# The tough life of the 'hardened unemployed'



## RMCF (12 Apr 2010)

Before I start this rant, I have to say that by 'hardened unemployed' I mean the career unemployed, not those who may have lost their jobs on recent hard times and who desperately want to work. 

I mean those that have no interest in working - basically the dolites.

I was working today indoors in the beautiful sunshine, and many of us at work were saying how great it would be to be out.

I went home at 5pm and gave a relative a lift to his girls house, on a social housing estate. Here I was met with about 5 groups of families, including both parents and some grown children from each family. They had been drinking in the sun since 1pm, all lying in the front garden (of their free house I may add). One of the folk there was a new mother of 22yrs old, who has never worked a day in her life, yet recently was given a new house as she is a single mum. Tough times.

And tomorrow in the sunshine I will be back at work, paying taxes to support them. You can guess where they will be.

Who's the mug, eh?


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

If you want to be unemployed?

If you want to lay down in the sun all day?

If you want to live in a "social housing estate?

If you want to drink from 1pm?

If you want a free house?

You could always join them if you envy their lives so much...

No point in feeling like a mug all your life. Or was that just today?

I guess someone else would be happy to go to work sun rain or shine,regardless of how others have to live.


----------



## DonDub (13 Apr 2010)

Tempting as it is, .
Much rather be home by five, and view them from my car window.  

As I drive back to my private home, where there wont be loads of family's sunning themselves and drinking all day.

And  OH MY GOD,22 yr old single parents with free houses.

Release the hounds.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

I dont think your a mug,I think you earn a wage and should feel proud of that.

It gives you a lot more options,emotionaly,physically and mentally.

I find it very hard to believe that a 22 yr old who recently became a single mother would get a free house so easily.

And I think that education is the answer for the type of people who have no inclination to work.

Usually they are uneducated or have very little education, poor, have restricted their own choices in life,suffer from lack of confidence etc..

Who would want to choose that type of lifestyle.

I don't envy them, I think there lives are quite difficult, behind it all.


----------



## Betsy Og (13 Apr 2010)

I'm guessing the OP thinks they should make some effort to ease their burden on the state, not glory in it.

Or perhaps the State should "incentivise" those that need "encouragement" - for instance would it be unreasonable that people do a bit of civic minded work around the community in return for their effective wage. Obviously those caring for dependents would need to be exempt, but wouldnt it be something for others to do.


----------



## Sunny (13 Apr 2010)

Never forget hearing two teenage girls talking on a bus before. One of them was moaning how her mother was 'wrecking her head'. The other girls advice was to do what she did and get herself preganant and the council will give her somewhere to live. I don't think she was joking.....

Unfortunately there are people in every society who are scroungers (a relative of mine is one that comes to mind) just as there are many genuine vunerable people who need a helping hand.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

I would imagine that a very comprehensive programme of change would be in order .

As if they are not inclined to work,it would be very difficult to get the mindset to do civic minded chores.

I think there will always ,as was shown when we had full employment, be some who for whatever reason are unemployable.Sadly this can be passed on to the next generation.

Which is why intervention is required.

Sometimes we have a tendency to look at a scene and superimpose our view of what we think it is.


----------



## MANTO (13 Apr 2010)

I am going to say what others think!

There will always be the LAZY SLOBS who will take, take, take and give nothing back. Thats life. 

But i for one am delighted I am not slobbing there with them.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

Sunny; This is where early intervention would be great,that the kids could see that there is a different way to live,that getting pregnant is not the answer and just traps them into this cycle even more.

If that teenage could see that it wouldn't be her mother wrecking her head,but possibly her baby, her lack of opportunity,her lack of money, etc..

I think its sad,that they don't realise how instead of getting away from a problem they are going to end up having more problems.

If you watch Teens in the wild,it would , I think, give an insight into how intervention can really help.


----------



## Caveat (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Who would want to choose that type of lifestyle.
> 
> I don't envy them, I think there lives are quite difficult, behind it all.


 
I think this sounds a little bit naive if you don't mind me saying.

Plenty of people make a conscious decision to spend their entire lives like this.  Like Sunny, a couple of relatives spring to mind.

They are utterly guilt free, reasonably intellingent and not lacking in education as such.  They have simply realised that with a little sacrifice, they don't *need* to work - so they don't.

Of course I realise that there are also many also caught in a poverty and welfare cycle that they want to escape from.


----------



## MrMan (13 Apr 2010)

It is a pain though to be indoors on days like this and I think the OP is right to feel a little ****ed off at the thought of funding others to laze in the sun. You can have pride in having a job yadda yadda, but most of us wouldn't mind relaxing in the sunshine rather than completing the daily grind.


----------



## truthseeker (13 Apr 2010)

MrMan said:


> ....but most of us wouldn't mind relaxing in the sunshine rather than completing the daily grind.


 
But the price of that relaxation is never having an opportunity to better yourself economically. Never to own your own property, never to live in a nice area, never to be responsible for yourself, always waiting on the next handout. If you are happy to live that lifestyle, fine. But I wouldnt be happy to live like that, Id prefer my grind.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

MrMan; My point is that you could do just that if you want. But you choose not to ,for a reason.

Caveat; It depends on the mindset. If they think a little sacrifice,is living on the dole,living in social housing, bringing kids into this milieu,living a life of nothing to aim for nothing to do.

Then I believe they are not educated enough to make the leap. Its trying to help them understand that this is not what is called a good life.

The fact that you say they don't need to work and make a conscious decision to spend their lives like this and are utterly guilt free,speaks volumes as to how their mindset is.

truthseeker; I couldnt agree with you more.


----------



## Towger (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> as was shown when we had full employment, be some who for whatever reason are unemployable.Sadly this can be passed on to the next generation.





thedaras said:


> Which is why intervention is required.


 
Sterilisation comes to mind, when I read the above.

In the early 90's a friend of my parents while working for the EEC, had to do survey of the Irish state benefits and calculation of the salary required to have the same standard of living. I believe as figure in the low £40k's was the result!


----------



## Purple (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Then I believe they are not educated enough to make the leap. Its trying to help them understand that this is not what is called a good life.



What exactly do you mean by educated?


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

To be made aware that there is another way.
To help them understand the need to break the cycle.
To give them the confidence to escape what is considered the norm in their environment.


----------



## Purple (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> To be made aware that there is another way.
> To help them understand the need to break the cycle.
> To give them the confidence to escape what is considered the norm in their environment.



The vast majority of them know that but choose to stay the way they are.
The biggest causes of poverty are social, not economic.


----------



## truthseeker (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Its trying to help them understand that this is not what is called a good life.


 
This reminds me of the tale of the old mediteranean fisherman, he lay on the beach, took a few tourists out on his boat, did a little fishing, caught a few fish, went home in the evening, drank some wine, made love to his wife.

One day he met a tourist who said 'you should work more hours, catch more fish, sell the excess, get a little money together, buy another boat, and keep going til you have a fleet of boats'.

'Why?' asked the fisherman? 

'Well, when you have built up an empire you can sell it and retire young'.

'And what would I do if I retired young?'.

'Well you could lie on the beach, take a few tourists out on your boat, do a little fishing, catch a few fish, go home in the evening, drink some wine, and make love to your wife'.

The moral of the story is - you cant tell people what is a good life, they have to decide that for themselves.


----------



## Caveat (13 Apr 2010)

BTW, the classic examples aside, life on the dole is not necessarily all sprawling grim estates and bad diets with multiple child allowances and bleak futures.

You can rent a perfectly fine flat in a reasonable area. If you don't have kids to support, a couple of nixers, a bit of wheeling and dealing and you could easily net over €400 pw - for what - a couple of hours 'work'?

Don't forget rent allowance and other benefits too.

I know people like this. 

If you are unambitiuous, it's a handy enough life TBH.

Having said that, it's not for me - but it suits plenty.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

I worked with family's many moons ago,who were just as the OP described.

Success was to get them to open their blinds/curtains before one in the day.
A lot of them were just very ignorant to another way of life.

Intervention definitely helps ,not them necessarily but hopefully their children.

For example their homes were void of any kind of books.
The kids had little or no positive feedback from the parents.
School was way down on the list,plus homework,so every one suffers.
The parents were ignorant as to how to improve the childs life.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

> But the price of that relaxation is never having an opportunity to better yourself economically. Never to own your own property, never to live in a nice area, never to be responsible for yourself, always waiting on the next handout. If you are happy to live that lifestyle, fine. But I wouldnt be happy to live like that, Id prefer my grind.


I can't agree that you're better off economically on the dole. As soon as you go down the route of 'bettering yourself', you're immediately burning bridges. If you work for and collect wealth, then you lose out on loads of social welfare entitlements. This is especially so for those at the very bottom of the heap, ie the self-employed.

At the end of it all, when you're in a nursing home, you'll be no better off than the person who never worked in their life.
Even at pension age, there's no difference.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

Anyhow ,its almost midday,the sun is shining, I have some serious tanning and drinking to do..thats after Ive collected my ten kids children's allowance and buy a plasma for my free house.
After that Ive to sign on..phew ,Im exhausted just thinking about it all.
It would be easier to work. hehehe.


----------



## ney001 (13 Apr 2010)

I have reason to come into contact with quite a few families who live like this.  It's really a cycle, their own parents moved into council houses in the 80's they now have children of their own and move into a council house as well.  They know nothing else, they have never witnessed their parents slogging and trying to pay a mortgage, they just know that you can get a house fairly handy if you have kids etc.   They know the claims that you can make and they have a keen sense of how to survive without working. 

My own husband was made unemployed months ago, he has worked all his life and never had to claim anything.  I am now stuck trying to pay a mortgage, car loans etc on my own because we don't qualify for any help with mortgage etc due to the fact that I work over 29hrs a week.  Look, point is I have learned to accept that although I have to slog very hard now and have little or no money left over for anything, I still wake up under a roof that is mine, I take great pride in going to work in a job that I love & I also take pride in the fact that I have contributed to the country and never made a claim, even if others have.  Just because it is easy enough to get a council house, make a claim etc - it doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do & I don't envy anybody who does! They are misguided, they believe that scamming the system is a much cleverer way to survive then working hard and contributing - more fool them!!   I have a great sense of self worth and I wonder do these guys have the same??... I doubt it.... despite the bravado that you might see! So no, I will enjoy sitting in the sun on my weekends much more than I would during the week skipping off work - I'll know I've earned it at the weekend and can feel good cracking open a nice cold bottle of heineken whilst sitting in my own garden!


----------



## liaconn (13 Apr 2010)

I don't envy people who live like this and I feel that they're losing out big time on the rewards of earning a living and paying your way. However, I really grudge the fact that part of my earnings are being used to support generations of people like this, because the system is so weak they just get away with it. At a time of full employment no one who wasn't suffering from an illness or disability should have been allowed to live on welfare yet many people did. I knew one young healthy reasonably well educated couple who just couldn't be bothered to work during the boom years and the state were supporting them and their two children.


----------



## RMCF (13 Apr 2010)

truthseeker said:


> But the price of that relaxation is never having an opportunity to better yourself economically. *Never to own your own property*, *never to live in a nice area*, never to be responsible for yourself, always waiting on the next handout. If you are happy to live that lifestyle, fine. But I wouldnt be happy to live like that, Id prefer my grind.



It has been interesting coming on today (while the sun shines outside the office) to catch up on all the comments that have been added since I posted this thread. 

I can assure the person that questioned me about the 22yr old getting a free house that its completely true. The only thing is, I am talking about NI in this example. I live close to the border and the example I witnessed yesterday is in the North. I know them fairly well through the said relative. But I am sure that the benefits in RoI are not far behind the North.

The same girl in question has been trying to have a baby since she was 18. She has had a prev miscarriage. Of course I am not saying that she tried to have a baby to get a free house, but I do believe that work has never been on her agenda for her life. And the father of her child does not work either, and again never has. 

I do appreciate that these various people I met yesterday may have always found it hard to find a job, maybe through lack of education. But I do believe that many also have no interest in ever working, and thats something that needs to be addressed by the Gov. Surely paying them just to lie about all day doing nothing is not beneficial to them or us? I am a great believer that the unemployed could be required to do some sort of community work, even if its only a few hours a day.

And don't get me wrong, as I have no interest in living this lifestyle. At the end of the day I am far happier to have a job to go to every morning. OK so it does sometimes annoy me when I look at all the taxes I pay, but as many have said, I'd rather do that than sit around all day wasting my life.

But I have hghlighted a couple of points about that I think we need to look at. 

- *Never own your own property*. Well the desire to "own your own property" has wrecked the lives of many wealthy and hard-working people in Ireland. So many people that might have saved well and worked hard are now so much in negative equity that they may never get out of debt. These folk I mention will not have suffered the same way.

- *Never live in a nice area*. Well I bought a house in what was a nice area. The street is now home to an unemployed couple (not recently unemplyed but those that simply don't work) with 6 children who generally cause a fair bit of trouble. Rough calculations suggest this family is lifting €3000 per month off this bankrupt state whilst putting next to nothing back. This is the 'nice area' that I pay a mortgage every month to live in.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

> OK so it does sometimes annoy me when I look at all the taxes I pay, but as many have said, I'd rather do that than sit around all day wasting my life.


I far, far more resent the taxes we are all paying and are going to pay for the governments dire mismanagement of the economy.
Wait until we see the final bill for nama and the bank/FF bailouts.

That's what makes me sick. TDs are far worse than the people you mention.


----------



## annR (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> I worked with family's many moons ago,who were just as the OP described.
> 
> Success was to get them to open their blinds/curtains before one in the day.  A lot of them were just very ignorant to another way of life.
> 
> ...


 
+1  So sad. When you look at it this way, do the kids really have a chance?  And if they do they are facing an uphill slog to compete / catch up to other kids where education has always been on the agenda at home.  I read Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers recently, there is an interesting chapter about children from poorer backgrounds and whether they can catch up to middle class kids by intensive schooling.  Answer - when they were at school they caught up (better test results) but after the summer holidays they were behind again.


----------



## MrMan (13 Apr 2010)

truthseeker said:


> But the price of that relaxation is never having an opportunity to better yourself economically. Never to own your own property, never to live in a nice area, never to be responsible for yourself, always waiting on the next handout. If you are happy to live that lifestyle, fine. But I wouldnt be happy to live like that, Id prefer my grind.



All well and good but on a sunny day is it not normal to think as the OP did? Thats all I'm saying. We work and pay our way, I don't get any great pleasure from my current job and the fact that I'm paying my own way doesn't make me feel better about the fact that I'm in here and they are out there in the sun!
You can also live all your life working and not live in a nice area, never read a book, or eat a healthy meal.


----------



## DerKaiser (13 Apr 2010)

truthseeker said:


> If you are happy to live that lifestyle, fine.


 
The point is a lot of people don't see it as being fine. 

The argument 'Sure if it's so great, why don't you do it yourself?' is not good enough.

If the dole was doubled in the morning would you feel aggrieved as a taxpayer? Of course you would, the option to go on the dole yourself doesn't make it acceptable.

As a PAYE worker it sometimes feels fairly marginalised (despite their being almost 2 million of us). It's fair game to take more than half of any wage we earn above €35k at the moment with a guilt trip that we're not contributing enough.

Working 3 hours overtime on a sunny evening and paying half of what I get for it to the state fairly focused my mind on the argument of who's not contributing enough to society


----------



## truthseeker (13 Apr 2010)

DerKaiser - your post has moved away slightly from the OPs original point. The point that was being made was to 'show' these people that there is a 'better' life. I was simply commenting that if they are happy with that life, then thats how they are going to live and my idea of a better life may mean nothing to them and they may well have zero interest in aspiring to that better life.

A different argument is the cost to society - and I totally agree with you on this one.

If you are happy to live that lifestyle - fine, in the context of the individual themselves being happy to do it.

In the context of the cost to me, you and other tax payers - well we need a major change to society to stop giving these handouts and make the situation fairer for all members of society and not let the lazy dole-ites benefit to the cost of the rest of us.


----------



## Mpsox (13 Apr 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> I can't agree that you're better off economically on the dole. As soon as you go down the route of 'bettering yourself', you're immediately burning bridges. If you work for and collect wealth, then you lose out on loads of social welfare entitlements. This is especially so for those at the very bottom of the heap, ie the self-employed.
> 
> At the end of it all, when you're in a nursing home, you'll be no better off than the person who never worked in their life.
> Even at pension age, there's no difference.


 
Yes, but I'd like to think when I am in a nursing home that I can look back at my life and realise I'd seen more of the world and done more with my life then pouring cider down my throat. 

As for the self employed being bottom of the heap, funny, in the boom years I knew self employed people who laughed at me for being a PRSI slave and boasted about all the tax they were saving by being self-employed.


----------



## shnaek (13 Apr 2010)

Stop the press - "The Government are wasting our money" shocker.


----------



## Protocol (13 Apr 2010)

I have some suggestions:

The welfare state should be redesigned to *provide welfare for those in employment who contribute*.


1. Therefore, unemployment payments should only be paid to those who have worked and paid PRSI:


Therefore, abolish JSA (dole)
Keep JSB, maybe 250-300 pw for 9/12 months, with an extension of 9 months during a recession.

2. I feel that lone parents payments should also be abolished.

3. Pay a lower pension for those who do not pay PRSI (currently, the NC OAP is just about 10 pw less than the C OAP):
Contributory pension = 300pw
Never worked = 200pw​4. Make it an expectation that a job / training / retraining is available for all adults. Give subsidies / support / payments for all ST unemployed to re-train, etc.

*Anybody in employment should not fear unemployment (generous JSB and supports), but all those unemployed should be expected to participate in the lab mkt.*

For those with less skills, lack of confidence, out of touch with the lab mkt, again strong intervention to support a movement back to the lab mkt.


*Long term un should not be tolerated - it is bad for everybody.*


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

> Yes, but I'd like to think when I am in a nursing home that I can look back at my life and realise I'd seen more of the world and done more with my life then pouring cider down my throat.


I wouldn't count on it. Many dole people get more money than the minimum waged. Not only will they be able to afford to see more of the world, but will have more time to do it too. While you're slaving away, paying for FF/Banks/Nama, they'll be off on their Ryanair break. Living life.



> As for the self employed being bottom of the heap, funny, in the boom years I knew self employed people who laughed at me for being a PRSI slave and boasted about all the tax they were saving by being self-employed.


How do you save tax by being self employed? 'S' class directors pay more tax then employees because they do not have PAYE tax credits.
I certainly don't save one cent in tax by being self employed. Indeed, every cent is accounted for. 
I'm a muggins.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

Agree with a lot of protocols post.

Not so sure about lone parents payments being totally abolished,maybe being paid up until the child is in secondary school? Or provide childcare?

It is utter maddness that they get this money until the child is 21!!

Id also say make it compulsary that job /training/retraining is undertaken for all.

There seems to be a lot of fit healthy young people who are unemployed,highly educated ,that are getting this JSA. (through no fault of their own in most cases).

While the parents shouldn't have to continue to pay for their keep ,and even though they are unemployed,they are young ,fit ,healthy highly educated and get money every week from the state! 

Now imagine that,living in your parents house,educated by the state for free (ISH),getting approx 100/125e a week,and your only 20. Party time me thinks.

Maybe that scheme whereby those who were on the dole were given a certain amount of money to leave the country should be brought back in? So those who have the education to get a job abroad could be incentivised to go.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

> Maybe that scheme whereby those who were on the dole were given a certain amount of money to leave the country should be brought back in?


This time, for a change, it should be the politicians and their cronies that are forced to leave the state - or get executed for treason.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

Agree..
But for our young people ,to give them a chance to get out of this hell hole, it could help.


----------



## liaconn (13 Apr 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> I
> 
> How do you save tax by being self employed? 'S' class directors pay more tax then employees because they do not have PAYE tax credits.
> I certainly don't save one cent in tax by being self employed. Indeed, every cent is accounted for.
> I'm a muggins.


 
I assume they are indulging in some creative accounting. Don't a lot of self-employed people do that?


----------



## truthseeker (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Agree..
> But for our young people ,to give them a chance to get out of this hell hole, it could help.


 
It would be good for the individuals, but as a society I dont think its a good idea to send all our young educated people elsewhere (people our society has paid to educate). Its a brain drain.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

> I assume they are indulging in some creative accounting. Don't a lot of self-employed people do that?


I honestly don't know any self employed people that do this.
I've often asked my accountant about various ways of getting money out of a company without having to pay income tax on it, but there are no loopholes. At least not for me.
I pay full whack taxes.

Any expenses have to be wholly and solely for the business. Same as any other employee.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

It is a great pity to see so many of our young leave us.

It is a great loss to us all.

But for them, to have the opportunity to get out of here would be great.
It must be very frustrating for them(some of them)  to be stuck at home with no job /prospects.

We may have to suffer their loss ,to give them a future they deserve.

It seems it will be a long time before this country gets its act together, and if they stay here what future do they have?

I am advising mine to get a degree/qualification that they can travel with. So that they at least have that option.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

If the politicians were forced out of the country, it would increase average intelligence in Ireland (instead of a brain drain).

Yet again people are forced to leave the country because Irish politicians have failed.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

Ok, So we know the reason why and we know who's fault it is.

So next we need to sort it out.

No one likes to see a brain drain, But sadly this is what I would prefer for my kids.
Rather than staying here in this god forsaken country, with little prospects and hanging around doing nothing for years.


----------



## DublinTexas (13 Apr 2010)

I think we need to modify the way we contribute to the welfare of other people. We must divide between those who contributed to the pod and those who did not or not for long periods.

Unemployment after having been in work:

If one becomes unemployed after having worked for set period of time and having contributed to the PRSI the person should get financial aid in case they become unemployed.

Rather than a fixed amount they should get 60% of their net salary of the previous 12 month and the duration should depend on how long they have contributed to the insurance. The more and longer you paid in the more and longer you get out.

This is depending on the person seeking new employment and regular having contact to social welfare office. 

Social welfare after above period or for people that did not contribute:

Once the entitlement in this program has lapsed the state than should ensure that the person gets enough support from the state to cover the cost of the minimum existence.

This must be enough to cover the cost of a rented flat, heating, power and living plus additional for certain situations (children, pregnant etc). 
But this also must be only paid if there is a need. A person that has wealth or other income (child maintenance by divorced fathers etc.) must see a reduction of such payments.

This is fairer than the “one for all” attitude that is currently practiced.


----------



## MandaC (13 Apr 2010)

*Hardened unemployed*

I dont know why people think they all live in grim dodgy areas.  Before I moved house three years ago, lots of people who had bought their houses at the same time (which doubled in value) were able to move on and keep their first house and rent out.

Where I lived, there ended up being a huge amount of renters, most to EHB.  So, I was working my backside off and they were standing at their front doors in the morning, watching me going to work for the day.

I got completely cheesed off paying the mortgage and still no better off than a council house, so ended up having to up my mortgage by 100K and put added pressure on myself.

Bigger mortgage, but feel much happier now.


----------



## Protocol (13 Apr 2010)

There must be a reward to working vs not working.

Taxes on low incomes need to be kept low, to maintain this reward.

Un should not be seen as an option.

Therefore, those who do not work and pay PRSI should be worse-off.

Workers should end up with better un payments, better pensions, etc. than those who do not work.

Indeed, by turning the welfare system around, *we protect and reward those who work and contribute*, rather than supporting people who do not work.

By work here, I mean part-time, temp, 3-day week, supported employment, apprentices, re-training, etc. *Any and all types of participation in the lab mkt.*

Disability benefit: I feel that all adults are "able" to work, in some fashion, and should be supported, helped. I don't accept defining somebody as unable to work. I think this benefit should be reformed.

Here's another somewhat radical idea: *What about giving medical cards only to those who work??*

Or give (free) health ins to those who pay PRSI, and medical cards to those who do not or have not worked?

Am I mad?


----------



## haminka1 (13 Apr 2010)

i don't envy a 22 year-old single mother who never got any proper education her free council flat - i'm sorry for her and at the same time angry, because her kid will most likely follow in her steps - it will know everything about how to use /and misuse/ the social benefit system but it will never be given a chance by his parent/s to get a decent education and good life ..
sitting in a garden or in front of your council house with a six-pack and a one-way barbecue while others are at work might sound almost attractive for one day, particularly if that of yours was difficult at work but there is nothing productive and constructive about it
these people are stuck in a rut more than any of the working people because while someone who has a good education and a job most likely have enough experience to change their lives if they want to, those guys only know their life of social benefit leisure and will never be able to make anything else out of themselves or their families


----------



## Complainer (13 Apr 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> I honestly don't know any self employed people that do this.
> I've often asked my accountant about various ways of getting money out of a company without having to pay income tax on it, but there are no loopholes. At least not for me.
> I pay full whack taxes.
> 
> Any expenses have to be wholly and solely for the business. Same as any other employee.


I guess that those posts indicating an effective tax rate of 15%-20% for contracts are just crazy then? http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=1021408&postcount=2


----------



## VOR (13 Apr 2010)

A Clare FG councillor used a wonderful phrase last week to describe those "who appear to do nothing" but still enjoy the benefits of a working life. He referred to it as "effortless affluence". 
I thought it was wonderful in its simplicity.


----------



## RMCF (13 Apr 2010)

VOR said:


> A Clare FG councillor used a wonderful phrase last week to describe those "who appear to do nothing" but still enjoy the benefits of a working life. He referred to it as "effortless affluence".
> I thought it was wonderful in its simplicity.



Thats a great phrase, and sums up what I have been trying to hint at.

I know many working people watching old style TVs and many have no satellite/cable TV etc.

Yet nearly all of the people I know on benefits have a large plasma TV, and Sky TV as well. Needless to say there is plenty of gaming systems at home too.

I think the problem is that so many know how to play the system, and this is how they do so well. A scam that I know is rife in NI is pretending that a married couple are actually estranged and living at different addresses. This allows a lot of fraud to be committed.

Mobility Allowance is also open to serious abuse. Again I know of several people who have a free car, complete with free servicing and there is next to nothing wrong with them. But they know how to play the game.

And unfortunately we have been raised in a society where to 'grass' these people up to the authorities isn't considered acceptable.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

Complainer said:


> I guess that those posts indicating an effective tax rate of 15%-20% for contracts are just crazy then? http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=1021408&postcount=2



All _those_ posts? I don't see too many of them on AAM.

Here is the post you linked to





> But with a good pension plan, maxing expenses you should retain 80-85% of invoice.
> 
> setting up a company, accountancy fees, Insurance, own training costs are all allowable expenses.



I can't afford a pension, so there goes that. It is true that setting up a company, accountant fees etc... are allowable expenses, but employees do not incur these in the first place. So how do you 'max expenses'?
What expenses can I possibly use that are closed off to normal PAYE workers?
I would really love to know, I could save myself some money.

If you know the answer to this, please post it! - or PM me if you don't want to bring this off topic. I'd be delighted to hear it.


----------



## csirl (13 Apr 2010)

Family friend on mine grew up on a council estate, but was one of the few who worked her way out - now has good career, owns own house etc. etc. Says that most of her school friends got pregnant in late teens/early 20s just to get free houses and welfare - was the accepted way of life. Relative of her's once went out celebrating when he was diagnosed with a condition which technically meant he qualified for disability benefit and never had to look for work.


----------



## Bazoo (13 Apr 2010)

RMCF said:


> And unfortunately we have been raised in a society where to 'grass' these people up to the authorities isn't considered acceptable.



It's irrelevant what's acceptable in society when what these parasites are doing is patently wrong. I'd have absolutely no hesitation in "grassing them up". You know who these people are - why don't you?


----------



## bullbars (13 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> It is a great pity to see so many of our young leave us.
> 
> It is a great loss to us all.
> 
> ...


 
I'm in this situation now. Recent graduate, had to up and leave all behind me. Glad to be working, but its hard to sit here and wonder when (if) I can go home for work again & what sort of environment will it be?



umop3p!sdn said:


> If the politicians were forced out of the country, it would increase average intelligence in Ireland (instead of a brain drain).


 
With nonsense like this, feel free to follow them.


----------



## RMCF (13 Apr 2010)

I think the big test of how interested these folk are in working would be if they were offered a job at exactly the same weekly amount that they currently receive in benefits.

I would guess that if they could get €500 for sitting in the house and €500 for working, they would pick the house every time.


----------



## mtk (13 Apr 2010)

deleted


----------



## Complainer (13 Apr 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> All _those_ posts? I don't see too many of them on AAM.
> 
> Here is the post you linked to
> 
> ...


You should probably address your queries to whoever posted it. I note that you didn't express any surprise or query those figures when they were posted first time round, mind you.




RMCF said:


> I think the big test of how interested these folk are in working would be if they were offered a job at exactly the same weekly amount that they currently receive in benefits.
> 
> I would guess that if they could get €500 for sitting in the house and €500 for working, they would pick the house every time.



Yep, they would probably pick the house - but maybe not for the reasons you suspect of laziness or dole addiction. 

They may well pick the house because we have create a series of poverty traps. In taking the job, they don't just lose their dole, but they also lose some very basic supports, particularly medical card entitlement, after the retention period. 

I'd love to know where in the country are these hugely generous local councils that are throwing houses at any girl who has a baby. I know several single parent families in Dublin (one with two kids) who are still living with parents, or in private rented accommodation.

All we're missing on this thread is a few moans about 'dem blacks'.


----------



## z107 (13 Apr 2010)

> You should probably address your queries to whoever posted it. I note that you didn't express any surprise or query those figures when they were posted first time round, mind you.


You seem to prefer to believe that being self employed entitles people to a tax rate of 15% to 20%. You even went to the trouble of finding and linking to the post.
I didn't query those figures before because I don't respond to every post I have a query or opinion on, or disagree with.


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

Complainer:Quote "I'd love to know where in the country are these hugely generous local councils that are throwing houses at any girl who has a baby. I know several single parent families in Dublin (one with two kids) who are still living with parents, or in private rented accommodation.

All we're missing on this thread is a few moans about 'dem blacks'.:End quote:

I couldn't agree with you more!

Its kind of like all the polish/Nigerians are all getting money for cars mobile phones blah blah.NOT TRUE


----------



## thedaras (13 Apr 2010)

mtk said:


> I grew up on a corporation estate and now have professional qualification earning>six figures , house in "posh" dublin suburbs.
> The reason why - the luck to have
> parents who cared about education
> blessed with a great brain
> ...



Brilliant.. Its so hard for some parents who are trying to do just what your parents did.

There is a tendency to target those who seem to be trying to improve their kids lives,by bullying the child etc.

Really great to hear a success story.

And there are a lot of very decent hardworking people who grew up in these estates.


----------



## RMCF (14 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Complainer:Quote "I'd love to know where in the country are these hugely generous local councils that are throwing houses at any girl who has a baby. I know several single parent families in Dublin (one with two kids) who are still living with parents, or in private rented accommodation.
> 
> All we're missing on this thread is a few moans about 'dem blacks'.:End quote:
> 
> ...



As I mentioned earlier, my example was from NI, not RoI. Although I am sure there are plenty of similarities between both jurisdictions.

And the layabouts I was chatting about are all white Irish.


----------



## RMCF (15 Apr 2010)

Here's a link that I was reading about in some UK papers today.

Sort of sums up what I'm chatting about.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=502766&in_page_id=2


----------



## thedaras (15 Apr 2010)

Most of the parents at our kids' school are on benefits.'She added: 'I don't feel bad about being subsidised by people who are working. I'm just working with the system that's there. If the government wants to give me money, I'm happy to take it.

The couple met in a pub 13 years ago. A year later, at the age of 17, Mrs Davey gave birth to Jessica, now 12. She was followed by Jade, ten, Jamie-Anne, eight, Harriet, six, Adele, four, the couple's only son Tie, three, and Mercedes, two.

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=502766&in_page_id=2#ixzz0l9aG

The quotes above sum up what I think about this situation.
The system is wrong.
They live in this kind of environment..
Pregnant at 17.
Speaks volumes about lack of education, ignorance and how education/change of mindset must be a priority.
There will always be exceptions to this.


----------



## Firefly (15 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=502766&in_page_id=2#ixzz0l9aG


 
I like the 3rd comment in this article

"You should never ever be better off on benefits than working full time on minimum wage. That should be the benchmark."


----------



## csirl (15 Apr 2010)

What's worse is that SW rates in Ireland are a lot higher than in the UK.


----------



## cork (15 Apr 2010)

I once shared a house with a guy on disability. He said that he had back trouble.

He got free bus, bin tags etc.

I never once hear the guy even mention that he had back trouble.


----------



## Firefly (15 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> If the government wants to give me money, I'm happy to take it.


 
Whilst this attitude and her obvious spunging drives me mad, I do think she has a point. We're all economic agents (In Economics parlance) where we will generally take the best course of action that we seem fit (within the law). People on high incomes making pension contributions to reduce their tax bill and wealthy indicuduals / profitable companies hiring expensive tax accountants to minimize their tax are equally doing what's in their best interests. It falls to the government to pass & enforce fair legislation regarding tax and social welfare payments. 

My own view is that these people are quite sad really. No sense of embarrassment that they are in no way trying to improve their lives and passing lazy values to their children. The big plasma is actually a good investment in their case as I'm sure it gets plenty use


----------



## DeeFox (15 Apr 2010)

RMCF said:


> I know many working people watching old style TVs and many have no satellite/cable TV etc.
> 
> Yet nearly all of the people I know on benefits have a large plasma TV, and Sky TV as well. Needless to say there is plenty of gaming systems at home too.


 
I used to manage rental property and sadly found that this is often true.  I think some people have different priorities and often think in the short term only.

A bit unrelated - I'd like to see a charge introduced to people entitled to medical cards.  Something like having to pay the first €5 of any visit to the doctor.  Anything that is free gets abused.


----------



## thedaras (15 Apr 2010)

The quote highlighted 2 posts above is a quote taken from a newspaper article ,and not the view of thedaras.

Usually when people are given things for free they do not appreciate it.
I remember a course that was fully booked where anyone on social welfare got on it for free,there was a waiting list,so many of those who booked but didn't have to pay, didn't turn up a lot of the time,or not at all.
Obviously this meant the genuine people missed the chance to do.


----------



## shnaek (16 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> Usually when people are given things for free they do not appreciate it.


I think this is the crux of it all. People don't appreciate and tend to abuse that which they get for free. In my opinion, nothing should be free. Everything should at least carry a nominal charge. 
Except drink 
We need that to help us forget what a mess the place is in.


----------



## Complainer (16 Apr 2010)

shnaek said:


> I think this is the crux of it all. People don't appreciate and tend to abuse that which they get for free. In my opinion, nothing should be free. Everything should at least carry a nominal charge.


My instinct would be to agree with you, but I did see hard research on prescription charges showing that any charge of any size acts as a deterrent, and people end up not getting the medication that they should be taking. Apart from the personal costs of this, it can often result in downstream costs for society in terms of more intensive healthcare requirements.


----------



## Purple (16 Apr 2010)

Complainer said:


> My instinct would be to agree with you, but I did see hard research on prescription charges showing that any charge of any size acts as a deterrent, and people end up not getting the medication that they should be taking. Apart from the personal costs of this, it can often result in downstream costs for society in terms of more intensive healthcare requirements.



Mrs Purple is a GP. She has been called out at night to medical card patients because they have run out of Calpol and she has then been verbally abused because she didn’t have a full bottle to give to them. Nothing like that has ever happened with private (paying) patients.


----------



## Firefly (16 Apr 2010)

Purple said:


> She has been called out at night to medical card patients because they have run out of *Calpol *


 
Mrs Firefly on girlie weekend and I'm on on my tod with the little one ...thanks for the reminder!!!


----------



## RMCF (16 Apr 2010)

Here's another quality example, admittedly from NI too, but it just goes to show how the Govs continue to get all their priorities wrong.

I have a friend whose little child is now coming to the age of going to pre/nursery school in the North (Sept 2010). Their previous child went to a nursery about 8 yrs ago and got in no bother. He and his wife both work long hours and pay taxes.

When he enquired recently about getting the 2nd child into the same school he was told that he couldn't be guaranteed anything just yet as they had to wait to see if there was any spaces left since the criteria had changed. Apparently now all the single mums and unemployed/disadvantaged parents get 1st places for their children, and then they see what they have left over after those are allocated.

To me this just sums up that once again the hard working people are discriminated against in favour of many lazy good-for-nothings (not all of course but many system abusers will get priority).

I have asked a family member who works in NI social welfare system if this was true and it was confirmed.


----------



## Purple (16 Apr 2010)

Firefly said:


> Mrs Firefly on girlie weekend and I'm on on my tod with the little one ...thanks for the reminder!!!



Think nothing of it!


----------



## thedaras (18 Apr 2010)

Purple said:


> Mrs Purple is a GP. She has been called out at night to medical card patients because they have run out of Calpol and she has then been verbally abused because she didn’t have a full bottle to give to them. Nothing like that has ever happened with private (paying) patients.



I understood that when a Doctor is called out at night by either private of medical card holders that a detailed description of what is wrong with the patient had to (is asked for) be given.

Do Mrs Purples medical card patients say,well I need a doctor cos I don't have any calpol! Where does triage come into that!

She may want to have a word with the people who are on the phones.

If on the other hand a parent,(I really don't see what difference being a medical card holder or a private patient has on this,)has  rung in with a genuine concern that  a child is ill and the doctor arrives and makes the call that the child is ok, but needs calpol for pain and doesn't have enough /any to give to a child at 3am in the morning well I can understand the parent being concerned/upset.

As someone who is a private patient and has had to call out doctors to check out my kids, I have never come across a doctor that didn't have the medication to get me through until I could get some myself and that includes calpol.I dont ever recall the child being given a half bottle or a spoonfull.

Isnt that why they have drivers? Due to the fact  that they carry medication.

Parents whose kids are sick are usually quite scared and want the best for their kids regardless of being a medical card or private patient.


----------



## Purple (19 Apr 2010)

thedaras said:


> I understood that when a Doctor is called out at night by either private of medical card holders that a detailed description of what is wrong with the patient had to (is asked for) be given.
> 
> Do Mrs Purples medical card patients say,well I need a doctor cos I don't have any calpol! Where does triage come into that!
> 
> ...


 Patients are triaged by a nurse and the call is passed on to the doctor. Symptoms are exaggerated in order to get the doctor to call out. In her experience (around 1’000 nights on call over 10 years) she has never had such blatant exaggeration from parents who do not have the medical card but it is a regular, if infrequent, occurrence with medical card patients.   



thedaras said:


> but needs calpol for pain and doesn't have enough /any to give to a child at 3am in the morning well I can understand the parent being concerned/upset.


 Doctors usually carry large numbers sachets rather than multiple bottles of the stuff. In the case outlines the parents were irate because there was no bottle of the stuff given to then (for free), only enough sachets to keep them going ‘till well into the following day. The real problem is that Calpol is not a prescription drug and so they had to pay for it themselves.



thedaras said:


> As someone who is a private patient and has had to call out doctors to check out my kids, I have never come across a doctor that didn't have the medication to get me through until I could get some myself and that includes calpol. I dont ever recall the child being given a half bottle or a spoonfull.


 I agree,  that would be standard practice. In your case did the doctor give you enough medication to last you the following week or just enough to get you through ‘till the shops opened?



thedaras said:


> Isnt that why they have drivers? Due to the fact  that they carry medication.


 Yes, but they don’t carry enough for the full treatment of every illness they might come across in the course of a nights work, otherwise they’d be travelling abound in a truck.



thedaras said:


> Parents whose kids are sick are usually quite scared and want the best for their kids regardless of being a medical card or private patient.


 No, if your baby is teething and you’ve run out of calpol then you get in your car and drive to the nearest 24 hour garage or shop. If you don’t  have a car then get a taxi or call a family member. If you don’t have that option then you accept that you screwed up and you deal with having a crying baby for the night.  It’s annoying but not frightening and it’s no reason to call out an emergency doctor in the middle of the night at a cost to the tax payer of well over €150 (the doctors fee, plus the drivers wages, plus the nurses wages,  plus the call centre facility, plus the insurance etc) because you were stupid and didn’t spend a couple of euro on medicine.


----------



## thedaras (19 Apr 2010)

Might be an idea to get the people on the phone to advise the "medical card" patients that only one/two sachets will be given by the doctor

This would save the doctor from any hassle?
My point is ,most parents are irrational when it comes to their kids, and not if fairness ,stupid to have run out of medicine.


----------



## doubledeb (19 Apr 2010)

I have been in a situation that someone was sick in the middle of the night and I rang south doc.  I was told that the only reason a doctor would call if it was a suspected heart attack or stroke, otherwise I would have to travel to the doctors office. My point is maybe the parents thought that the child was much sicker than what it was and panicked?


----------



## Complainer (19 Apr 2010)

doubledeb said:


> I have been in a situation that someone was sick in the middle of the night and I rang south doc.  I was told that the only reason a doctor would call if it was a suspected heart attack or stroke,


If this is the case, it is just dumb. For either of these cases, you need an ambulance with skilled paramedics, quickly followed by a hospital, not a home-visit locum GP.


----------



## doubledeb (19 Apr 2010)

Yes I agree, but this person was in bed and couldn't get out of bed ended up that it wasn't very serious, but was told by the nurse that no doctor would call unless it was that serious, and em.. I would be calling the ambulance if this was the case.  I don't know but maybe they were too busy to do home visits...


----------



## Purple (19 Apr 2010)

Complainer said:


> If this is the case, it is just dumb. For either of these cases, you need an ambulance with skilled paramedics, quickly followed by a hospital, not a home-visit locum GP.



I agree. doubledeb, you should make a formal complaint to the Locum agency.


----------



## doubledeb (19 Apr 2010)

I suppose, but you know at the end of the day, I appreciate the fact that there are services like that available at all rather than calling out your own doctor, there is a gp on hand if you need them in the middle of the night...


----------



## Purple (19 Apr 2010)

doubledeb said:


> I suppose, but you know at the end of the day, I appreciate the fact that there are services like that available at all rather than calling out your own doctor, there is a gp on hand if you need them in the middle of the night...


 It's hard work but they get well paid for it. If they didn't then they wouldn't be doing it. They are no more motivated by altruistic reasons than a plumber who's on emergency call. If they are not doing the job they are getting paid to do then you have every right to complaine.


----------



## doubledeb (19 Apr 2010)

I'll remember that the next time I need to make a call.... heres hoping I don't


----------



## cork (19 Apr 2010)

It is crazy that more isn't invested in traing & education.

Why there are not more  incentives foe people to upskill beggers belief.


----------



## Purple (19 Apr 2010)

cork said:


> It is crazy that more isn't invested in traing & education.
> 
> Why there are not more  incentives foe people to upskill beggers belief.



Upskill to do what?


----------



## Firefly (20 Apr 2010)

Purple said:


> Upskill to do what?


 
To become GPs


----------



## Purple (20 Apr 2010)

firefly said:


> to become gps :d



Lol


----------



## bonzos (7 May 2010)

How about this...if you are in court every second week for breaking the law you SW should be cut, all of these free houses should be inspected every year and if thet are damaged the cost of repairs should be docked from yous SW


----------



## Caveat (7 May 2010)

bonzos said:


> How about this...if you are in court every second week for breaking the law you SW should be cut


 
Why? What is the logic? 

If you ensure that people are punished properly in the first place it shouldn't matter. All crime should be punished.




> ...all of these free houses should be inspected every year and if thet are damaged the cost of repairs should be docked from yous SW


 
I've no problem with that at all but it would never be applied.


----------



## Howitzer (7 May 2010)

bonzos said:


> How about this...if you are in court every second week for breaking the law you SW should be cut, all of these free houses should be inspected every year and if thet are damaged the cost of repairs should be docked from yous SW


Where people have been found guilty of anti-social behaviour, and due process has been followed, people ARE taken off Local Authority housing lists.


----------



## UptheDeise (7 May 2010)

Purple said:


> No, if your baby is teething and you’ve run out of calpol then you get in your car and drive to the nearest 24 hour garage or shop. If you don’t have a car then get a taxi or call a family member. If you don’t have that option then you accept that you screwed up and you deal with having a crying baby for the night. It’s annoying but not frightening and it’s no reason to call out an emergency doctor in the middle of the night at a cost to the tax payer of well over €150 (the doctors fee, plus the drivers wages, plus the nurses wages, plus the call centre facility, plus the insurance etc) because you were stupid and didn’t spend a couple of euro on medicine.


 
And that's one of the reasons why healthcare costs in this country are high. When people see something as free, they will abuse the system that provides it, driving up the price. Also am I reading your post correct? What this woman really wanted was a bottle of capol, hand delivered at a cost of €150 to the taxpayer?


----------



## Purple (7 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> Also am I reading your post correct? What this woman really wanted was a bottle of capol, hand delivered at a cost of €150 to the taxpayer?



 Yep


----------



## Complainer (7 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> And that's one of the reasons why healthcare costs in this country are high. When people see something as free, they will abuse the system that provides it, driving up the price. Also am I reading your post correct? What this woman really wanted was a bottle of capol, hand delivered at a cost of €150 to the taxpayer?


It is usually a good idea to get two sides of a story, before you rush to judgement.


----------



## indebtedgal (7 May 2010)

i haven't had time to rad all the replies but i totally see where th op is coming from. This country is shagged and will remain so until these leeches are no longer allowed to live on our taxes. I seriously think that at the very least "the hardened unemployed" should provide a cleaning and laundry service for their employed neighbours and maybe a hot dinner everynow and then... Get them off their back sides...


----------



## Complainer (7 May 2010)

indebtedgal said:


> I seriously think that at the very least "the hardened unemployed" should provide a cleaning and laundry service for their employed neighbours and maybe a hot dinner everynow and then....


There is a place where this happens. It is called 'the 19th century'.


----------



## johnd (7 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> There is a place where this happens. It is called 'the 19th century'.



I think you are what they refer to  as "a liberal do-gooder" or a "bleeding heart liberal"


----------



## Complainer (7 May 2010)

johnd said:


> I think you are what they refer to  as "a liberal do-gooder" or a "bleeding heart liberal"


You might want to check out .


----------



## UptheDeise (7 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> It is usually a good idea to get two sides of a story, before you rush to judgement.


 
I'm going on what the Purple posted. Are you suggesting that he is lying?

There is always someone out to protect the deserving poor, because at the end of the day they are essentially a goldmine.


----------



## Howitzer (7 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> There is always someone out to protect the deserving poor, because at the end of the day they essentially are a goldmine.


??


----------



## UptheDeise (7 May 2010)

Howitzer said:


> ??


 
Think about it. Poverty in this country has been turned into a lucrative industry. How many tens of thousands now work in that industry, making quite a substantial living? If we didn't have the deserving poor, most of those people would be out of a job.


----------



## csirl (7 May 2010)

Howitzer said:


> ??


 
There are a lot of people who make comfortable livings out of poverty. 

e.g. someone starts lobbying on behalf of a category of deserving people. If they are successful, there are a couple of things that can happen. Firstly, the Government will set up a programme for these people which will invariably be headed up by the prinicpal lobbyists (as they are the experts). Lobbyists can look forward to years on the public sector payroll.

Secondly, a charity or non-profit group gets established. This becomes funded through a combination of donations and Government support. It needs a CEO and staff - the lobbyists, as founders, fill these roles. 

Essentially in both of the above scenarios, people have created well paid jobs for themselves by "protecting the deserving poor".

I'm such a cynic at times


----------



## cork (7 May 2010)

Purple said:


> Upskill to do what?



Upskill to anything to help getting a job.

GP, Barber, Butcher, Banker, Barman etc


----------



## Latrade (7 May 2010)

csirl said:


> Essentially in both of the above scenarios, people have created well paid jobs for themselves by "protecting the deserving poor".
> 
> I'm such a cynic at times


 
There's an even more obvious one: the lottery.

Anyway, there's a lot of broadbrush strokes as to generalising all unemployed with those who work the system. No system is or can be free from abuse. The question is whether we have a social ambulance like a social welfare system, if so what's the most effective way to prevent abuse.

Well, I don't think the virtual workhouses proposed is the right way to go.

But second, a greater emphasis on monitoring and supervision of the system requires more resources, aren't we trying to cut down on a bloated PS?

The current system obviously needs some work to prevent abuse. But then simply posting out letters to claimants to ask for more information on their claim has seen a huge success in terms of people then withdrawing their claim. So simple inexpensive stuff can be done.

But we don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water. Like all those suddenly unemployed over the last 2 years, those in regions who were reliant on one or two large employers now gone. There is no other work there for them and the "social ambulance" is essential. How do we implement a system that ensures the right people get the benefit without creating a how new job sector in social welfare enforcement and having more of those officers than Gardai?


----------



## Purple (7 May 2010)

cork said:


> Upskill to anything to help getting a job.
> 
> GP, Barber, Butcher, Banker, Barman etc



Without export focused jobs which bring money into the country there will be no way to create these other jobs.


----------



## Complainer (7 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> I'm going on what the Purple posted. Are you  suggesting that he is lying?


What I'm suggesting is contained in my earlier post - but I'll say it again if you like. It is usually a good idea to get two sides of a story, before you rush  to judgement. 	


UptheDeise said:


> There is always someone out to protect the deserving poor, because at the end of the day they are essentially a goldmine.





UptheDeise said:


> Think about it. Poverty in this country has been turned into a lucrative industry. How many tens of thousands now work in that industry, making quite a substantial living? If we didn't have the deserving poor, most of those people would be out of a job.


Here's a challenge - I won't ask you to find the 'tens of thousands', but maybe you could find 1,000 employees in this 'lucrative industry'. Start a list of some of these organisations that employ large numbers of people in this 'lucrative industry'.


----------



## johnd (7 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> You might want to check out .



I'm sorry if you regard these as terms of abuse to you personally, that was not my intention which is why they were in brackets. The public generally perceive people with your opinion on this topic to be "do gooders or bleeding heart liberals"  I would regard myself as a "liberal" in certain matters but not when it comes to  people who just take advantage and spin a good yarn.


----------



## gianni (8 May 2010)

johnd said:


> I'm sorry if you regard these as terms of abuse to you personally, that was not my intention which is why they were in brackets. The public generally perceive people with your opinion on this topic to be "do gooders or bleeding heart liberals"  I would regard myself as a "liberal" in certain matters but not when it comes to  people who just take advantage and spin a good yarn.




I'm part of 'the public' and don't generally have these perceptions.


----------



## Complainer (8 May 2010)

johnd said:


> I'm sorry if you regard these as terms of abuse to you personally


I was referring to this section from the guidelines "Attack an opinion by all means, but please don't attack the person  expressing the opinion."

Resorting to name-calling and labelling is generally an indication that you've run out of sensible things to say.


----------



## Purple (8 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> What I'm suggesting is contained in my earlier post - but I'll say it again if you like. It is usually a good idea to get two sides of a story, before you rush  to judgement.



I still have no idea what he was saying, or should that be implying, either UptheDeise. I was simply relaying an experience that my wife told me about. By the way, she told me that it happens regularly, but not frequently. I saw no reason at the time to insinuate that she was exaggerating or lying and I see no reason to think so now. 

For the record she is very much in favour of the GMS system but thinks that payments to GP’s should be cut further and well off people shouldn’t get free healthcare that they can easily afford to pay for themselves, even if they are over 70.


----------



## UptheDeise (8 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> What I'm suggesting is contained in my earlier post - but I'll say it again if you like. It is usually a good idea to get two sides of a story, before you rush to judgement.


 
If you mean your posts and purples, then after some consideration, I'm going with Purples, even though we had our spats in the past .



> Here's a challenge - I won't ask you to find the 'tens of thousands', but maybe you could find 1,000 employees in this 'lucrative industry'. Start a list of some of these organisations that employ large numbers of people in this 'lucrative industry'.


 
Lucrative or poverty industry whatever you want to call it, is doing fine and well in this country. How many quango's and their associative quangocrats now work in well paid jobs to assist the deserving poor? The government spends billions of euros each year paying out wages and pensions for this. Without the deserving poor those people would be out of jobs.


----------



## Deiseblue (8 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> If you mean your posts and purples, then after some consideration, I'm going with Purples, even though we had our spats in the past .
> 
> 
> 
> Lucrative or poverty industry whatever you want to call it, is doing fine and well in this country. How many quango's and their associative quangocrats now work in well paid jobs to assist the deserving poor? The government spends billions of euros each year paying out wages and pensions for this. Without the deserving poor those people would be out of jobs.


 
You've asked the question ?

Now can you give us the answer ?

Name the quangos and outline the numbers they employ , if you can tell us how many billions are expended to maintain them as well then that would be helpful .


----------



## UptheDeise (8 May 2010)

Deiseblue said:


> You've asked the question ?
> 
> Now can you give us the answer ?
> 
> Name the quangos and outline the numbers they employ , if you can tell us how many billions are expended to maintain them as well then that would be helpful .


 
Well the government spends around €21 billion in social welfare. I do not know exactly how much of this is ministered to the deserving poor but I'm sure it's quite a lot. We also have between 800 to 1000 quangos in existance. Again not sure how many exist because of the deserving poor but you can read about them here: [broken link removed]

Also, take into account charities which can receive substantial sums of taxpayers money and award their directors massive salaries.


----------



## Complainer (8 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> Lucrative or poverty industry whatever you want to call it, is doing fine and well in this country. How many quango's and their associative quangocrats now work in well paid jobs to assist the deserving poor? The government spends billions of euros each year paying out wages and pensions for this. Without the deserving poor those people would be out of jobs.





UptheDeise said:


> Well the government spends around €21 billion in social welfare. I do not know exactly how much of this is ministered to the deserving poor but I'm sure it's quite a lot. We also have between 800 to 1000 quangos in existance. Again not sure how many exist because of the deserving poor but you can read about them here: [broken link removed]
> 
> Also, take into account charities which can receive substantial sums of taxpayers money and award their directors massive salaries.



Any chance that you could say 5 or 10 quangos that are part of this 'lucrative poverty industry' and maybe 5 or 10 charities that "receive substantial sums of taxpayers money and award their directors  massive salaries". It would just be nice to get some specifics behind your wide (or should that be wild) allegations.


----------



## Deiseblue (8 May 2010)

UptheDeise said:


> Well the government spends around €21 billion in social welfare. I do not know exactly how much of this is ministered to the deserving poor but I'm sure it's quite a lot. We also have between 800 to 1000 quangos in existance. Again not sure how many exist because of the deserving poor but you can read about them here: [broken link removed]
> 
> Also, take into account charities which can receive substantial sums of taxpayers money and award their directors massive salaries.


 
The Department of Social and Family affairs is a neccessity and I would hope that the vast majority of funds expended do go to does that depend on them , you are surely not suggesting that we dispense with this most essential of services.

Again I ask you to move away from the area of surmise and detail the quangoes you refer to with details of the number of their employees and the details of the billions they spend , more details on the charities you refer to would'nt go astray either !


----------



## annet (8 May 2010)

OK I can speak with some authority on this one. 

First, the DSFA or the Department of Social Protection is one organisation that deals with social security. Within this organisation you've got the Appeals board which is suppose to be independent but its funded by the Department.

You've then got the Citizens Information Board who through citizen information centres provides valuable advice and information services to the public - but if Departments done their job in the first place by telling people of their rights and entitlements that would then lead to the question do we need this organisation. This organisation also inputs into policy. Coincidently, funding and services were cut from this organisation to citizen information centres. The citizen information board also funds a range of community advocacy projects that have been set up for disabled persons. Part of these persons job is helping persons to advocate for themselves in accessing their rights and entitlements which again crosses over several departments and the work of citizen information centres. 

Then we come to a spin off from the Department of Social Protection called the Family Support Agency that commissions research (although research its conducted is quite limited (look at the website)) and supports Family Resource Centres. It provides funding to the FRC's and also a range of community and voluntary organisations. It has few staff and its services are questionable.  McCarthy asked that this organsation be abolished.  Again, this is one organisation whose functions could be reviewed and then viable parts of it brought back into the Department.

You've got the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs who funds partnerships in areas of socio-economic disadvantage and community development projects and rural leader programmes. Again, it manages and funds these programmes and also offers funding under different programme areas to communty programmes which duplicates the work done by the Department of Social Protection.

You've got the Combat Poverty Agency that research's poverty that could be brought back into the Department.

You've got numerous homeless agencies whose function cross-cuts several departments from HSE, Social Protection, Housing, Environment etc. There's no coordination in services.

This is what McCarthy was talking about in respect to the need to cut funding and the duplication of services.


----------



## Complainer (8 May 2010)

annet said:


> OK I can speak with some authority on this one.
> 
> First, the DSFA or the Department of Social Protection is one organisation that deals with social security. Within this organisation you've got the Appeals board which is suppose to be independent but its funded by the Department.


So you reckon that DSP is now part of the 'lucrative poverty industry'? So payment of job seekers benefit, children's allowances, old age pensions, illness benefit etc are now part of 'poverty industry'? Come on now - let's get real.




annet said:


> You've got the Combat Poverty Agency that research's poverty that could  be brought back into the Department.


Your 'authoritative position' is a little out of date. From [broken link removed] "On 1 July 2009 the Combat Poverty Agency was  integrated               with the Office for Social Inclusion to form the Social  Inclusion               Division within the Department of Social and Family  Affairs.             From 1 May 2010 the Social Inclusion  Division will be part of the Department of Community, Equality and  Gaeltacht Affairs."​


annet said:


> This is what McCarthy was talking about in respect to the need to cut  funding and the duplication of services.


Where exactly is the duplication that you are talking? What services/funding are being duplicated?


----------



## annet (8 May 2010)

Have you read the McCarthy Report? It refers to the duplication of services. The McCarthy report also refers to the need to streamline funding so that organisations receive funding from one organisation so that there is not cross-cutting across several departments and organisations.

As for the Department of social protection while it does provide social security it is involved in the poverty industry since it provides funding through its spin offs to multiple other organisations that deal with persons who are deemed to be living in poverty.


----------



## Complainer (8 May 2010)

annet said:


> Have you read the McCarthy Report? It refers to the duplication of services. The McCarthy report also refers to the need to streamline funding so that organisations receive funding from one organisation so that there is not cross-cutting across several departments and organisations.


I read every word of the bits of the report that applied to my own area. It was very unimpressed with the level of understanding of the services provided in my area. I've gone back over the DSFA sections of Vol 1 of the report now, and there is no mention of duplication. So again I'll ask you to identify the areas of duplication that you are talking about.



annet said:


> As for the Department of social protection while it does provide social  security it is involved in the poverty industry since it provides  funding through its spin offs to multiple other organisations that deal  with persons who are deemed to be living in poverty.


More vague allegations - who are these "multiple other organisations that deal  with persons who are deemed to be living in poverty"?


----------



## annet (8 May 2010)

*How accountable are the public bodies who fund projects?*

These are examples of duplication of services and funding and all grown from the need to address poverty and social exclusion. 

In Community, Rural and Gaeltacht there is Pobal who as you know supports and funds partnerships in addition to cdp's and other community organisations. Pobal has pulled funding from alot of the CDP’s as an outcome of undertaking a review and analysis of projects and was one outcome of the McCarthy report.

So in one geoghrapic area, we had Pobal who supported a partnership and two cdp's and these three services overlapped in their work and the services they provided. The core funding for these organisations came from Pobal, the Department of Social Protection, HSE and various other sources.

We had two drug projects that spent more time clashing over personalities and in demarcation disputes about service areas. This another example where drug services were being duplicated. This duplication was a waste of resources where these two organistions would have better spent their time pooling resources to tackle the substance misuse problem that existed in their area. 

Services for the unemployed also overlapped through duplication as there was a centre for the unemployed, in addition to the partnership and their own services, the LES, and then CDP's and also FAS.

We had various community development projects which overlapped with several other community organisations by providing services for the same target groups in the same local area.

In another area there are CDP's, partnerships and family resource centres and that was in addition to a range of other smaller community based projects all providing the same services to specific target groups be them lone parents, the unemployed, children, youth, persons from the travelling community, persons who were disabled or who have mental health difficulties to those persons who suffer from substance misuse.

All these organisations received funding from multiple department sources that included for instance the Department of Social Protection, FSA, HSE, Pobal and the County Councils. Funding for various projects was also available and drawn down from other sources like the Department of the Taoiseach, Dublin Bus, banks and philantrophy sources. We also had main voluntary organisations that received public funding through various streams and who then dished that money out in support of projects for their own target groups. 

We had FRC's and other voluntary projects providing counselling for the same target groups in the same area and that’s in addition to the public and private health services that existed in these areas. This duplication of services was actively supported by the same funder - the Family Support Agency who comes under the Department of Social Protection. It was also encouraged and supported by the HSE and public health providers. This whole programme was investigated by Colm McCarthy and his findings were that this counselling programme did not show proof of benefit and in conclusion this programme and its funding stream should be done away with. 

Then comes more waste in this poverty industry where Family Resource Centres are funded by the Family Support Agency who in this web contract a support agency to provide the support services to the Family Resource Centres who are the manager who should know how to manage and the board of directors. Pobal also uses the same methodology by contracting a support agency to support the CDP's and other community based organisations that it funds and supports. The support agency and its staff is then in existence through funding received by the public body. So in summary if you are a partnership, cdp or a frc you get a worker allocated to you from the funding organisation and they in turn also employ a support agency to support the person they themselves are supporting! 

I have seen situations where public bodies have no requirement or even a system of checks and balances in respect to the grants they issue to the community and voluntary sector. Accountability for the taxpayer, so you would think that public bodies would ensure that these checks and balances are in place to make sure that the grant monies that they are issuing is expended for the purpose they were actually given! 

I have seen situations where grant monies were pocketed by organisations into their bank accounts without any expenditure whatsoever. In other words organisations were applying for grants saying they were going to provide x,y,z and not only did they not provide the service they kept the money. When it came to reports on expenditures x,y,z could say whatever they wanted knowing the funding agency wouldn’t investigate the expenditure. 

The funding agency never conducted an audit of the organisation they were funding and supporting. 

And then it beggared belief that a funding body would then go along and significantly increase this organisations funding for the next year when the grant monies for the previous year was not fully expended or in some instances the service was never been provided in the first place. 

I have seen situations where public bodies have issued significant grant monies to organisations where the financial management systems didn’t come up to scratch. Services for significant sums of monies were awarded by organisations who received public funding without the funder setting the need or condition that these organisations need to go to Tender above certain thresholds.  Other instances was payments from public grant monies were made without invoices, and that didn’t even cover cheques being given to persons who did not provide the actual services....

The Department of Social Protection together with FAS actively supported back to work measures for persons who were deemed to be vulnerable or living in poverty. They are CE and JI. CE is still in existence whereas JI has been closed to new applicants for several years. But typically we’ve still got persons of certain ages on JI who never progressed into open employment or from discussions with them never had any intention of getting a job as they said "they'd be worse off" and these people still retain their JI payments and secondary benefits. Very few people also make the transition from CE to employment but that's another issue.  Again, the McCarthy report dealt with the CE scheme and as far as I know he recommended that the double payment element should be abolished - it hasnt happened. 

This spun about from the business of addressing poverty, disadvantage and social exclusion. And I would say it can be replicated all over this country….


----------



## UptheDeise (9 May 2010)

That was a very interesting post annet.


----------



## thedaras (9 May 2010)

Annet; Very well thought out post and thanks for taking the time.

I  know that some organisations receive a budget,which they struggle to spend.
They squander this money,as my understanding is that if they didn't spend the full amount,they would get less the following year.


----------



## Complainer (10 May 2010)

Indeed, a very good jpost from annet. However, it is a long way off showing the existance of the 'lucrative poverty industry' that others have been going on about. It shows that the community sector is imperfect, just like the banking sector, the IT sector, the public sector, the sporting sector and pretty much any sector that involves people.


----------



## Towger (10 May 2010)

Complainer said:


> Indeed, a very good jpost from annet. However, it is a long way off showing the existance of the 'lucrative poverty industry' that others have been going on about.


 
Two seconds on Google does that : Top charities defend 'fat cat' CEO salaries


----------



## Complainer (10 May 2010)

Towger said:


> Two seconds on Google does that : Top charities defend 'fat cat' CEO salaries



Nope, it doesn't. Typical Independent reporting - it actually doesn't have John O'Shea's salary but it still happy to call him a 'fat cat'. It is unreasonable to suggest that people could look at the size of the organisation, the scope and complexity of their work before deciding that there is a 'lucrative poverty industry' out there. Is it reasonable to expect that people who work in the charity sector are expected to have some kind of vocation, and should not expect fair remuneration for their work?


----------



## annet (10 May 2010)

*Poverty*



Complainer said:


> Indeed, a very good jpost from annet. However, it is a long way off showing the existance of the 'lucrative poverty industry' that others have been going on about. It shows that the community sector is imperfect, just like the banking sector, the IT sector, the public sector, the sporting sector and pretty much any sector that involves people.


 
I think the post also shows that the problem lies with certain Government Departments who are responsible for administering these grants in the first place because if the proper safeguards were in place, and not to mention the staff who know what to actually look for (ie. how to read book of accounts) alot of this kind of practice would be minimized.

And just to add, getting designated an area of disadvantage and poverty can be extremely lucrative for these type of organisations, because certainly in the past areas that did manage to get designated RAPID or CLAR attracted greater investment and levels of funding.

And if we take this further, we could look on the social security system from benefits to allowances as a social policy measure whose aim is to provide minimum adequate incomes to protect recipients against the risk of poverty. So, theoretically we could say that the Department of Social Protection and all the persons who are employed in the Department are also in the poverty industry....


----------



## UptheDeise (12 May 2010)

Interesting article in the times going back to 2008

Some quotes



> Brian Lenihan, the minister for finance, says the number of their employees has grown by more than 60% to 17,000 since 2000. A 2006 survey by Tasc, a think tank, found that the country has 832 such entities, with a combined annual budget of €13 billion. The OECD said last April that we have a quango for every 5,000 people. The government hopes to save at least €20m next year by reducing the number of such agencies.


 


> Brian Cowen, the taoiseach, appeared to describe the National Consumer Agency as “a bunch of ''expletive'' in an aside in the Dail. Celia Larkin, Bertie Ahern’s ex-girlfriend, received €34,000 in two years for her role as a “volunteer”on the agency’s board.


 
We even have a quango for fish! The National Salmon Commission. Lols!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article4596998.ece


----------



## Towger (12 May 2010)

13Bn... Get rid of the lot and we would payoff our loans in no time at all.


----------

