truthseeker
Registered User
- Messages
- 2,577
Ok. sponger remark unfair and withdrawn.I was reacting to the the landlady who said that it galled her to see the unemployed getting social welfare.
However if people paid rent to landlords from their unemployment assistance\benefit there would be no issue. Supply and Demand would mean that landlords would have no choice but to accept what people could afford to pay.
However this is not the case. Rent Allowance cheques are only given to those who can prove that the full amount ends up in a Landlords pocket.
It is therefore a subsidy or welfare payment to landlords. The fact that landlords give something in exchange does not change this.
e.g. suppose the unemployed were told that they would get €10 a week Bread allowance. However the full amount had to be given to a baker in exchange for one loaf of bread and recepients had to show proof that this had occured. I would see this as a subsidy to bakers rather than the unemployed.
Tax relief wouldn't help those who most need it, who would be paying little or no tax anyway. The laws of supply & demand mean that it would almost certainly lead to an equivalent increase in creche costs, resulting in a large subsidy for creche operators and little benefit for their customers.How about even tax relief on childcare costs? That would help a huge amount of people, it would certainly help me! It seems like you can get tax relief on practically everything but childcare, and that is the biggest monthly outlay for a lot of people.
Now you're withdrawing the 'sponger remark' and misquoting me as well!Ok. sponger remark unfair and withdrawn.I was reacting to the the landlady who said that it galled her to see the unemployed getting social welfare.
Madisona, you're either incapable of understanding what is being written here or are deliberately mis-quoting me to provoke a response.A couple came to see it with their 3 children - he was introduced as the Boyfriend and in later conversation it transpired that he was the father of the 3 children.
Now let me be clear, my annoyance is not so much at landlords, but rather at landlords who are annoyed at poor people who are in effect forced to commit fraud for their benefit.
When Seamus Brennan was Minister for Social & Family Affairs, I heard him state his intention to remove the requirement to be living on your own to be eligible for such benefits, largely because it was unenforceable. Not sure if this has happened or will happen. Come back, Seamus - all is forgiven.
Not like Bertie to shaft one of his few effective ministers…Just heard Joan Burton's speech today calling on the Minister to implement these promised changes, so I guess they certainly haven't happened yet.
When Seamus Brennan was Minister for Social & Family Affairs, I heard him state his intention to remove the requirement to be living on your own to be eligible for such benefits, largely because it was unenforceable. Not sure if this has happened or will happen. Come back, Seamus - all is forgiven.
He also mentioned, at the same time as he was talking about doing away with the co-habitation rule, that he would introduce conditions that a lone parent would have to go to work/training/education when the child reached 6 years of age in order to keep the payment. You still want him back?
Fascist! Nazi! Neo-Con Capitalist pig!Why shouldnt a lone parent go into work/training/education when their child is 6 years of age and in school all day?
Well said!Fascist! Nazi! Neo-Con Capitalist pig!
How dare you suggest that people should be self-sufficient and imply that the welfare system should be used to help them reach that goal and not as a free income for life!
Why shouldnt a lone parent go into work/training/education when their child is 6 years of age and in school all day?
Why indeed?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?