# Benefits and Sky TV/plasma's etc



## RMCF (30 Oct 2010)

Sorry for this rant, but I was always under the belief that the Social Welfare system was meant to provide citizens with a basic level of income to help them fulfill daily living requirements.

Does this include Sky TV and big screen plasma's? (amongst other things).

I think if you are able to buy these on benefits, then the benefits system is paying you too much.


----------



## JP1234 (30 Oct 2010)

I understand what you are saying but have you considered that for some people on benefits at least the TV's were bought while they had jobs and they are tied into a contract with Sky which would cost them as much to get out of?

Just a thought!


----------



## RMCF (30 Oct 2010)

I hear you, but I am talking more about those who are long term unemployed (or just plain lazy and don't want to work) who have said items.

I know several households who have full Sky TV package (not cheap) and had a big plasma quite a few years before me (2 wages coming in).

I guess there is an element of TV entertainment being more important to some people than others. I had a big bulky CRT TV right up until earlier this year, but I was doing other things with my money. I too have Sky, but at least I'm out paying taxes. I just think that luxuries should not be included in what you can afford to buy with benefits.


----------



## JP1234 (30 Oct 2010)

I completely agree with you about people who have never worked having luxury items.

When I was claiming JSB last year I got a snipey comment about " still having the big fancy TV" from someone, despite the fact it was bought and paid for a year earlier out of money we had saved up, so apologies for getting a bit defensive there


----------



## micmclo (30 Oct 2010)

Well if you don't own a car which cost huge money to run, don't smoke and don't drink in pubs then why not spend your benefit money on a TV and TV subscription?

If your neighbours can't or won't work they need something to keep them sane and occupied.
It's that or join the local library I suppose


----------



## RMCF (30 Oct 2010)

micmclo said:


> *Well if you don't own a car which cost huge money to run, don't smoke and don't drink in pubs then why not spend your benefit money on a TV and TV subscription*?
> 
> If your neighbours can't or won't work they need something to keep them sane and occupied.
> It's that or join the local library I suppose



Why not spend your money on Sky/plasma?  Thats my point, surely they shouldn't have the money to buy these things if they are on the dole! These things aren't cheap and if they can afford them on the dole then I say the dole is too high.

Oh, forgot to say, some of the people I have in mind also have cars, smoke and drink. Explain how they can afford all of these.


----------



## micmclo (30 Oct 2010)

RMCF said:


> Explain how they can afford all of these.



How can expect me to know your neighbours in Donegal and their household budgets , I've never been there, it's a lawless place full of boy racers and people dodging VRT 

Maybe they have nixers?
Realy you know your neighbours so you figure it out

It's likely it not just JSA/JSB they get, they are range of other welfare schemes too. Rent allowance, money to pay mortgage interest, disability allowance, carers allowance, family income supplement, lone parents allowance, medical card.
It's not just €196 per week, if you qualify for one scheme you many qualify for others

Edit: You ignored all of this, you focused on just one:



RMCF said:


> I say the dole is too high.


----------



## RMCF (30 Oct 2010)

Well you ask me to figure it out, and my last line is the summation of my investigation !!
The dole is too high. 

As for Donegal being a lawless place full of boy racers and VRT dodgers, well I can't argue with that! (although I recently paid VRT myself as I don't like ducking and diving down back roads and tiny lanes just to avoid the Customs men). I believe in paying my taxes.


----------



## orka (30 Oct 2010)

I agree with the OP. I made similar points on the overseas aid thread - if someone on benefits can afford cigarettes, alcohol, sky/tv, holidays or a car, then they are receving too much money from the state.  If you were in a greenfield situation setting up a new welfare system, the necessities are food, shelter, clothing, medical care and education - anything else is a luxury that may be provided when times are good but shouldn't be when times are bad when the state can't afford it.


----------



## RMCF (30 Oct 2010)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1030/economy.html

Shocking to read that benefits take up 38% of the countrys spending.

Its time they were cut back, big time.

Lets all share the pain.


----------



## micmclo (30 Oct 2010)

If benefits are cut, we're going to spend the next few months listening to Fr. Sean Healy on the radio and "_the poorest and most vulnerable in our society"_

If every benefit was doubled we'ed still be hearing that phrase. When you use a phrase too often it loses all meaning.

Don't you remember when they cut the Christmas bonus around April and people were outraged? Scrooge was the call 

8 months to plan ahead people. It's not like it was cut the week before Christmas. People had lots of notice, it was quiet well planned, take a bow Minister 

You had to be on benefits for 15 months before you qualified too. I don't know if RMCF would call them long term unemployed.


----------



## RMCF (30 Oct 2010)

micmclo said:


> If benefits are cut, we're going to spend the next few months listening to Fr. Sean Healy on the radio and "_the poorest and most vulnerable in our society"_
> 
> If every benefit was doubled we'ed still be hearing that phrase. When you use a phrase too often it loses all meaning.
> 
> ...



Perhaps my main dig is at those who were unemployed when we had "full employment". The ones who don't want to work !!


----------



## truthseeker (2 Nov 2010)

My Oh has recently found himself in the unfortunate position of claiming Jobseekers Benefit.

He has had to go to the social welfare office on a number of occasions to sort out various issues (someone entered his address wrong on a computer, someone else told him the money would be there on a tuesday but then it wasnt and he should have been told friday etc....).

Last time he was there he was in a queue and the guy behind him in the queue was drinking a *starbucks coffee* and using an *iphone* to have a loud conversation where he stated that he 'had a bit of a head on him this morning cos he took a few *yoks* last night, but seeing as he had to get up to sign on for his *wages*, did yer man on the other end want to go for a few *pints* at lunchtime'.

The whole office could hear this conversation.


----------



## duchalla (2 Nov 2010)

Sounds like a scene from Hardy Bucks....


----------



## z107 (2 Nov 2010)

> Perhaps my main dig is at those who were unemployed when we had "full employment". The ones who don't want to work !!


Why?
These people are just taking advantage of the situation put in place by the government. If anyone, your 'main dig' should be towards the TDs of this country.

If someone was to offer me free money, I wouldn't turn my nose up at it either.


----------



## RMCF (2 Nov 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> Why?
> These people are just taking advantage of the situation put in place by the government. If anyone, your 'main dig' should be towards the TDs of this country.
> 
> If someone was to offer me free money, I wouldn't turn my nose up at it either.



True, but this thread is starting to go around on circles. 

The benefits system should not, in my opinion, fund your nights out, your Sky TV, plasma, car etc, so I look forward to it being reduced come the Budget.


----------



## Shawady (2 Nov 2010)

I think social welfare benefits should be reduced in upcoming budget but the problem is that there are different categories of people receiving benefits.
There are over 200,000 people that have lost their job in the past year that may have high costs like mortages/VHI etc. However, there are also a lot of people that never worked when there were jobs available and a combination of unemployment benefit/child benefit/rent allowance and medical card means they can get by fine.


----------



## RMCF (2 Nov 2010)

Shawady said:


> I think social welfare benefits should be reduced in upcoming budget but the problem is that there are different categories of people receiving benefits.
> There are over 200,000 people that have lost their job in the past year that may have high costs like mortages/VHI etc. However, there are also a lot of people that never worked when there were jobs available and a combination of unemployment benefit/child benefit/rent allowance and medical card means they can get by fine.



totally agree, maybe they should look to see who has paid what taxes into the running of the country in recent years and pay them more benefits, and cut those of the laziest who haven't worked in ages?


----------



## Mpsox (2 Nov 2010)

TO get back to the core of the original point the OP was making, namely that some people seem to be able to spend their social welfare money on what he considers "luxuries". I understand where he is coming from, neighbours of my in laws are on disability benefit yet the wheelie bin seems to be jammed full of beer bottles every Monday morning.

Reality is that there seems to be a hard core in this country which seems to thrive quite well on the social and even when jobs were available, never seemed to rush out to get them.

It's interesting to see the approach being taken in the USA for example
[broken link removed]

What would be the reaction here if people on social welfare were required to cancel their Sky DDs or given a pre-paid debit card that could not be used to buy alcohol or withdraw cash?.

Sorry if that makes me sound like a Scrooge and I know it would perhaps affect those who genuinely do not want to be on welfare, but maybe it should be considered


----------



## TarfHead (2 Nov 2010)

Do you really want to be a citizen in a State where a bureaucrat tells someone how they may and may not spend their money ?

Why not then go the whole hog and have Ireland join the People's Republic of China as a Special Administrative Region  ?


----------



## Mpsox (2 Nov 2010)

TarfHead said:


> Do you really want to be a citizen in a State where a bureaucrat tells someone how they may and may not spend their money ?


 

Yes, if it reduces my taxes, provides incentives for people to come off social welfare and make a positive impact on society.


----------



## truthseeker (2 Nov 2010)

TarfHead said:


> Do you really want to be a citizen in a State where a bureaucrat tells someone how they may and may not spend their money ?


 
No - but I object to giving them 'free' money above the necessities for living that they choose to spend however they please!

Id rather provide shelter, food, heat and light directly instead of just handing over the cash.

Its a bit like the beggar in town - I dont give him cash because if I do I know he will go to the off licence with it. But I would buy him a sandwich. Does that make me some kind of control freak? Maybe, but if Im going to give charity I want to see it used properly and not wasted on booze.


----------



## mugga (2 Nov 2010)

I agree with the op, I've got a two package deal from Sky as that's all I can afford. People who've *never* worked in their lives have the full Sky package, the same house as I kill myself working for and all that other people work for--for free. It's wrong. The government has enabled people to get like this-there's no incentive to get a job / no reason to work if it's all just given to you.


----------



## Protocol (2 Nov 2010)

Don't cut benefits - cut the duration of benefits.

No lifetime JSA.

JSA of 5 yrs max across your lifetime.


----------



## Complainer (2 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> My Oh has recently found himself in the unfortunate position of claiming Jobseekers Benefit.
> 
> He has had to go to the social welfare office on a number of occasions to sort out various issues (someone entered his address wrong on a computer, someone else told him the money would be there on a tuesday but then it wasnt and he should have been told friday etc....).
> 
> ...


God forbid that he might actually spend his redundancy payment, eh?


----------



## Grizzly (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> God forbid that he might actually spend his redundancy payment, eh?


 
I agree. Someone might have paid 30 years worth of "stamps" as well and never claimed anything during that time.


----------



## truthseeker (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> God forbid that he might actually spend his redundancy payment, eh?


 
Possibly. But unlikely. He was early 20s. He was dressed in the 'uniform' of shiny tracksuit bottoms and football jersey, tattoos extending up to be visible on the neck, and the hollow chested stoop that one associates with drug abuse.


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Possibly. But unlikely. He was early 20s. He was dressed in the 'uniform' of shiny tracksuit bottoms and football jersey, tattoos extending up to be visible on the neck, and the hollow chested stoop that one associates with drug abuse.


Ah silly me - he LOOKS like he never had a job, therefore he defintely never had a job. That explains everything.


----------



## Ceist Beag (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Ah silly me - he LOOKS like he never had a job, therefore he defintely never had a job. That explains everything.



If he calls his benefit payment "wages" would you still give him the benefit of doubt? If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...
Of course we could just ignore all evidence that the benefit rate in this country is more than we can afford and burden taxpayers with the debt to pay these layabouts for their nice to haves and the like if that's what you prefer Complainer!


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2010)

Ceist Beag said:


> If he calls his benefit payment "wages" would you still give him the benefit of doubt? If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...


If he's talking about 'wages', then it sounds to me that he is more used to being employed than unemployed.

But maybe we should stop building public policy based on what one bloke saw in the dole office?


----------



## Ceist Beag (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> But maybe we should stop building public policy based on what one bloke saw in the dole office?



Who said we were? But there is plenty of evidence to suggest the benefits in this country are far too generous, especially given the state of the public purse.


----------



## truthseeker (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Ah silly me - he LOOKS like he never had a job, therefore he defintely never had a job. That explains everything.


 
Complainer - you might want to believe that the social welfare office is full of people who have worked for years and fallen on hard times. The reality is that there are some scroungers who have never worked a day in their lives and live off the state. My OH told me of one particular example. He was shocked by the numbers of people up there standing in line, drinking starbucks coffees (there is a starbucks nearby) and moaning about having to stand in line, while loudly discussing various activities that people would be disgusted that social welfare money is being spent on - drug use, alcohol use, sky packages, holidays abroad, the latest designer gear etc...

You may think that someone referring to their benefits as 'wages' means they are used to being employed. I would absolutely disagree with this - in my own experience the people who refer to their benefits as wages are those who are NOT used to earning an actual wage. Anyone I know who has genuinely fallen on hard times refers to the money as 'social welfare'.


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Complainer - you might want to believe that the social welfare office is full of people who have worked for years and fallen on hard times. The reality is that there are some scroungers who have never worked a day in their lives and live off the state. My OH told me of one particular example. He was shocked by the numbers of people up there standing in line, drinking starbucks coffees (there is a starbucks nearby) and moaning about having to stand in line, while loudly discussing various activities that people would be disgusted that social welfare money is being spent on - drug use, alcohol use, sky packages, holidays abroad, the latest designer gear etc...


I fully agree that there are people who have never worked a day and live off the State. I'm not so sure that I agree that many of these people are spending on sky and starbucks. Your OH has no idea of the status of any individual in the queue around him, so I don't see how you can come to any conclusions based on observations.

It is interesting to note that those who spend their welfare payments largely on smokes and booze are really being very patriotic. They are recycling most of their welfare back to the State via VAT and excise duties.


----------



## truthseeker (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> ...so I don't see how you can come to any conclusions based on observations.


 
There is plenty that can be picked up on observation in a long queue where you can overhear conversations.


----------



## Caveat (3 Nov 2010)

Mpsox said:


> ...neighbours of my in laws are on disability benefit yet the wheelie bin seems to be jammed full of beer bottles every Monday morning.


 
Well it is their right to drink a lot of they wish - maybe they feel they need to? Not a great idea maybe but hardly indicative of a luxury lifestyle - you can beer for about €1 per bottle.

Their diet could well be poor - scrimping on that to fund their beer money. Perhaps they rarely buy new clothes or have a holiday?


----------



## Yachtie (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> My Oh has recently found himself in the unfortunate position of claiming Jobseekers Benefit.
> 
> He has had to go to the social welfare office on a number of occasions to sort out various issues (someone entered his address wrong on a computer, someone else told him the money would be there on a tuesday but then it wasnt and he should have been told friday etc....).
> 
> ...


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> There is plenty that can be picked up on observation in a long queue where you can overhear conversations.


Have you told your OH that it is quite rude to earwig on other people's conversations?


----------



## truthseeker (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Have you told your OH that it is quite rude to earwig on other people's conversations?


 
How could he help overhearing them in close queuing quarters with people shouting - would you like me to suggest he wears earplugs when he goes to queue somewhere?


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> How could he help overhearing them in close queuing quarters with people shouting - would you like me to suggest he wears earplugs when he goes to queue somewhere?


No need for that in my experience - just minding your own business has worked for me in any situation that I've been in.


----------



## Firefly (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Have you told your OH that it is quite rude to earwig on other people's conversations?



Not exactly how I interpreted the last line on Post #13


----------



## truthseeker (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> No need for that in my experience - just minding your own business has worked for me in any situation that I've been in.


 
To be able to block out the sights and sounds around oneself and enter a world of ones own - and just not hear or see whats going on around you. Sounds about right.


----------



## DB74 (3 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> No need for that in my experience - just minding your own business has worked for me in any situation that I've been in.


 
How do you explain 3,473 posts on AAM then?!!!!!!!!


----------



## Firefly (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> to be able to block out the sights and sounds around oneself and enter a world of ones own - and just not hear or see whats going on around you. Sounds about right.



:d


----------



## Complainer (3 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> To be able to block out the sights and sounds around oneself and enter a world of ones own - and just not hear or see whats going on around you. Sounds about right.


Touché


----------



## lightswitch (4 Nov 2010)

I certainly could not survive on €196 per week.  Fair play to anyone who can.  I would imagine their "luxury items" are paid for by credit union loans.  Apparently they dont look for proof of income etc so probably €20 or so goes to pay them back.

Truthseeker, no offence but your OH needs to find himself some voluntary activities to do.  Keep his mind occupied and all of that.

Complainer,  I also find minding my own business works well for me  With exception to people elected to represent to me or those they nominate that is.


----------



## Ceist Beag (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> I certainly could not survive on €196 per week.  Fair play to anyone who can.



That all depends on your circumstances. If you have no mortgage or rent to pay then 196 per week is a very generous sum to get by on - you could easily get by on a lot less. Is the cost of living here really twice what it is in other countries, I don't think so! Anyway the bottom line is the country cannot afford to pay 196 per week.


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> Truthseeker, no offence but your OH needs to find himself some voluntary activities to do. Keep his mind occupied and all of that.


 
lol, my OH tells me of one incident that he couldnt help but overhear, I tell it here and Ive people saying he needs to mind his own business and he needs to get some voluntary activities! Its a funny old world. He is kept very busy I assure you.


----------



## Chris (4 Nov 2010)

orka said:


> I agree with the OP. I made similar points on the overseas aid thread - if someone on benefits can afford cigarettes, alcohol, sky/tv, holidays or a car, then they are receving too much money from the state.  If you were in a greenfield situation setting up a new welfare system, the necessities are food, shelter, clothing, medical care and education - anything else is a luxury that may be provided when times are good but shouldn't be when times are bad when the state can't afford it.


I fully agree with your list of necessities, but I would imagine that controlling what various social welfare payments are used for would cost more than it would save, not to mention creating a whole new level of bureaucracy. 
I disagree though that any luxeries should ever be taken into a calculation; not in the bad times or the good times.



umop3p!sdn said:


> Why?
> These people are just taking advantage of the situation put in place by the government. If anyone, your 'main dig' should be towards the TDs of this country.
> 
> If someone was to offer me free money, I wouldn't turn my nose up at it either.



This is a good point. All that the welfare system of the last half a century has achieved is to breed a mentality of "entitlement". There was a time when people would only accept a government cheque if it was abolutely necessary; people would do anything to earn a living rather than receive a handout from the state.



Protocol said:


> Don't cut benefits - cut the duration of benefits.
> 
> No lifetime JSA.
> 
> JSA of 5 yrs max across your lifetime.


This would at least be a start.
Personally I believe that the biggest problem is that there is very little incentive to take a job, not the amount of money being paid out. JSA is €196 a week, while a minimum wage job pays about €350 a week (minus PRSI?). That effectively means that you get paid about €3.50 an hour by not being on the dole, not to mention any other benefit "entitlements" lost. 
If you are receiving welfare benefits you should be made work for it. You could start with 10 hours a week after 6 months, 20 after 9 months, and so on. 
Such a system has worked relatively well in Germany since its introduction.


----------



## lightswitch (4 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> lol, my OH tells me of one incident that he couldnt help but overhear, I tell it here and Ive people saying he needs to mind his own business and he needs to get some voluntary activities! Its a funny old world. He is kept very busy I assure you.


 
Not too busy that he is not available for work I hope?  After all it is job seekers he is claiming.  To ordinary workers like myself he may seem to look like a welfare scrounger that we are propping up, did he ever think of that?  He is at the end of the day no different to anyone else on that queue.


----------



## DB74 (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> He is at the end of the day no different to anyone else on that queue.


 
What a ridiculous arrogant statement

Plenty of people on the dole queue who have been paying taxes for years and now find themselves redundant and trying to live on €196 per week

And you claim that they are the same as those who never bother to work during the good times when we had to import people from around the world to fill job vacancies


----------



## lightswitch (4 Nov 2010)

DB74 said:


> What a ridiculous arrogant statement
> 
> Plenty of people on the dole queue who have been paying taxes for years and now find themselves redundant and trying to live on €196 per week
> 
> And you claim that they are the same as those who never bother to work during the good times when we had to import people from around the world to fill job vacancies


 

I disagree on the grounds that I do not make judgements on people claiming the dole, unlike others who have posted on here.  We had virtually no unemployment during the boom, 2 or 3% as far as I recall.

As for importing people, if we had taken things more slowly and didn't "import" people, we would not have the mess we have now. 

We are still "importing" people now by the way and there is nothing for them to do here.


----------



## Deiseblue (4 Nov 2010)

DB74 said:


> What a ridiculous arrogant statement
> 
> Plenty of people on the dole queue who have been paying taxes for years and now find themselves redundant and trying to live on €196 per week
> 
> And you claim that they are the same as those who never bother to work during the good times when we had to import people from around the world to fill job vacancies



Absolutely , nobody has the right to judge anybody on the dole queue based on assumptions.

Perhap's the OP's OH should have operated on the same principle ?


----------



## DB74 (4 Nov 2010)

Just because we had "virtually no unemployment" during the boom doesn't mean that there weren't people doing nothing who could have been out working.

And the OP didn't make a judgement on everybody on the dole (as you did whether you like it or not) but on one particular person in one particluar dole queue based predominantly on what they said

Also I appreciate that "import" is the wrong word to use but I felt the need to get my point across rather than worry about the semantics of the occasion. But thanks for pointing it out anyway!


----------



## lightswitch (4 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Possibly. But unlikely. He was early 20s. He was dressed in the 'uniform' of shiny tracksuit bottoms and football jersey, tattoos extending up to be visible on the neck, and the hollow chested stoop that one associates with drug abuse.


 
The judgement was made on this person......... Maybe it just me but this guy certainly doesn't sound like he has the kind of lifestyle I would aspire to............... More to be pitied than criticised in my opinion, would say the boom just passed him by, he may not even know it ever happened by the posters discription.


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

Deiseblue said:


> Absolutely , nobody has the right to judge anybody on the dole queue based on assumptions.


 
Why not - people make personal judgements all day everyday - its part of being human. The only end this particular judgement was going to was in my OHs head!! Its not like he was off making a report to the Peoples Republic on the guy!!

The way people are carrying on here youd swear that they dont have any casual conversation with their partners regarding their day and what they did or saw or whatever.


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> He is at the end of the day no different to anyone else on that queue.


 
Of course he is - there are people on that queue who have never worked a day in their lives.


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> The judgement was made on this person......... Maybe it just me but this guy certainly doesn't sound like he has the kind of lifestyle I would aspire to............... More to be pitied than criticised in my opinion, would say the boom just passed him by, he may not even know it ever happened by the posters discription.


 
Then that guy is certainly different to my OH or many other people on the guy - passing judgement much there lightswitch?


----------



## lightswitch (4 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Why not - people make personal judgements all day everyday - its part of being human. The only end this particular judgement was going to was in my OHs head!! Its not like he was off making a report to the Peoples Republic on the guy!!
> 
> The way people are carrying on here youd swear that they dont have any casual conversation with their partners regarding their day and what they did or saw or whatever.


 
I agree, but not a very nice aspect of being human.  The guy you refer to has no real prospects by the sounds of him.  Anyway, enough from me, people to do and things to see and all of that.

Have a good day all .


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> I agree, but not a very nice aspect of being human.


 
Whats not nice about it? Do you think the guy in question actually cares what people think of him? If he did would he have shouted mobile phone conversations about his drug use in the social welfare office? Would it be better if he did care - then maybe he would clean up his act a little?

If you want people to pass 'nice' judgements on you then thats in your control.


----------



## Firefly (4 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> lol, my OH tells me of one incident that he couldnt help but overhear, I tell it here and Ive people saying he needs to mind his own business and he needs to get some voluntary activities! Its a funny old world. *He is kept very busy I assure you*.



Good for him


----------



## thedaras (4 Nov 2010)

How about a "special " queue for those who have never worked,perhaps a kind of tunnel ,with sound proofing,mobile phones would be banned and they could only wear shinning tracksuits or a least look like they have never worked. 
Then A gold line queue for those who worked for 20 years or more.They would be kept the furthest away from the untouchables..
A silver queue for those who have only worked for 10-20 years and
A bronze queue for those who have worked for 0 to 10 years.
I think in India they call it a caste system..

Note; Yes I am being sarcastic..


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

How about not giving 'jobseekers' indefinitely?
I mean if you havent managed to ever have a job and you are years and years collecting 'jobseekers'- are you really seeking?


----------



## Protocol (4 Nov 2010)

I agree.

12 months of JSB at 250pw.

Then maybe 12 months of JSA at 200pw.

Then less, then cut JSA altogether.


----------



## lightswitch (4 Nov 2010)

To those of you who recommend cutting off the dole completly.  Where exactly do the thousands of starving people go?  Do we get the foreign versions of Concern and Goal to come in to feed them?

One of the reasons there is long term unemployment payments is to stop rioting on the streets.  Think before you post guys or at least suggest alternatives .

Truthseeker your own OH might end up long term unemployed the way things are going.


----------



## truthseeker (4 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> To those of you who recommend cutting off the dole completly. Where exactly do the thousands of starving people go? Do we get the foreign versions of Concern and Goal to come in to feed them?


 
I agree with Protocol but with the addition of basic food/shelter benefits for those who run out of both JSB and JSB. Im not suggesting we starve anyone, but handing out 200 a week, year after year, to people who dont actually jobseek - is madness.



lightswitch said:


> One of the reasons there is long term unemployment payments is to stop rioting on the streets. Think before you post guys or at least suggest alternatives .


 
I dont see a lot of rioting in the streets in countries that dont give the equivalent of jobseekers.



lightswitch said:


> Truthseeker your own OH might end up long term unemployed the way things are going.


 
Maybe. He is the type who has no job snobbery at all and despite excellent qualifications and experience would shovel coal if it meant earning a wage. If it really did come down to it and there was NO work at all and he was unemployed for over a year I think both of us would consider leaving the country altogether. But I dont believe that there has been NO work in this country for the past 10 years and yet there we have 'long term unemployed'.


----------



## Complainer (4 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Of course he is - there are people on that queue who have never worked a day in their lives.



True indeed. Just as there are some in the queue who mind their own business.


----------



## thedaras (4 Nov 2010)

Is it just the title you have a problem with then? ie; jobseeker?
There are many reasons why some people do not have a job.

They could be unemployable for example.They could have had jobs but were not capable of keeping a commitment,they may have had jobs but been sacked due to incompetence etc etc.

So the result would be for those who are actively job seeking, they should be made to take any job.There are jobs out there now yet even though some on the dole are educated etc they still cant get those jobs.And they could be on jobseekers for a long long time...

During the boom, there was plenty of jobs,yet some remained unemployed,I think a lot of those were the unemployable.

So perhaps "jobseekers " should be for those who seek a job,and prove it,and if they dont get the job they move to unemployable benefit...
Once again seperate queues so no one makes the mistake of thinking that someone on the dole for a year or more could possibly be unemployable...or could possibly not taking the job in mcdonalds etc..
In fact you wouldn't have to "shovel coal" just have a look here..www.jobs.ie for example.


----------



## DB74 (5 Nov 2010)

Separate queues would be a good idea - at least people would see who is trying and who is not

People who are incapable of keeping a commitment or are incompetent shouldn't be rewarded with €200 per week, the same payment as somebody who has worked every day for the previous 10 years.

There should be graded levels of unemployment benefit, based on the level of tax paid over, say the previous 5 full tax years. So somebody who earned say €50K would get slightly more than somebody who earned €30K

Also we should set a minimum level of payment at say €100 per week

For example

Say we set the level of payment at 0.5% of your gross wage. The weekly payment for this level is therefore €250 per week

Ms A earns €50K and becomes unemployed. She has paid tax for the last 5 tax years so she gets the full week's payment for the first tax year of €250 per week

After year one she now only has 4 full tax years in the last 5 tax years so her payment reduces by 20% of the difference between what her salary scale payment should be and the minimum payment of €100

So in Year 2 she gets €220. This is a drop of €30 per week, calculated as 20% x (€250 less €100)

In Year 3 she has another drop of €30 per week each year until Year 6 when she has no tax paid in the previous 5 tax years so she now gets the minimum payment of €100 per week.


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> True indeed. Just as there are some in the queue who mind their own business.


 
Yawn.

Back on topic - its not the title jobseekers I have a problem with in itself, its people who dont jobseek claiming jobseekers. On a broader level I have an issue with the large numbers of people who claim from SW and work for cash in hand, who fraudently aquire homes based on being single but then move the working gf/bf in and never tell the local authority, who refuse to even look for work because "ill lose my benefits", women who claim they dont get a penny from their childs father to maximise the amount they get paid from SW, 

I think the system is being played every which way and its the taxpayers that are paying for it. I dont have any problem with genuine cases but I fear we have a lot of wastage sucking up benefits in this country and its just accepted. On top of that the benefits that are being paid out are very generous and dont encourage some people to go back to work.


----------



## Chris (5 Nov 2010)

lightswitch said:


> One of the reasons there is long term unemployment payments is to stop rioting on the streets.  Think before you post guys or at least suggest alternatives .



How about these suggestions already made:
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=1100025&postcount=24
http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showpost.php?p=1100633&postcount=48


----------



## RMCF (5 Nov 2010)

I have searched and could not find any data on Sky cancellations over the last 2 or 3 yrs in Ireland. You would think that with the recession that a luxury like satellite TV would possibly he high on the list of things to be sacrificed?

This link says that was over 1mill satellite/cable subscribers in Ireland in 2010. Thats a massive number.

http://www.tribune.ie/archive/article/2006/aug/13/skys-the-limit-as-hd-expands-tv-horizons/


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> On a broader level I have an issue with the large numbers of people who claim from SW and work for cash in hand, who fraudently aquire homes based on being single but then move the working gf/bf in and never tell the local authority, who refuse to even look for work because "ill lose my benefits", women who claim they dont get a penny from their childs father to maximise the amount they get paid from SW,


Have you reported many of these 'large numbers of people' to the relevant authorities?


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Have you reported many of these 'large numbers of people' to the relevant authorities?


 
No - Ive taken your suggestion to mind my own business on board


----------



## Firefly (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Have you reported many of these 'large numbers of people' to the relevant authorities?


 
Perhaps if these people were reported and action taken then there would be less pressure on reducing PS pay and numbers


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> No - Ive taken your suggestion to mind my own business on board


Or maybe these 'large numbers' are just a figment of your imagination?


----------



## fizzelina (5 Nov 2010)

Firefly said:


> Perhaps if these people were reported and action taken then there would be less pressure on reducing PS pay and numbers


 
well SW "snitching" is up 1000% according to this article today - http://www.independent.ie/national-news/dole-cheats-exposed-as-snitching-up-1000pc-2408564.html


----------



## Ceist Beag (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Or maybe these 'large numbers' are just a figment of your imagination?



Or maybe not! http://www.tribune.ie/article/2010/oct/24/clampdown-on-welfare-cheats-saves-530m/


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Or maybe these 'large numbers' are just a figment of your imagination?


 
Maybe.......or....



Ceist Beag said:


> Or maybe not! http://www.tribune.ie/article/2010/oct/24/clampdown-on-welfare-cheats-saves-530m/


 
maybe not!


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Interesting - this article highlights a number of points Ive already made:



truthseeker said:


> On a broader level I have an issue with the large numbers of people who claim from SW and work for cash in hand...


 


> Mr O Cuiv believes false claims for child benefit, co-habiting couples claiming two rent allowances and *working people in the black economy drawing unemployment benefit* are among the major problem areas.


 


truthseeker said:


> ....who fraudently aquire homes based on being single but then move the working gf/bf in and never tell the local authority..


 


> Mr O Cuiv believes false claims for child benefit, *co-habiting couples claiming two rent allowances *and working people in the black economy drawing unemployment benefit are among the major problem areas.


 


truthseeker said:


> ..women who claim they dont get a penny from their childs father to maximise the amount they get paid from SW..


 


> Mr O Cuiv believes *false claims for child benefit*, co-habiting couples claiming two rent allowances and working people in the black economy drawing unemployment benefit are among the major problem areas.


 
Perhaps Im *NOT *imagining things eh? Perhaps the old 'mind my own business in queues and elsewhere' attitude just cant allow one to see whats actually going on.


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Interesting - this article highlights a number of points Ive already made:
> 
> Perhaps Im *NOT *imagining things eh? Perhaps the old 'mind my own business in queues and elsewhere' attitude just cant allow one to see whats actually going on.


So just to be clear - is your understanding of 'large numbers of people' based on personal experience and knowledge, or based on what you've read in our right-wing media?


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> So just to be clear - is your understanding of 'large numbers of people' based on personal experience and knowledge, or based on what you've read in our right-wing media?


 
Personal experience, conversations with friends, what I see with my own two eyes, what I read on forums such as this and others, very little from the 'right-wing media' actually. But it is interesting to see that what Im seeing around me is also being reported on.


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

Shame on you if you don't bother reporting you see around me. It seems that some people prefer to moan about a problem rather than actually taking action to fix the problem.


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Shame on you if you don't bother reporting you see around me. It seems that some people prefer to moan about a problem rather than actually taking action to fix the problem.


 
I thought you wanted me to mind my own business and not 'overhear' conversations?


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> I thought you wanted me to mind my own business and not 'overhear' conversations?


But you've told me that you already have this intimate personal knowledge of these situations - right? Regardless of your future earwigging approach, you are already personally aware of 'large numbers of people' defrauding the state of their welfare entitlements. And you choose to do nothing about it?


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Regardless of your future earwigging approach.....


 
Brilliant 
Youre coming out with some gems today Complainer!


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> And you choose to do nothing about it?


 
I dont know their names, and I wouldnt ask because Im minding my own business


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

truthseeker said:


> I dont know their names, and I wouldnt ask because Im minding my own business


Seems strange as to how you can absolute certainty about people's social welfare status and absolute certainty about them defrauding the system, but you don't actually know their names? 

Could it be the case that this is just street gossip that you have, and maybe it's not that reliable at all?


----------



## Ceist Beag (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> Could it be the case that this is just street gossip that you have, and maybe it's not that reliable at all?



Complainer instead of getting involved in personal jibes are you saying that you don't believe the tribune report - that it is "right wing media" making this up? Or can you not admit that there has been widespread welfare fraud in this country, even if you haven't personally witnessed it?


----------



## Caveat (5 Nov 2010)

It would be useful to know, just for future reference like, if there is a media source that Complainer will accept information from?

Goes without saying too obviously that if the same "right wing media" ever have anything positive to say about the public sector or unions that we should also dismiss this as unreliable.

Or is it only unreliable if you don't like the sound of it?


----------



## Firefly (5 Nov 2010)

Caveat said:


> It would be useful to know, just for future reference like, if there is a media source that Complainer will accept information from?
> 
> Goes without saying too obviously that if the same "right wing media" ever have anything positive to say about the public sector or unions that we should also dismiss this as unreliable.
> 
> Or is it only unreliable if you don't like the sound of it?


 

And the prize goes to you for this week's top post. (Sorry Purple, I know someone already nominated you!).


----------



## Complainer (5 Nov 2010)

Ceist Beag said:


> Complainer instead of getting involved in personal jibes are you saying that you don't believe the tribune report - that it is "right wing media" making this up? Or can you not admit that there has been widespread welfare fraud in this country, even if you haven't personally witnessed it?





Caveat said:


> It would be useful to know, just for future reference like, if there is a media source that Complainer will accept information from?
> 
> Goes without saying too obviously that if the same "right wing media" ever have anything positive to say about the public sector or unions that we should also dismiss this as unreliable.
> 
> Or is it only unreliable if you don't like the sound of it?



You miss the point, folks. I'm actually not making any comment about the level of welfare fraud in this country.

What I'm challenging is whether truthseeker actually has reliable, personal knowledge of 'large numbers of people' engaging in welfare fraud.


----------



## Ceist Beag (5 Nov 2010)

Nitpicking in other words!! I hardly think it is contentious to say that large numbers of people were engaging in welfare fraud based on the reports published on the savings made in the past while!


----------



## truthseeker (5 Nov 2010)

Complainer said:


> What I'm challenging is whether truthseeker actually has reliable, personal knowledge of 'large numbers of people' engaging in welfare fraud.


 
Complainer, Ive already explained to you what I see around me, that Ive had conversations with friends who see similar, that I read other forums such as these and read about people actively engaging in fraud, I can also point to articles linked in this thread but you have decided to dismiss them as 'right wing media' although it suited you to use them to back yourself up in another thread.

Now you can choose to believe me or not - and you continually decide not to and badger me to know personal details of people I overhear bragging about their benefits and their side cash jobs. I dont know their names. I do know that not only do I see it around me, but one would have to be a fool not to know its going on. Not just me either, newspapers, other forums, people I interact with in work and socially talk about it. Its rife in our society and if you wish to think it is not then thats your perogative.

You are refusing to acknowledge the truth even when its pointed out for you in various links. But hey, thats your choice, you have already stated you like to mind your own business and not take notice of what goes on around you in the world - I suggest if you did take notice you would see the same as the rest of us.

Im not going to continue to respond to your posts as Id rather not give validation to an obviously blinkered perspective by actually pointing out the real situation over and over again. Believe whatever you like.


----------



## shnaek (5 Nov 2010)

Everyone to the right of the extreme left is right wing in Ireland! Even Joe Duffy has been described as 'Extreme Right Wing'!!


----------

