Focus on the job or the post, not the person. In our current environment and system, no cleaner or kitchen hand is going to earn a living wage. So when one kitchen hand gets promoted, the problem just moves to his or her replacement - the new person getting the crappy wage.
Be honest now: when you book an Irish plumber or electrician, do you really expect him (and tragically, it's always a 'him') to turn up on time? Are you all that surprised if he doesn't turn up at all? But then you might get a phone call a couple of days later saying, sorry, he got tied up on another job, so he'll pop round tomorrow. Ask him why he didn't phone, and he'll throw you a few porkies.
And until recently a tradesman would earn far, far more then a solicitor for example, a job which involves years of exams and qualifications.
Solicitors have to train for years and pass exams as well you know.
..and serve the two slots in an office before they are qualified
Was my post unclear?
Actually it wasn't, maybe you should read it again
Of course they do, go to college and do the FE-1 exams and serve the two slots in an office before they are qualified
Trades people have to train for years and pass exams as well.
Solicitors have to train for years and pass exams as well you know.
What you are highlighting is a failure of the governments health system, the very institution that you put so much faith in when it comes running the economy. I've brought up the following calculation before:You end up in the same position as many low and middle earners - your family get sick and you are unable to afford doctors fees and drug fees for anything but the most serious of conditions. If you are unlucky enough to have a serious condition, you might die while waiting for treatment. But to be honest, you would probably have died on the medical card too.
That's why I did. You only get FIS if you have kids. There are many unemployed that do not have kids.I didn't mention kids, so I'm not sure I get your question about kids?
Here's a quick calculation that shows the disincentive of FIS for a low paid worker with 1 child:Not true. FIS has no poverty trap. If you earn more, you do indeed lose the equivalent FIS, but you don't end up worse off. If you do have the opportunity to earn more (through overtime or promotion or whatever), there is no disincentive to progressing.
FIS is not limited to one year. If you still qualify after one year, you have to reapply. http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Publications/SW22/Pages/10HowlongdoestheFISpaymentlast.aspx
You do not need some exceptional talent to get a career started or a job that pays closer to the average income. And most people do have enough brains, but are lacking work ethic and incentive. There are plenty of colleges that offer night courses for diplomas and degrees, and they are not prohibitively expensive.It is of course possible for people of exceptional talent and commitment to develop and build a career or a business from modest roots. But most people don't have that talent, and get frustrated at the lack of fairness and equity in the system. They look around them and see those who get to move up the ranks because Daddy owns the business, or because they went to the 'right' school or they play on the 'right' rugby team. We are a long, long way off a fair and balanced system where talent and commitment bring fair rewards. But even if we had this perfect system with equal opportunities for everyone to develop, this still misses the point. Focus on the job or the post, not the person. In our current environment and system, no cleaner or kitchen hand is going to earn a living wage. So when one kitchen hand gets promoted, the problem just moves to his or her replacement - the new person getting the crappy wage.
I grew up in a rural area where none of what Myers is talking about would apply..
Never said they didn't.
And my first post was I wasn't fan of labeling people into different classes based on their job so I can't see how I'm being elitist.
In a republic everyone is supposed to be equal, well that's my belief
Elitist am I?
Think I'll give this thread a miss, can't be back to explain my post again for a 4th time
I don't remember posting otherwise, I don't see your point or where I need to be corrected
I agree with all of the points he makes
I fully accept that it was the supposed great and good that were running things when Ireland hit the rocks but to ignore the anti-educational bias amongst large sections of the population is not going to get us anywhere. So called Working Class pride; “I have nothing, my kids will have nothing and I’m proud of that.”
Poverty is more a social problem than an economic one. While we pretend otherwise we won’t solve out poverty issued.
I don't buy that for a second and I don't buy that this is Myer's point. You really think that all, or even a majority of working class people are proud that their kids have nothing? Really? Sure, there are some, but Myers is indicating this is the mindset of the majority and that's bull. It's bull because of all the working class families I know (including my own) the vast majority of parents want to give everything they can just so their kids have something and don't have the life they did as children and that includes education.
A friend of mine grew up in Tallaght, very close to where I was born. His parents sent him and his brother to a private school. They scrimped and saved to do so. The people who gave them a hard time about it weren’t the other kids in his school or the parents of those children, it was their neighbours. I remember his getting abused by his friends father because supposedly he thought he was too good for the local school.I see no pride whatsoever in the majority of people who saw their parents struggle when they were young and I certainly don't see that transferred to their kids. I do see an acknowledgement that the odds are against them from the start, like they can't afford the best pre-school, schools, tutors, etc and so immediately their kids are going to have to work that bit harder to compete. I see acceptance that it'll be harder to get to college. I see an acceptance that there's still prejudice in certain "middle class" professions where the right school, the right college and the right “postcode” still counts. Some occasional working class upstart gets through the system, but they’relabelled as having a chip on their shoulder. To insinuate that the vast majority of working class parents are happy to see their kids do nothing and claim off the state is just pathetic and abhorrent.
I agree to a certain extent there; nobody is perfect. Personally I find the whole “Working Class” and “Middle Class” tags very distasteful in a Republic.And are we to believe that every middle class person take's their child's education seriously? That their only motivation is their child? I call bull on that too. Here's my own sweeping generalisation, but the vast majority of that stuff is competing with other parents and bragging rights, nothing to do with the child at all. Its look how great I am I've put my child through the best school and how brainy my genetic material is. "My son the engineer".
But those examples are just examples of being a lazy human, not exclusive examples of a particular socio-economic banding.
I've seen the "lazy" working class, the criminals (petty and major) and the scroungers. But I've seen far far more parents who have more or less given the shirt off their backs to make sure their kids had what they didn't. And living around the part of the world I do (epitome of upper middle class) I see whole generations where everything is handed to them by Daddy/Mummy. I see the same sense of "right to behave that way" and attitude in those circles. I see similar issues when it comes to schooling, for resentment see isolation, remarks and judgement because some can't afford the right school. It's a different side of the same thing.
Maybe it's a chip on my shoulder, but to read that wholesale knocking of a group of people just because a plumber is late is the kind of ill informed snobbery I expect on an internet forum, not a journalist, even Myers.
Distasteful, and worthless - for when people speak of "Working Class" they tend to mean people on social welfare. The class system, if it ever existed in Ireland, does not exist any more. We have the rich and the poor, and most of us somewhere inbetween.Personally I find the whole “Working Class” and “Middle Class” tags very distasteful in a Republic.
Actually neither. My claim is that welfare programs have not reduced the amount of people living below the poverty line, because the rules of welfare programs are such, that as soon as you work you lose your entitlements. And in many cases work will pay less than welfare, so there is no incentive to work. Unless you have a job you will not learn new skills or even be able to get a carreer off the ground.
Can anyone tell me what the definition of the poverty line is?
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?