# Varadkar:  Jobseekers Benefit should be higher than Jobseekers Allowance



## Protocol (11 Nov 2017)

Again, Leo Varadker has suggested improving SI benefits, and making them higher than SA payments.

So JSB would be higher than JSA.

I agree with him.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-ne...-payments-to-prsi-contributions-36310277.html


----------



## MrEarl (12 Nov 2017)

Hello,

I'd far rather see the state set up some form of "work for your pay" arrangement - almost everyone could do something, be it support / admin services for various government departments, or helping maintain the public parks etc. etc.

Pay people a bit more, get them working say 3-4 days a week for 2-3 weeks of every month, everyone wins (apart from the very small minority who just want to do nothing and have the rest of us support them).

Just imagine, government departments that answer their phones, don't drag their heels for weeks (or even months) before responding to your correspondence, far more dog wardens out fining people for not picking up after their dogs, the list of things that need help in this country is endless and the list claiming benefits isn't a lot shorter, so there must be an obvious match here in principal.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (12 Nov 2017)

Steady on...you’ll have the bleeding heart lefties out in force insisting that welfare recipients shouldn’t be humiliated in such a manner


----------



## MrEarl (13 Nov 2017)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Steady on...you’ll have the bleeding heart lefties out in force insisting that *welfare recipients shouldn’t be humiliated in such a manner*



What, you mean having to work like everyone else ?


----------



## allencat3 (14 Nov 2017)

Both my husband (age 74) and myself (64) are sensorily disabled since birth and had undertaken special schooling in different locations. My husband, despite being semi-illiterate, managed to obtain a 7-year apprenticeship, and obtained a trade, working for 46 years, for three employers. During his time of employment, he had been treated abominably by some of the supervisors and work colleagues due to his disability. Yet he persevered to work and save hard enough, along with myself, to purchase a house, car and pay for utilities, insurance (house, motor, health, life, etc.)  When seeking a mortgage for our house, he was turned down by a bank, who assumed that he would not manage to keep up mortgage repayments due to his disability, despite a letter of reference from his employer, certifying his permanency of his job and employment history. Fortunately, my own building society approved our application for the mortgage - that was 40 years ago!   Anyway, to cut the story short, we paid our dues and contributed to Irish society.  When my husband reached his retirement age of 65, his employer's pension scheme folded up, leaving a very small pension for him, despite our appeal to the Pension Board.  He draws the state pension.  Then last year, I had to retire 2 years early - from public service after 20 years - for health reasons.  All I receive is 97 euros fortnightly, plus illness benefit of 193 euros.  Thankfully, the mortgage had been paid off many years ago.  It was yesterday when I saw the television report displaying a young woman - lone parent - with five children, including a new-born child - granted a new house. 
   Why should, as Brendan Burgress said in his opening post on this thread, those who worked for over 40 years receive only 10 euros on contributory State pension more than those who would not make an effort to support oneself during his/her "working" (or should it be "welfare") years?


----------



## Firefly (15 Nov 2017)

allencat3 said:


> Both my husband (age 74) and myself (64) are sensorily disabled since birth and had undertaken special schooling in different locations. My husband, despite being semi-illiterate, managed to obtain a 7-year apprenticeship, and obtained a trade, working for 46 years, for three employers. During his time of employment, he had been treated abominably by some of the supervisors and work colleagues due to his disability. Yet he persevered to work and save hard enough, along with myself, to purchase a house, car and pay for utilities, insurance (house, motor, health, life, etc.)  When seeking a mortgage for our house, he was turned down by a bank, who assumed that he would not manage to keep up mortgage repayments due to his disability, despite a letter of reference from his employer, certifying his permanency of his job and employment history. Fortunately, my own building society approved our application for the mortgage - that was 40 years ago!   Anyway, to cut the story short, we paid our dues and contributed to Irish society.  When my husband reached his retirement age of 65, his employer's pension scheme folded up, leaving a very small pension for him, despite our appeal to the Pension Board.  He draws the state pension.  Then last year, I had to retire 2 years early - from public service after 20 years - for health reasons.  All I receive is 97 euros fortnightly, plus illness benefit of 193 euros.  Thankfully, the mortgage had been paid off many years ago.  It was yesterday when I saw the television report displaying a young woman - lone parent - with five children, including a new-born child - granted a new house.
> Why should, as Brendan Burgress said in his opening post on this thread, those who worked for over 40 years receive only 10 euros on contributory State pension more than those who would not make an effort to support oneself during his/her "working" (or should it be "welfare") years?



Excellent post and well done to you and your husband. It's a sad state of affairs alright but at least you can both look in the mirror and feel good about yourselves for having done things the right way. It's a pity more people are not like you!


----------



## Purple (15 Nov 2017)

Firefly said:


> Excellent post and well done to you and your husband. It's a sad state of affairs alright but at least you can both look in the mirror and feel good about yourselves for having done things the right way. It's a pity more people are not like you!


The problem is that many people see nothing wrong with living off their fellow citizens for their entire lives.


----------



## Palerider (15 Nov 2017)

JSB should of course be more as the individual has contributed.

The message in the Allencat3 post is one we all know well, be a good citizen, play by the rules, improve yourself, add to society despite any and all obstacles, pay your taxes etc but bear in mind if the day comes when you need help from the State that you should expect to fight or suck it up.

We have a welfare mentality, it runs deep and in many cases it is generational, I have heard this first hand from a single mother of two that lives with the children's unemployed father in a private rented house that the taxpayer funds in a nice area Southside Dublin location 5 minutes from the beach.....quoting here,  ""my parents never worked and they did alright so I won't and I will refuse all housing offers unless I get a house near my Ma and Da.."

I couldn't argue other than on the side of the prsi contributor that finds a need for JSB, it is daft that JSA payments are the same and I know these are means tested but that is not the point.


----------



## TheBigShort (12 Dec 2017)

MrEarl said:


> I'd far rather see the state set up some form of "work for your pay" arrangement - almost everyone could do something, be it support / admin services for various government departments, or helping maintain the public parks etc. etc.



The problem with that is, if an unemployed architect is made to maintain public parks ( I'm assuming litter warden, sweeping, flowerbed maintenance? Etc), then technically s/he is at work and should be paid the appropriate rate for the job. Ditto admin / support services. 
I'm not sure what a first year park-keeper is paid, but assuming it's at least €10 p h, that's 18 hours work. Which is fine, until you have too many park-keepers, and the ones who are full-time employed are made redundant and end up, erm, unemployed! - Perhaps they could go work in an architects office?


----------



## MrEarl (13 Dec 2017)

Hi TBS,

There is a solution to every problem, assuming you actually want the problem solved


----------



## Purple (14 Dec 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> The problem with that is, if an unemployed architect is made to maintain public parks ( I'm assuming litter warden, sweeping, flowerbed maintenance? Etc), then technically s/he is at work and should be paid the appropriate rate for the job. Ditto admin / support services.
> I'm not sure what a first year park-keeper is paid, but assuming it's at least €10 p h, that's 18 hours work. Which is fine, until you have too many park-keepers, and the ones who are full-time employed are made redundant and end up, erm, unemployed! - Perhaps they could go work in an architects office?


Are you satisfied with the system as it currently stands?


----------



## TheBigShort (14 Dec 2017)

MrEarl said:


> Hi TBS,
> 
> There is a solution to every problem, assuming you actually want the problem solved



Remind me what the problem is? The topic is that the Taoiseach thinks that JSB should be higher than JSA, I have no issue with that.


----------



## TheBigShort (14 Dec 2017)

Purple said:


> Are you satisfied with the system as it currently stands?



What system?


----------



## MrEarl (14 Dec 2017)

TheBigShort said:


> *The problem with that is*, if an unemployed architect is made to maintain public parks ( I'm assuming litter warden, sweeping, flowerbed maintenance? Etc), then technically s/he is at work and should be paid the appropriate rate for the job. Ditto admin / support services.
> I'm not sure what a first year park-keeper is paid, but assuming it's at least €10 p h, that's 18 hours work. Which is fine, until you have too many park-keepers, and the ones who are full-time employed are made redundant and end up, erm, unemployed! - Perhaps they could go work in an architects office?





MrEarl said:


> Hi TBS,
> 
> There is a solution to every problem, assuming you actually want the problem solved





TheBigShort said:


> Remind me what the problem is?  .....


----------



## TheBigShort (14 Dec 2017)

MrEarl said:


>



 sorry, mixed wires here. It appears you have identified what appears to you to be a problem, not me, and you proposed a solution (work for dole) to your problem.
I identified a potential problem with your proposed solution to your apparent problem. 

I dont have a problem with providing unemployment benefits to those out of work.


----------



## Purple (14 Dec 2017)

Purple said:


> Are you satisfied with the system as it currently stands?





TheBigShort said:


> What system?



That system;



TheBigShort said:


> I dont have a problem with providing unemployment benefits to those out of work.


Are you happy with the way in which we provide unemployment benefits to those out of work.

Would you like me to explain further?
If you are just being obtuse and evasive, as you usually are, then say so.


----------



## TheBigShort (14 Dec 2017)

Purple said:


> Are you happy with the way in which we provide unemployment benefits to those out of work.


 Broadly speaking yes.
I have no issue with the system being proposed by the Taoiseach. I would be sceptical about how it would be paid for.


----------



## mtk (14 Dec 2017)

three other related issues
1) In my view JSB should be paid much longer 9 months max,  Its ridiculous that so quickly you are onto means tested JSA. It was max 15 months if memory serves me correctly  at one stage.

2)  The JSB should have a pay related element.  It did until mid eighties as far as I recall.

3) Means testing in my view is not a great  idea - cost to administer, perverse incentives ( no incentive to save), creates poverty trap etc.


----------

