.

Many who had voted for FG/Lab in 2011 and expected things to be different, transparent, no cronies, a fair recovery, etc., vented there anger and  frustration while waiting for the General Election.

FF can ignore them at their peril. (Look at FG/Lab).

LPT is just a tax, for example, it was supposed to be 80% local and 20% for poorer counties for locval services (I am open to correction her) and has this happened - NO (some has been hived off for Irish Water)

IW was incompetently and expensively set up to be sold off (to 1 of Ireland richest men, no names mentioned here).

8p on a liter of petrol would bring in the same money (M Martin Dail)

I think this thread is narrowly focused and do not agree with the sentiments expressed.


----------



## Sunny (9 Mar 2016)

Hmmmm. I can honestly say no political party represents me. I lost my job during the recession. I got one again but am earning over 30% less. I saved hard into a pension fund since my early 20's but when I needed money to help my family, I couldn't access it even after paying tax due but apparently the State had no problem dipping their greedy fingers into it. I am being charged water charges but the water turns my wife's hair green and my appliances are destroyed. Rang Irish water and not their problem. 

I am not a first time buyer but am in a property not suitable for my family. Nobody is talking about helping me. Not looking for a handout but I do expect some common sense. 

Have paid health insurance since I was a teenager and never once claimed. Still goes up at multiples of inflation. Like a lot of families, we had two cars but one is gone because cost of insurance makes it unaffordable. 

On the other side, I get over 50% off the cost of my public transport but someone on half my salary will only get 21%. I get twice the pension relief as someone earning half my salary. I get the same child benefit as someone not working and also Michael O'leary. 

People talk about right wing and left wing politics but it is all rubbish. None of us live lives that always suit the one camp. When I work, I want to pay less tax. When I was struggling, I appreciated with all my heart the limited support given to me by the State. How am I supposed to vote?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (9 Mar 2016)

Sunny said:


> When I was struggling, I appreciated with all my heart the limited support given to me by the State.



This is another outrageous outcome of our welfare system. 

When you lost your job, you got Jobseekers' Benefit for 9 months. You probably got around €20 a week more than someone who had never worked a day in their life. And yet you had paid *Pay Related *Social Insurance. 

The PRSI contributions should go into a fund in the person's name. When they need to claim social welfare for unemployment or disability or pension, then the amount should be determined by the amount in their fund. If you have worked for 30 years and have had PRSI of 14.75% contributed to your fund, you should get much higher social welfare than someone who has worked for only a few years.

Brendan


----------



## Protocol (9 Mar 2016)

monagt said:


> N
> LPT is just a tax, for example, it was supposed to be 80% local and 20% for poorer counties for locval services (I am open to correction her) and has this happened - NO (some has been hived off for Irish Water)



LPT is a tax, yes, of course.

This has happened, you are corrected.

Some LPT collected from stronger counties is redistributed to weaker counties.

Read this:

http://www.environ.ie/sites/default...ment/Administration/FileDownLoad,43581,en.pdf


----------



## Protocol (9 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> This is another outrageous outcome of our welfare system.
> 
> When you lost your job, you got Jobseekers' Benefit for 9 months. You probably got around €20 a week more than someone who had never worked a day in their life. And yet you had paid *Pay Related *Social Insurance.
> 
> Brendan



Brendan,

you won't be happy to hear that JSB = JSA = 188 per week.

Indeed, the long-term unemployed get more, as they qualify for the bonus.

We are unique in paying more welfare to LT unemployed, rather than ST unemployed.


----------



## cremeegg (9 Mar 2016)

Sorry guys but this is the stupidest thread ever. The election is over, you were hammered. Get used to it.

For my part, I want nothing to do with public provision. I will fund my kids education, I will save for my own retirement and I will buy my own health insurance.

I will pay what tax I must, and take whatever public pension I get but the idea of co-operative social provision in Ireland is dead.


----------



## monagt (9 Mar 2016)

cremeegg said:


> Sorry guys but this is the stupidest thread ever. The election is over, you were hammered. Get used to it.



+1


----------



## Delboy (9 Mar 2016)

monagt said:


> Not so. While the Shinners and Left Loonies were the most visible, a lot of the silent majority attended the marches.


'a lot' of the silent majority didn't march. So thats not true.
At most, 100k marched on the biggest day. The population is close to 5m. Over 70% have paid at least 1 of their water bills thus far.

I agree there is no party out there for those working, saving, buying a house etc. It's all pandering to the lowest common denominator.
And yet what are FG to do....they got hammered in the election. People seem to have forgotten very quickly the trouble we were in just 5 years ago.

With regards to Social Welfare. We talk about the 'Scandinavian models' all the time....isn't it the case over there that if you lose your job, you get up to 75% of your salary for X period of time.
Here as mentioned above, your treated no different than the fella who's never got out of bed before mid-day in his life


----------



## odyssey06 (10 Mar 2016)

I think we have a lot of people who are directly or indirectly dependent on the state in one form or another.
 - Farmers reliant on CAP, and Ireland's agricultural sector is relatively large
 - Civil service and semi-state, semi-state sector in particular is significant
 - Students
 - Pensioners on fixed incomes
 - Long term unemployed

Of those who are working, a significant number are calculated as net beneficiaries of the tax\benefits system (though this may or may not be apparent to them).  Also considering the PR system we have, you need a coalition of voters or parties.

Looking at other conservative parties in English they have the advantage of first past the post, and also, they aren't trying to fly right wing on one engine - usually one or more of "tough on law and order", "strong on foreign policy", "standing up for traditional values" helps to get them over the line.

- If FG announced any new initiatives on crime for the election, I didn't hear them. They seem to think being tough means not accepting SF as coalition partners. If they positioned themselves as serious about law and order, they would be pushing an open door. There seems to be concern that the media will present anyone taking that line as some sort of fascist. Look at the trashing of Renua, clearly it's very hard for a new small party to break through that media barrier. But for FG? All it would need is conviction.
I don't get the feeling that the current FG leadership, either out of personal disposition, or because they are in the media echo chamber, have any appetite for taking that position. If law and order was a priority for you, could you vote for FG? Alan Shatter went from one shambles to the next. If Frances Fitzgerald didn't turn up for work, how long before anyone would notice?
You could throw €500 million at the health service and barely make a dent. Imagine the traction you could get from €500 million for policing, prisons, courts etc?

- Traditional values... FG handled the abortion issue so adeptly it led to Renua who got 2%+ vote share. 2% doesn't seem like a lot, but 2% here, 2% there and bang, you're not getting candidates over the line in the last seat. 
In Dublin Bay North, Richard Bruton and Terence Flanagan running for FG together might just have pulled off the two seats (counting Bruton's surplus, and the votes the 2 FG candidates and Flanagan got).


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Mar 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> Look at the trashing of Renua, clearly it's very hard for a new small party to break through that media barrier.



Their flat tax proposal was poorly presented. When challenged that this would mean higher taxes on the lower paid and lower taxes on the higher paid, they said that they would protect the lower paid though some complex income transfer system.  They should have just come out straight - "Jobseekers Allowance is too high; tax rates on the lower paid are too low and tax rates on the higher paid are too high. Yes, our flat rate system will result in a widening of the tax base."  That would have helped them. 

They were not going to get votes from the welfare classes anyway, so they should not have pandered to them. 

The quality of the Renua candidates was very poor and the message was not different enough from Fine Gael. 

Brendan


----------



## monagt (10 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> 'a lot' of the silent majority didn't march. So thats not true.
> At most, 100k marched on the biggest day. The population is close to 5m. Over 70% have paid at least 1 of their water bills thus far.
> 
> I agree there is no party out there for those working, saving, buying a house etc. It's all pandering to the lowest common denominator.
> And yet what are FG to do....they got hammered in the election. People seem to have forgotten very quickly the trouble we were in just 5 years ago



Over 70%...........???........At least 1 water bill paid.........those who cancelled DD's and accounts are still counted.........is this Pixie land?

FG did what they always did........(ie) became more arrogant, more cronyism, corrupt and out of touch in 5 years than FF did in 16 years (the reason why they never got a second term, Kenny will be first if gets Taoiseach  this time) and why we ended up with FF in power so long.

Don't assume this response is support for FF who ruined the country and should have been dismantled as a party and now seen as the only choice by many to keep FG out.

Now to the 100K marching: While we can't take the 100K as a representative sample for many reasons, we can assume that the opposition to Irish Water is more that 100k out of a population of 5M.
Perhaps someone would have the multiple that Governments use to assess the true opposition based on the numbers marching.

A second election should be held and FG will lose more seats, FF did not see the turnaround in their support and failed to run enough candidates to hoover up the final seats in many constituencies, so another FF Gov (God help us).


----------



## Delboy (10 Mar 2016)

Colm McCarthy just now on The Pat Kenny Show now:
In Ireland, 23% of households are totally dependant on the State for all income/housing etc
The closest in the EU are Belgium and the UK on 13%


----------



## Delboy (10 Mar 2016)

monagt said:


> Over 70%...........???........At least 1 water bill paid.........those who cancelled DD's and accounts are still counted.........is this Pixie land?


I stand corrected as that 70% figure was from memory...a quick google tells me the actual figure is 61%.
Is that Pixie land enough for you?


----------



## monagt (10 Mar 2016)

Dont include those who cancelled DDs, cancelled Accounts, Paid only 1 bill and those "Registered by Irish Water" without their acceptance and/or knowledge so maybe 49% 



One of better TD's in the Dail and who supports charges.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Mar 2016)

monagt said:


> One of better TD's in the Dail and who supports charges.



Are you sure that Stephen Donnelly supports water charges?  When they formed the Social Democrats, they three of them were asked if they had paid their water charges. His two co-founders said that they had not paid them. He said he didn't know whether he had paid them or not.  

Brendan


----------



## odyssey06 (10 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Their flat tax proposal was poorly presented. When challenged that this would mean higher taxes on the lower paid and lower taxes on the higher paid, they said that they would protect the lower paid though some complex income transfer system.  They should have just come out straight - "Jobseekers Allowance is too high; tax rates on the lower paid are too low and tax rates on the higher paid are too high. Yes, our flat rate system will result in a widening of the tax base."  That would have helped them.Brendan



Good points, hopefully next time round they'll be more open to such feedback...


----------



## monagt (10 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Are you sure that Stephen Donnelly supports water charges?  When they formed the Social Democrats, they three of them were asked if they had paid their water charges. His two co-founders said that they had not paid them. He said he didn't know whether he had paid them or not. Brendan



Thx Brendan, you are correct Social Democrats will abolish IW 

Again, most do not object paying for services, once we get what we paid for..........LPT better local services, Road Tax Better Roads, PRSI better Welfare services, etc., so objecting to a bid to privatise our water and sell it off to our crony friends by not allowing proper debate among our elected representatives .


----------



## Delboy (10 Mar 2016)

monagt said:


> Dont include those who cancelled DDs, cancelled Accounts, Paid only 1 bill and those "Registered by Irish Water" without their acceptance and/or knowledge so maybe 49%
> 
> 
> 
> One of better TD's in the Dail and who supports charges.


61% is the figure for those who paid a bill in Q3. I'm not saying any more because no stats exist.
Anyways this is not a thread for IW.

Anyone know why we are at 23% of households reliant totally on State benefits while the UK/Belgium are at 13%, the closest to us in the EU?
And Ireland with 1 of the youngest populations in Western Europe.


----------



## Palerider (10 Mar 2016)

Those that paid their charges will have to suck it up, not all marchers were from the Left, I went myself ( great days out by the way..;-) ), I would not be a grumpy guy, I can afford to pay but enough was enough, honestly I think the marchers were out complaining about many different items, for me in addition to the IW quango it was the raid to my pension pot, the FG lies per M Noonan saying there would be no more deductions and there were....that made him a Liar, fool me once...

Voters of a similar mindset to myself have spoken, if the message fails to get through we will speak again at the next election, the war is over folks, get over it, Irish Water is dead and nobody will carry the can for its demise, a demise that was inevitable the way it was constructed and managed.


----------



## monagt (10 Mar 2016)

Palerider said:


> Those that paid their charges will have to suck it up, not all marchers were from the Left, I went myself ( great days out by the way..;-) ), I would not be a grumpy guy, I can afford to pay but enough was enough, honestly I think the marchers were out complaining about many different items, for me in addition to the IW quango it was the raid to my pension pot, the FG lies per M Noonan saying there would be no more deductions and there were....that made him a Liar, fool me once...
> 
> Voters of a similar mindset to myself have spoken, if the message fails to get through we will speak again at the next election, the war is over folks, get over it, Irish Water is dead and nobody will carry the can for its demise, a demise that was inevitable the way it was constructed and managed.



+ 1 IW
+ 1 On the Pension Robbery & because they have destroyed confidence in Pensions among many


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> Anyone know why we are at 23% of households reliant totally on State benefits while the UK/Belgium are at 13%, the closest to us in the EU?
> And Ireland with 1 of the youngest populations in Western Europe.



It's probably because we have nearly the highest social welfare rates in Europe.  It makes no sense for a man with a wife and child to work when he gets such high social welfare, housing and healthcare free of charge.

We also have very high numbers of people on disability and invalidity. On objectively measurable disabilities such as blindness or physical disabilities, we are average. But apparently,  the Irish have much higher than average problems with back pain and "the nerves" - illnesses which can't really be objectively challenged.

Here is what the NESC said about it

"Jobless Households - an Exploration of the Issues

Ireland has a high level of household joblessness compared to other European countries, with nearly one-quarter (23 per cent) of households in Ireland described as jobless (in 2010).  The next-highest countries were UK and Belgium at 13 per cent, with an EU-15 average of 11 per cent.  A distinguishing feature of Ireland’s jobless households is the likelihood that they contain children.  While fewer than 30 per cent of adults in jobless households live with children in other EU-15 countries, more than half do in Ireland at 56 per cent.

Various explanations have been put forward to explain the causes of household
joblessness.  These can be summarised as follow:
 The operation of the tax and welfare system;
 The state of the labour market; and
 The characteristics of jobless households (age, level of education, age and
number of children, health status of adults and children)."

One would expect that the countries with the highest unemployment rates would have the highest jobless families rates, but that is not the case.




Brendan


----------



## Fella (10 Mar 2016)

Social welfare rates are disgracefully high , I know many people who don't work and are no worse off than me , still have cars laptops broadband iPhones sky sports , there is just a disgusting amount of people who freeload and don't contribute anything in tax .


----------



## 44brendan (10 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> It's probably because we have nearly the highest social welfare rates in Europe.


I have a relation who had a severe illness about 15 years ago and had to give up work. She applied for and was granted disability benefit and a medical card. She recovered fully from the illness and has been fit to work for the past 14 years. However she remains in receipt of the disability benefit and has no interest in returning to work.
Accepting that this is just 1 case it does indicate that the current assessment system appears to be flawed. it would appear that once you are in the system and have received the medical card/other payment you tend to stay within that system irrespective of any change in circumstances.


----------



## blueband (10 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> 'a lot' of the silent majority didn't march. So thats not true.
> At most, 100k marched on the biggest day. The population is close to 5m. Over 70% have paid at least 1 of their water bills thus far.
> 
> I agree there is no party out there for those working, saving, buying a house etc. It's all pandering to the lowest common denominator.
> ...


Just because someone dose not march that dose mean that they are not protesting, many people choose to wait until the election and then use their vote as a protest...


----------



## Dermot (10 Mar 2016)

I have a friend who has no disability in any normal rational way of thinking and he has been drawing a disability pension for the past 4 or 5 years.  He retired from work with a pension at about 54 years of age.  He was out walking with me one day a few weeks after retiring and the next day he rang me and said to me about he must have twisted his knee when we were out walking. I noticed nothing and he said nothing to me at the time.  When talking about it the next day he said he would go to his doctor and get a letter to say he was unfit to work as this would prolong his stamps and he could draw his disability money and preserve his stamps.  
The weeks went into months and his doctors letters indicated injury getting worse (at his insistence).  He showed me a copy of the letters/reports and it was unbelievable stuff.  He was actually bragging about it.  He also remarked that a lot of retired people from where he worked done the same thing and he was getting advice from them on what to do.
Anyway he is on a disability pension/never had an operation/no medication and never had to go before an independent doctor.  It was all decided by a non medical person reading his medical reports.
He is not the only one. From my own experience it seems to be rampant.
BTW I am not in any way whatsoever against genuine cases getting well looked after


----------



## Brendan Burgess (10 Mar 2016)

Dermot said:


> BTW I am not in any way whatsoever against genuine cases getting well looked after



Dermot

I think that really is the issue. 

A friend of mine who has worked for 35 years and contributed huge amounts of PRSI had had to stop work recently due to genuine ill health. He is getting the same disability as your friend who is malingering.  

Brendan


----------



## Gerry Canning (10 Mar 2016)

Fella said:


> Social welfare rates are disgracefully high , I know many people who don't work and are no worse off than me , still have cars laptops broadband iPhones sky sports , there is just a disgusting amount of people who freeload and don't contribute anything in tax .


.........................................................
I don,t think its that the rates on Social are {disgracefully high} , it is that  Welfare is not policed agressively enough..
SW rates do not afford a (high) lifestyle. I can,t see people on 188 per week affording many luxuries.(having @ times been in that position)
If they can afford luxuries then they have other hidden income.

If they are genuinely no worse off than you ,then you are being abused by your employment.

Any numbers that {freeload} are thieves and report them.


----------



## 44brendan (10 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> If they are genuinely no worse off than you ,then you are being abused by your employment.
> 
> Any numbers that {freeload} are thieves and report them.


Fair dues to you Gerry! From reading your posts you are in agreement with a proper SW system to help those in genuine need but unlike many so called Socialist parties have no interest in bailing out those who are merely manipulating the system to their own end. This is broadly what gives Socialism a bad name. Are there any genuine socialist out there who will not put up with the malingerers and others who see the rest of us as having an obligation to continually finance their lifestyle without an equal obligation on themselves to find gainful employment where that is possible?
A party who is prepared to openly espouse that type of policy would certainly get my vote!!


----------



## Fella (10 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> .........................................................
> I don,t think its that the rates on Social are {disgracefully high} , it is that  Welfare is not policed agressively enough..
> SW rates do not afford a (high) lifestyle. I can,t see people on 188 per week affording many luxuries.(having @ times been in that position)
> If they can afford luxuries then they have other hidden income.
> ...



A friend of mine was offered a job 500€ a week take home pay , he ran the numbers and it wasn't worth his while going back to work between medical cards dole etc and would then have to pay child care. 188 is too high any amount that lets people refuse a job is too high , give them 80€ a week or less , they'll soon get out and get a job , there's jobs there but people don't want to take them and lose al the benefits .


----------



## orka (10 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> I don,t think its that the rates on Social are {disgracefully high} , it is that  Welfare is not policed agressively enough..
> SW rates do not afford a (high) lifestyle. I can,t see people on 188 per week affording many luxuries.(having @ times been in that position)
> If they can afford luxuries then they have other hidden income.


It's not the single person basic rate that the big problem - it's all the extras - rent allowance, dependent add-ons, medical card, bonuses, fuel allowances etc.  We should have a cap like they introduced in the UK where a family have a ceiling on the amount of benefits they can receive so even a lowish paying job would leave them better off financially.


----------



## allencat3 (10 Mar 2016)

It's not the single person basic rate that the big problem - it's all the extras - rent allowance, dependent add-ons, medical card, bonuses, fuel allowances etc. We should have a cap like they introduced in the UK where a family have a ceiling on the amount of benefits they can receive so even a lowish paying job would leave them better off financially.

....and add Free Travel Pass to the mix.    It enrages me (disabled, age 63, commuting for 3 hours daily) to see those youngsters, walking onto buses, trains, etc, waving their FTPs at the drivers, and swigging RedBulls, checking their smartphones.  What kind of 'hidden disability' do these freeloaders/workshy possess in order to qualify for their FTPs?   The assessment criteria should be tightened, and GPs penalised for not thoroughly assessing their freeloading patients...

16 minutes ago


----------



## blueband (10 Mar 2016)

Fella said:


> A friend of mine was offered a job 500€ a week take home pay , he ran the numbers and it wasn't worth his while going back to work between medical cards dole etc and would then have to pay child care. 188 is too high any amount that lets people refuse a job is too high , give them 80€ a week or less , they'll soon get out and get a job , there's jobs there but people don't want to take them and lose al the benefits .


or better still...how about don't even give them the 80euro, then lets see in a few years what sort of a society we have created ...


----------



## Gerry Canning (10 Mar 2016)

I still hold that 188 is very far from big money to stay on welfare.
(Respectfully suggest trying to live on it for the more strident posters wanting reduction.)

I don,t see the mentioned extras as a huge issue.
..................
What I continue to see is a lack of leadership in Government.
a. Government should ,Stop running with the latest (big-wow) eg how in Gods name has water become such an issue?its peanuts in the scheme of things.
b. If we have 90% employment ,where are all these freeloaders ? @ 90 % employment+ 5% twix jobs , means  there is a maximum of 1 in 20 on welfare .


Of course we are going to have leg-lifters , surely it s Government Leadership to sort these out and stop pandering to self-opinionated unrepresentative groups such as (the poor Marys) or on the other side ( legal profession).

It is the lack of leadership fuelled by short term thinking that really needs to be sorted.
{the million suckers} voted these people in ,and no harm, but ye suckers have over the years got what ye have voted for.
So as Enda might say stop (whinging folks) !!


----------



## Delboy (10 Mar 2016)

Exactly...it's not the basic €188 per week but all the add-ons that make it such a lucrative honey pot.

And I believe that we will go the UK route and introduce a cap on the amount of benefits any 1 family/individual can get. We usually follow their lead a few years down the line.

Anyone know the answer to this? When unemployment rates are talked about in the paper etc , are those on disability excluded from the calcs?
Is disability the 'golden ticket' in SW terms?


----------



## Fella (10 Mar 2016)

blueband said:


> or better still...how about don't even give them the 80euro, then lets see in a few years what sort of a society we have created ...



You would create a society where people have to work and can't sit at home and expect hand outs , with rent allowance medical cards dole I seriously doubt the person on an average wage is that much better off than someone on all the benefits . 

I've asked people on social welfare did they want to work for me cash in hand on a Saturday offered them 50 quid for a few hours work going to bookmakers and they never do it , can't be that stuck , majority are just wasters .


----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> I
> b. If we have 90% employment ,where are all these freeloaders ? @ 90 % employment+ 5% twix jobs , means  there is a maximum of 1 in 20 on welfare .



Note that *half of the population* are recipients or beneficiaries of weekly welfare payments.

A more interesting figure would be what % of the 18-66 population are on welfare - I don't have that to hand.

Also note that, as referred to earlier, we have by far the highest amount of people living in households that experience VLWI, very low work intensity.

We are at 23% of households, next are Greece and Spain at is about 16%.


----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)




----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> Anyone know the answer to this? When unemployment rates are talked about in the paper etc , are those on disability excluded from the calcs?
> Is disability the 'golden ticket' in SW terms?



http://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Annual-SWS-Statistical-Information-Report-2014.aspx

All data here.

2014 data summary:
http://www.welfare.ie/en/downloads/Social-Stats-AR-2014-SectionA.pdf

"There were 1,440,876 people were in receipt of a weekly Social Welfare Payment at the end of 2014. As these payments included increases in respect of 194,190 Qualified Adults and 473,013 children, along with Family Income Supplement payments made in respect of 111,583 children, there were over 2,219,600 beneficiaries in all."


----------



## blueband (10 Mar 2016)

Fella said:


> You would create a society where people have to work and can't sit at home and expect hand outs , with rent allowance medical cards dole I seriously doubt the person on an average wage is that much better off than someone on all the benefits .
> 
> I've asked people on social welfare did they want to work for me cash in hand on a Saturday offered them 50 quid for a few hours work going to bookmakers and they never do it , can't be that stuck , majority are just wasters .


Maybe you could try offering them a real job with proper wages......you might get a different response .


----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)

*Table A8: Number of Recipients and Beneficiaries of Weekly Social Welfare Payments, 2005 to 2014*

Year Recipients(1) Beneficiaries(1) Population(2) Recipients as a % of population Beneficiaries as a % of population

2005   976,613     1,469,106     4,133,800                       23.6%                   35.5%

2006 1,003,517     1,506,824     4,232,900                        23.7% 35.6%

2007 1,060,327      1,577,463     4,375,800                        24.2% 36.0%

2008 1,208,883      1,799,875     4,485,100                        27.0% 40.1%

2009 1,379,206      2,076,256     4,533,400                       30.4% 45.8%

2010 1,430,833      2,179,428     4,554,800                       31.4% 47.8%

2011 1,467,129      2,248,284     4,574,900                        32.1% 49.1%

2012 1,469,214       2,267,499     4,585,400                       32.0% 49.5%

2013 1,467,918 2,273,003 4,593,100 32.0% 49.5%

2014 1,440,876 2,219,662 4,609,100 31.3% 48.2%

(1) There is an element of double counting due to recipients and beneficiaries being in receipt of concurrent payments
under various payments such as Carer’s, Domiciliary Care Allowance, Disablement Benefit etc.
(2) Sources: CSO


----------



## Sophrosyne (10 Mar 2016)

Protocol,

I assume your chart above is reproduced from one of the Eurostat databases. Which one?


----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)

See table A9 for the number of people of working age on income supports.

2005 = 293,000
2010 = 566,000
2014 = 446,000


----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)

Sophrosyne said:


> Protocol,
> 
> I assume your chart above is reproduced from one of the Eurostat databases. Which one?



Yes, please see here:

[broken link removed]


----------



## Protocol (10 Mar 2016)

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statis...People_at_risk_of_poverty_or_social_exclusion

2013 and 2014 VLWI data here.


----------



## Fella (10 Mar 2016)

blueband said:


> Maybe you could try offering them a real job with proper wages......you might get a different response .



I've said already a lad I know it wasn't worth his while taking 500€ a week after tax because of all the free handouts he gets already. 

If I was struggling I'd do anything and be delighted with a few quid cash in hand on a Saturday , welfare is too much so they ain't struggling .


----------



## Sophrosyne (10 Mar 2016)

To get back to the first post, does Charlie Weston or anyone else have statistical information regarding what socio-economic groups paid their water charges and what groups did not?


----------



## Sarenco (11 Mar 2016)

Hi Protocol

Thanks posting that data.

I knew that social transfers in Ireland were unusually impactful in terms of addressing at-risk-of-poverty rates but I hadn't realised that we were such outliers in terms of the numbers living in households with very low work intensity.


----------



## Sophrosyne (11 Mar 2016)

Protocol,

I think the Eurostat data in the chart you posted is mostly based on SILC surveys. Would you agree?


----------



## Protocol (11 Mar 2016)

I'd say so, yes.

Note that the CSO seem to have some reservations about the VLWI data in Ireland.

See here:

http://www.cso.ie/en/silc/methodology/


[broken link removed]


----------



## cremeegg (12 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> And I believe that we will go the UK route and introduce a cap on the amount of benefits any 1 family/individual can get.



I see absolutely no move in this direction in Ireland. The result of the election gives no indication of any support for such a move in Ireland.


----------



## cremeegg (12 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> When unemployment rates are talked about in the paper etc , are those on disability excluded from the calcs?



Yes.

The unemployment rate at just under 9% refers to 9% of the workforce. Those on disability are not measured as part of the workforce.


----------



## cremeegg (12 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> If we have 90% employment ,where are all these freeloaders ? @ 90 % employment+ 5% twix jobs , means  there is a maximum of 1 in 20 on welfare .



We have just over 60% employment.

From CSO re 2011

Labour Force Participation (Rate) 61.9
Unemployment (Rate) 19.0

The labour force participation rate is calculated by expressing the labour force (i.e. those at work, looking for first regular job and unemployed) as a percentage of the total aged 15 years and over.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Delboy (12 Mar 2016)

cremeegg said:


> I see absolutely no move in this direction in Ireland. The result of the election gives no indication of any support for such a move in Ireland.


In time, I believe it will happen. Where the Brits go, we usually follow.


----------



## gar32 (14 Mar 2016)

Why is there no change? Why if someone says no to €500 a week job is their €188 not cut by 10% and so on until €500 looks like a good option. 

Why is the dole not related to what you paid in? If you earn €60000 a year & loss your job it will hit you a lot harder then someone on €24000 a years losing their job. Give a percentage and reduce it over time until that person gets a job. 

As for medical card. Just set a percentage of income to pay for universal cover. Cap it at around €6000 a month with employer paying part of it. 

There needs to be change for the better but also for the worse. A fair system is needed and PRSI, USC and all the other tax systems need to be stream lined. Sliding scale of tax paid by everyone after a bass payment is reached.


----------



## Gerry Canning (14 Mar 2016)

Fella said:


> You would create a society where people have to work and can't sit at home and expect hand outs , with rent allowance medical cards dole I seriously doubt the person on an average wage is that much better off than someone on all the benefits .
> 
> I've asked people on social welfare did they want to work for me cash in hand on a Saturday offered them 50 quid for a few hours work going to bookmakers and they never do it , can't be that stuck , majority are just wasters .


................
Wow there Fella,
{majority are just wasters} !
Tell that to those who lost jobs in the recession,
Tell that to those who correctly took any job they could get since. Or those that left.
By your 50 (offer), you too are part of the problem, so stop throwing bricks !
If you know these {wasters} report them. You seem to (unlike me) know quite a few.
If you have ever been on welfare , it is NOT a good place, I hope you do not have to try it.
Medical cards probably apply to a lot of people on average wage.
If someone on average wage ain,t generally better off than Dole man, does that mean Mr Dole gets too much or is it Mr Worker gets too little ?

Walk in honest Dolemans path ie most before commenting as you did PLEASE.


----------



## Purple (15 Mar 2016)

Sunny said:


> I get twice the pension relief as someone earning half my salary.


 You don't get any tax relief on pension contributions. Your tax is deferred until you receive the money as income. 

I don't know how we can use the taxation system or the welfare system to change peoples mind set. The problem isn't welfare rates its that some people see no problem living off their fellow citizens while being able but unwilling to support themselves. Claiming welfare or disability when you are capable of working, even for the same or less money, is no different to insurance fraud or general theft. It's also no different to someone who works not paying their full taxes so if anyone posting here does the odd nixer for cash or is a doctor or solicitor who pockets some cash they are no different.
Some people say that they pay enough tax and so don't declare some income but paying your taxes ain't optional and cheating is cheating.


----------



## odyssey06 (15 Mar 2016)

Purple said:


> I don't know how we can use the taxation system or the welfare system to change peoples mind set. The problem isn't welfare rates its that some people see no problem living off their fellow citizens while being able but unwilling to support themselves. Claiming welfare or disability when you are capable of working, even for the same or less money, is no different to insurance fraud or general theft.



I think you have a chance with the people first coming onto the jobs market... If you have someone who was on welfare for X years, it starts to get very easy for them to get accustomed to that and rationalise it as an entitlement. Let's face it, would you want to hire someone who had been out of work for 5 years or longer, versus someone new to the jobs market? I've worked full time since I left college, I don't know what shape I'd be in returning to the workforce after several years out. Someone who never had a full time job coming into to the workforce after several years? There's a lot of bad habits you can pick up, and disclipining yourself to work in a call centre or stuck at a desk 9 to 5 would be a culture shock. Kudos to anyone who pulls it off.

I think we need to look at the incentives facing newcomers and focus efforts there. As for those who are 'accustomed' to it, I think UK style benefits cap is the way to go.


----------



## Gerry Canning (16 Mar 2016)

odyssey06,
Like your comments.
As you suggest, it is all too easy to get downed/live in an entitlement/dependant mode.
As you suggest, it is (oddly) difficult to get back into work day discipline.
As you suggest, Kudos to those who manage to move from long term unemployment into the (drudgery?) of work place.
As you hint, why would employer employ a long -term doleman ?

The (CAP) sounds good but it needs managing. Unemployment seems to follow generations so we could end up in a worse social place ?
Not sure the Tories would be my poster boys on Welfare. 

I am all for going after those who consciously work the system , but I think most unemployed want work and a way to get there.


----------



## odyssey06 (16 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> The (CAP) sounds good but it needs managing. Unemployment seems to follow generations so we could end up in a worse social place ? Not sure the Tories would be my poster boys on Welfare.
> I am all for going after those who consciously work the system , but I think most unemployed want work and a way to get there.



The other alternative is the citizens wages concept for all citizens, and scrapping of benefits. I assume the wage would be set at lower than current benefits level but by doing so it makes it easier for citizens to pickup work here and there as a 'topup'. I can see how it might work for New Zealand, I'm not sure how it could work for Ireland as part of the EU:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...itizens-wage-and-scrap-benefits-a6932136.html


----------



## Firefly (16 Mar 2016)

odyssey06 said:


> Let's face it, would you want to hire someone who had been out of work for 5 years or longer, versus someone new to the jobs market? I've worked full time since I left college, I don't know what shape I'd be in returning to the workforce after several years out. Someone who never had a full time job coming into to the workforce after several years? There's a lot of bad habits you can pick up, and disclipining yourself to work in a call centre or stuck at a desk 9 to 5 would be a culture shock. Kudos to anyone who pulls it off.



I agree. Major to kudos to anyone who pulls this off. The longer someone is unemployed the more difficult it is to (a) get back into the jobs market and (b) get any job that's half decent in terms of pay and fulfillment. I think prevention here is the key. Especially regarding the young & able - they need to be pushed into working from the off - unemployment benefits should be so low that work the only option. If that means taking a minimum wage job and working 60 hours a week so be it. Better than sitting at home watching Sky anyways. Ultimately, people should stop continually looking for someone else (the taxpayer) from picking up the tab everytime and accept personal responsibility. As I have said many times before, those genuinely mentally or physically impaired should be very well looked after (I'd go as far as saying we should look after these people better than anywhere else). Everyone else should have to work. 

Ronald Regan once said "the best social program is a job" and it's hard to argue with that.


----------



## Deiseblue (16 Mar 2016)

JSA for those aged 18 to 24 without children  is €100 per week increasing to €144 per week at age 25 which is so low that it surely motivates the majority to seek work whether it be in this country or abroad.
With the unemployment figures  hovering around 9% & given the fact that the green shoots of the recovery are not shared equally on a regional basis makes the search for jobs a precarious business , I certainly wouldn't fancy looking for a job in Waterford currently !
The Working Time Act 1997 ensures that the working week for most employees cannot exceed 48 hours which I believe is a good thing.


----------



## Firefly (16 Mar 2016)

Deiseblue said:


> JSA for those aged 18 to 24 without children  is €100 per week increasing to €144 per week at age 25 which is so low that it surely motivates the majority to seek work whether it be in this country or abroad.
> With the unemployment figures  hovering around 9% & given the fact that the green shoots of the recovery are not shared equally on a regional basis makes the search for jobs a precarious business , I certainly wouldn't fancy looking for a job in Waterford currently !
> The Working Time Act 1997 ensures that the working week for most employees cannot exceed 48 hours which I believe is a good thing.



Thanks for that. Yes, at those levels, it does indeed look like work does pay...I don't envy anyone trying to make do on 100e a week and more importantly being longer & longer out of the workplace. Regarding prevention, this really needs to be hammered home to kids by their parents and at school - the (legal!) way to get on is to knuckle down at school and progress to 3rd level or get a decent trade. It simply has to be a plan for people.

I genuinely feel very sorry for those who have been in employment all their lives and are now out of work. It must be very demoralising for them in lots of ways. I don't see any easy fixes though - retraining takes time and you'll also be up against younger and cheaper competition. What's worse is that after paying so much tax for so long they are reduced to the same levels as those who have never worked. It's a disgrace as these people are much more likely to get back working at something / anything again in the future and be paying tax again.

The last group then are those who have never worked and have no intention either. They know every trick in the book too. They are a scourge on society. We all know the type, and if we're honest, we can more often than not spot them a mile away.  It's all nice and PC to have pity on them, but just remember that part of the reason why you might on a hospital trolley or that your special needs teacher has had hours cutback are as a result of these freeloaders.


----------



## Protocol (16 Mar 2016)

Work doesn't pay if you take account of rent supp and med cards, and especially college grants.

I know people who [rationally] choose welfare as a long-term choice, as they will save

uni fees = 3000 pa
grant = 5,915 pa

So if you have three kids, being on welfare while they are in college will *mean a benefit of 90,000 approx.*

*No wonder people stay on welfare, while EU and non-EU migrants take up jobs.*


----------



## Firefly (16 Mar 2016)

Protocol said:


> Work doesn't pay if you take account of rent supp and med cards, and especially college grants.
> 
> I know people who [rationally] choose welfare as a long-term choice, as they will save
> 
> ...




I agree with the rational bit - it makes sense. But of course it's wrong. It's means you & I are paying for their lifestyle choice, never mind the poor old lady on a hospital trolley.

Regarding the fees - these are means tested to protect the lower paid and rightly so - the more kids from disadvantage backgrounds going on to 3rd level and trades the better. Having said that, children don't exactly pop out of the womb with their Leaving Cert done! Parents have 17 or 18 years to get their you-know-what together. And anyway, what kind of example is that for a parent to send their kids to college whilst _choosing _to stay on the dole? Crazy.

I know my posts might seem a little harsher than usual, but to be honest, I'm nearly at a tipping point with all these muppets on the far left. You can see why they're so happy to stay in opposition throwing stones....they wouldn't have the spine for a real job themselves. And as somepoint pointed out during the election, they'd have to take off their socks to count to 20.


----------



## Purple (17 Mar 2016)

Protocol said:


> Work doesn't pay if you take account of rent supp and med cards, and especially college grants.
> 
> I know people who [rationally] choose welfare as a long-term choice, as they will save
> 
> ...


Those people are no different to people who rationally decide to live off the proceeds of crime. They are stealing from their fellow citizens.
Welfare for those who have never worked is charity from others. The problem, in part, is how we talk about entitlements and rights as if we have no duty to earn them.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (17 Mar 2016)

Purple said:


> Those people are no different to people who rationally decide to live off the proceeds of crime. They are stealing from their fellow citizens.



But it's perfectly legal. It is not criminal.

Is it any different from aggressive tax avoidance by wealthy people?   We are to blame if we design the system which tolerates this.

Brendan


----------



## inaquandert (17 Mar 2016)

I agree with Odyssey06 pretty much in everything they.ve said  - the big push has to be on getting young people to opt for work rather than languish on the Dole. The longer you are on it the harder it is to get off it.  I do feel sorry though for some long term unemployed people who just can't get a job. I think also there was a problem years ago that many people drew Dole and worked on the side almost treating it like an entitlement to top up their income. They could do this because enforcement was lax and once you got it no one hardly ever looked at you again. Thankfully that's changed but now those people look like they have no work record and so can't get a job. I know they are at fault for doing this but it was society who enabled them. I also agree that the whole wealth of entitlements that families get should be capped. Society has created this problem and society must change it but I don't think I'll ever see a politician taking it on.


----------



## Purple (18 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> But it's perfectly legal. It is not criminal.
> 
> Is it any different from aggressive tax avoidance by wealthy people?   We are to blame if we design the system which tolerates this.
> 
> Brendan


It's not perfectly legal; legally you can only accept dole if you are available for work. The problem is it's not possible to prove beyond a doubt that people are playing the system.  
Morally it's exactly the same as stealing but personal integrity and such notions seem to be the preserve of fools.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Mar 2016)

Hi Purple 

Let's clarify. 

If a person is claiming the dole and doing nixers, that is a criminal offence. 
If a person is unemployed but realises that he and his family are better off if he does not work, then that is not a criminal offence. 

Brendan


----------



## Purple (18 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Hi Purple
> 
> Let's clarify.
> 
> ...


You can only claim dole if you are available for work. If you are not willing to work but say you are then you are claiming payments under false pretenses.


----------



## Firefly (18 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> But it's perfectly legal. It is not criminal.
> 
> Is it any different from aggressive tax avoidance by wealthy people?   We are to blame if we design the system which tolerates this.
> 
> Brendan



Hi Brendan,

I'm not sure of the legality aspect, but people who are "caught out" in various ways (not turning up for interviews etc) have their benefits stopped and I think we need more of this. Regarding aggressive tax avoidance, I think for many people this may seem equally (or even more) immoral. However, once it's _legal_ then you can't really blame them - who in their right mind would voluntarily hand over more tax than they are required to? I do think however that as many of these tax loopholes should be closed off as possible, unless there is some benefit in keeping them they were are not privy to.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (18 Mar 2016)

Purple 

I agree with you that if someone is claiming Jobseekers, they should be assigned a job. They should not have a choice. If they don't take it, they lose their JSA. 

But as we don't do that, then it's not criminal for the person to be choosy and not take a job unless it's perfect.

Brendan


----------



## Cervelo (18 Mar 2016)

As someone who signed on in 2011 for the first time after nearly 30 years working I was amazed at what I was able to claim from the SW
At one stage between myself and my wife we were receiving payments that were in excess of 26k a year
I am now self employed earning less then the SW payments we received and while I might not agree with someone turning down a job offer of €500pw I can understand why they wouldn't take the job.


----------



## Purple (18 Mar 2016)

Brendan Burgess said:


> But as we don't do that, then it's not criminal for the person to be choosy and not take a job unless it's perfect.
> 
> Brendan


Being picky is one thing but many people have no intention of ever taking a job. Living off their fellow citizens is a lifestyle choice.


----------



## Gerry Canning (18 Mar 2016)

Purple,

{many people have no intention of ever taking a job}
I really don,t think that is true , what is very true is that when we perceive that someone is cheating, it magnifies our anger.

Cervelo.
I am glad that after 30 years ,you as a tax- payer ,could honourably expect to be covered.
With individual (dole) @ 188 per week , your k26 would be an exception.

I believe there are very very few occasions where 500 wages is trumped by (dole).


----------



## Purple (18 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> Purple,
> 
> {many people have no intention of ever taking a job}
> I really don,t think that is true , what is very true is that when we perceive that someone is cheating, it magnifies our anger.
> ...



I know quite a few of them. I also know people who have given up working as they are better off on the dole. They were earning in excess of €500 per week.
There was a letter to the Sunday Business Post a few years ago from a man in the West of Ireland with 2 kids in college. He said that he would nee a job paying in excess of €62'000 a year to be better off working when college fees, medical expenses, work related expenses and childcare costs for his younger children were taken into account.


----------



## Gerry Canning (18 Mar 2016)

Purple ,
I really do hear you , but would be very interested in getting actual figures other than these outliers.
Financially (for the rest of us) I just can,t see there are many..
Even a few grates !


----------



## Dermot (18 Mar 2016)

Purple said:


> I know quite a few of them. I also know people who have given up working as they are better off on the dole. They were earning in excess of €500 per week.
> There was a letter to the Sunday Business Post a few years ago from a man in the West of Ireland with 2 kids in college. He said that he would nee a job paying in excess of €62'000 a year to be better off working when college fees, medical expenses, work related expenses and childcare costs for his younger children were taken into account.



There are quite a lot of "fools" working who are paying private health insurance, work related expenses, college fees and accommodation costs, rent/mortgage for home and who are not "eligible" for all these entitlements.  It takes a pretty high gross income to cover all these costs at this stage of ones life.

Sorry Gerry but there are a lot of people working during the college and creche phases of their childrens lives who would be better off not working.


----------



## Leper (19 Mar 2016)

OK, a guy won't work because it is financially crazy for him to do so.  Let's grass on him and you can have your name painted on every wall available  So-and-So is an Informer.  The guy won't work because he can get away with being bailed out by everybody else.

But, isn't this the nature of Paddy-the-Irishman? Yer Man doesn't work and it is patently obvious to everybody looking at him.

Now, let's look on 3rd Level Education Grants.  What percentage of college students qualify in every way for such a handout? Then ask ourselves, how much of these are made up with those who can legally or illegally cook the books?

How many people have Medical Cards who don't deserve them? 

Did anybody listen to the lady on Joe Duffy yesterday making a case for herself driving the wrong way up a one-way system just because it was 8.00am and she does it at least 3 times per week?  Duffy, of course agreed with her.  How dare those gardaí give her an €80 fine and penalty points. On the same show another lady complained she received a fine and penalty points for talking on her mobile phone while driving.  She used the death of her sister as an excuse.

In the supermarket yesterday while Mrs Lep and I did our weekly shopping a guy passed the entire queue of shopping trolleys.  "I don't have time to wait" he exclaimed and guess what - the check-out operator fast forwarded him through. And nobody said a word. When I exited the supermarket I again encountered the guy who could not wait talking to another about Willy Mullins' successes at Cheltenham.

There are some pretty hefty contributors to this forum who can argue here about anything (perhaps I am one?).  But when it comes to confronting somebody who somehow circumvents all problems, we don't.

We talk about the guy screwing the Social Welfare system.  We say "good on ya" to somebody getting a 3rd Level Grant who doesn't deserve it. We don't care who does or who doesn't get a Medical Card. Our well paid radio presenters condone the blatent breaking the rules of the road. 

So what are we whinging about here?  We can whinge and whinge, but sooner or later we're onto the next subject. We need a society that will prosecute abusers of our system with zero tolerance.

. . . and then we'll complain that we live in a police state.


----------



## Deiseblue (19 Mar 2016)

The anecdotal premise that work doesn't pay is undermined by the ESRI report of June 2015 which calculates that fewer than 3% would be better off not working , while 8 out of 10 would see their income increase by 40%.
For children with families the ESRI calculate that fewer than 1 in 15 would be better off staying out of work.
It should be noted that this report focuses on benefits versus wages & does not include the cost of travelling to & from work & the cost of childcare.


----------



## Delboy (19 Mar 2016)

Another good piece of work from the ESRI so


----------



## Protocol (19 Mar 2016)

It is true that work pays for single, childless people, yes.

But that ESRI report ignore the reality of third-level fees.

Does it included the value of med cards, and most importantly, rent supp?


----------



## Deiseblue (19 Mar 2016)

Delboy said:


> Another good piece of work from the ESRI so



I agree , it's good to see an independent report as opposed to anecdotal evidence.

As an aside the majority of the unemployed are young & childless.


----------



## losttheplot (19 Mar 2016)

For a 40% increase in income, you need to work 39hrs a week. This is what would put some people off. They would see a lot of effort and loss of freedom for a little return and more responsibility.


----------



## cremeegg (20 Mar 2016)

Although I am somewhat reluctant to get involved in this echo chamber discussion, I would like to point out something about living on social welfare from my own observation.

Despite the rules being the same for everyone, there are in fact great inequalities between social welfare dependants.

A single person over 24 receives €188 per week. Out of this some people pay the full cost of private rented accommodation. Others in receipt of RAS pay €15 per week (may have changed recently) toward the cost of their accommodation. And still others live at home with Mam while waiting for their own council house to come through. 

There are winners and losers within the welfare world just as in the world of work.


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Mar 2016)

A single person aged 24 receives €100 a week , a single person aged 25 receives €144 ( these payments apply to those without children ) & those aged 26 & over receive €188


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2016)

Deiseblue said:


> I agree , it's good to see an independent report as opposed to anecdotal evidence.


 You forgot the  there buddy. It would be great to see an independent report about living costs which took living costs into account.



Deiseblue said:


> As an aside the majority of the unemployed are young & childless.


Indeed and that weakens the argument for high rates of welfare.


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2016)

Leper, you are sounding more and more like a Blue Shirt!


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2016)

losttheplot said:


> For a 40% increase in income, you need to work 39hrs a week. This is what would put some people off. They would see a lot of effort and loss of freedom for a little return and more responsibility.


Especially when that 40% figure doesn't take the cost of getting to work or childcare into account. That could reduce it to zero or even a negative figure.


----------



## Gerry Canning (21 Mar 2016)

Purple .
{Independent} , seems only to apply only if suits one side of discussion?
I am inclined, unless shown otherwise to accept that report .

I am inclined to accept, that since majority are {young and childless} it weakens argument for welfare .

Protocol;.
ERSI ignore 3rd level fees ? Seems that those down the social ladder don,t have the (joy) of playing system to get to 3rd level. 
Outside of games played by some self-employed on income , I don,t think many genuine SW recipients play the College card?

Medical Cards.
Surely these are of value to most people/families on lower incomes not just SW recipients.

Lost the plot.
I hear your 40% , yet circa 100,000 + have moved into employment from dole . I am thinking most didn,t get a 40% uplift but retrieved their pride .

Having been in Welfare Position a few times , it really , really irks me to read some of the posts.
I fully accept we have some leg-lifters but in the scheme of things not too many. 

The old saying {walk in their shoes } etc comes to mind.


----------



## Firefly (21 Mar 2016)

Great post Leper. If everyone was 100% tax compliant in this country we would have a very equal society. There are plenty people scamming off the state and another group to be added to the list are those "Serial Entrepreneurs" who get grants from Enterprise Ireland.


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2016)

Firefly said:


> There are plenty people scamming off the state and another group to be added to the list are those "Serial Entrepreneurs" who get grants from Enterprise Ireland.


 I know the Enterprise Ireland system quite well and generally don't bother applying for grants because a) being East of the Shannon there's very little available and b) the checks and paperwork is considerable (as it should be).
If you are a manufacturing export company in Ireland you get 0% grant aid for capital investment in machinery. In Northern Ireland you get 50%.
If there is any abuse of the EI grants system it takes place in Universities where professors and medical doctors get large grants to develop Intellectual Property which won't be commercialised in Ireland but will give tax free IP royalties to the University and academics who developed it.


----------



## Firefly (21 Mar 2016)

Purple said:


> I know the Enterprise Ireland system quite well and generally don't bother applying for grants because a) being East of the Shannon there's very little available and b) the checks and paperwork is considerable (as it should be).
> If you are a manufacturing export company in Ireland you get 0% grant aid for capital investment in machinery. In Northern Ireland you get 50%.
> If there is any abuse of the EI grants system it takes place in Universities where professors and medical doctors get large grants to develop Intellectual Property which won't be commercialised in Ireland but will give tax free IP royalties to the University and academics who developed it.



Yeah, I hear you. A friend of mine has received several grants for startups. I remember ringing him 2 years ago and he was popping champagne with his wife as the "IE cheque came in". He did have to complete a lot of paperwork but also got his solr to make sure he would benefit from any upside.
Another friend got a grant which covered his wife working part-time at his start up. 
As it turns out, neither business did very much.

Whatever you do in life, tapping your fellow taxpayer should be a last resort. Safety nets are great and as a 1st world country we should be proud of the safety nets we have in place. However, safety nets should be used correctly - to break the fall for someone, but as with real safety nets, the idea is that you get out of the net and start climbing again, rather than staying on the net. As more and more people lie in the net, the net will eventually collapse...


----------



## losttheplot (21 Mar 2016)

Gerry Canning said:


> Purple .
> {Independent} , seems only to apply only if suits one side of discussion?
> 
> Lost the plot.
> ...



I think for most it comes down to pride and their background and environment. The uplift in pride would be worth more than 40% to some people. I remember some guys in school whose older siblings, father, uncles were all unemployed. These viewed unemployment as a valid career choice. I can understand someone being practical and as Purple pointed out, if taking into account other expenses you're losing out, can you really blame someone for not taking a job. It's something that really needs to be tackled at a young age. I had my first part time job at 15 and you get a great sense of independence.

3 months was the longest I'd spent unemployed and I hated it. No incentive to do anything as there was always tomorrow. I always felt uncomfortable going to the dole office to sign on. There was always a few, at 9.30 am with cans of cider. I can imagine how difficult it is for someone with children even looking for employment. Having to arrange childcare every time you've an interview, cost of transport to interview (especially if you're not living in Dublin). After a few unsuccessful interviews, I could really see why someone would just give up.


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2016)

I  think it's sad that people have so little sense of civil responsibility that their decision to work or stay living off their fellow citizens is not influenced by morality but only money.


----------



## Purple (21 Mar 2016)

By the way, as there are 2 million income tax payers but only the top 20% of them make any meaningful net contribution to the exchequer this thread should be titled
*"The four hundred thousand suckers who are paying for bailout have taken enough"*


----------



## blueband (22 Mar 2016)

Purple said:


> By the way, as there are 2 million income tax payers but only the top 20% of them make any meaningful net contribution to the exchequer this thread should be titled
> *"The four hundred thousand suckers who are paying for bailout have taken enough"*


Maybe if they really are feeling like suckers they might like to swop places with the 80% that have it so good!!   don't think so though...


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2016)

blueband said:


> Maybe if they really are feeling like suckers they might like to swop places with the 80% that have it so good!!   don't think so though...


Why do you think the other 80% have it so good? 
What a strange thing to say.


----------



## thedaddyman (22 Mar 2016)

Firefly said:


> Great post Leper. If everyone was 100% tax compliant in this country we would have a very equal society. There are plenty people scamming off the state and another group to be added to the list are those "Serial Entrepreneurs" who get grants from Enterprise Ireland.



I can't comment on EI but as someone who sits on another board that reviews and approves (or not) grant applications for start-ups and small companies that don't fall into the EI remit couple of points I'd like to make on non-EI grants

Applicants need to provide an up to date tax cert before payment is made
Applicants need to provide a business plan and the committee quite regularly rip these to shreds if it is appropriate. I've seen companies apply 3 or 4 times before they get an award. That may be frustrating for the applicant but the quality of their final plan and the thought they had to put into their business over the period will stand to them
A proportion of the grant aid is normally refundable
We quite regularly refuse applicants who may perceive a gap in the market but there may not be a market in the gap
I've never seen an applicant that get's the full amount applied for and most are required to provide at least 30% of matching funds themselves for anything major. For example, there was an initiative on ecommerce last year where most applicants got €2.5k for upgrading their websites and e commerce platforms, providing the business matched it with another €2.5k
I have no problem with serial entrepreneurs, every successful business person has failed at some stage in their life. Having said that, one of our biggest challenges is ensuring that a previous failure will not drag down a new start-up
the amount of grant money not drawn down never ceases to amaze me


----------



## Purple (22 Mar 2016)

Enterprise Ireland grants are given for money you spend, not for income for the recipient.  If that's what they are using it for then it's fraud.


----------

