Poverty in Ireland

Maybe cut off the soft financial supply and see what the reaction would be. Just for starters.:rolleyes:
 
noproblem said:
Maybe cut off the soft financial supply and see what the reaction would be. Just for starters.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If we were to start cutting off the soft financial supply to the people gaming the system and started at with the biggest offenders is would be a long time before we get to the people you would like to see hit first but of course it would be stopped long before then by lobby groups ,




We in Ireland love turning a blind eye to people gaming the system so it is handy to blame the people you are on about

The fact is we are going to be a very high tax Country for as long as you live the top 10 to 20%% along with all unearned Income will be Taxed to feed all of the people gaming the system and the people you are on about are only a very small part of the problem but are very handy so we don't notice the real offenders gaming the system,
 
Last edited:
how do we as a society deal with children whose parents can't or won't parent them properly? It seems to me the choices are the penal system or the education system. I'd prefer the latter. Morality aside it's much cheaper and has been shown to produce better results.
They would buy and sell you


We then have to decide what we do with the parents.

The British used to be able to round up their undesirables and send them to the Colonies.
It did not always work out so well for the British long term,( hope you are not offended ) often worked out for the so called undesirables

We can't do that so we we just forget about them or do we reconstruct our welfare and educational system to stop perpetuating the same cycle of inter-generational dependence?[/QUOTE]

The only option divert some of the money already being gamed by other groups at present
 
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess said:
As Miriam might say, let me stop you there.

Why?

I don't want to see an equal society. I actually believe that people who have studied and trained for ten years to qualify as a medical specialist and who work 80 hour weeks should earn far more than someone who has never done a day's work in their life.

I think that a 65 year old who has worked for 40 years should have more wealth than someone who is just leaving college (Age is a big determiner of inequality.)

I want to see an 80 year old who has saved up for their retirement being better off than an 80 year old who lived a flamboyant lifestyle and now has no money left.

I would like to see people who are working in low paid jobs getting priority for social housing close to where they work over people who have never worked and have no intention of working.

And I believe that someone who lives within their means and chooses to pay for private health insurance should get better and faster health care than someone who chooses to spend their money on drink and cigarettes.

I want to see a fair society where work and risk are rewarded and people who choose not to work are poor.

I would like to see equality of opportunity, but acknowledge that the children of wealthy parents have much better opportunities, so government policy should try to redress this imbalance in some way. Deis schools is a good example, although I am not sure if they are working.

Brendan
Click to expand...
A problem with much of this Brendan is that someone needs to differentiate between the morally deserving and the undeserving. For example:

1. The medical doctor who comes from a stable background which allows for college (and all the conditions that make that choice viable) vs those who don't have this in their background and therefore cannot achieve what might otherwise be possible, circumstances allowing.

2. The pennywise vs pound foolish 80 yrs old who blew money on whatever. Someone needs to view these two and adjudicate on who and why one is more deserving than the other. This equally applies to the 'person(s) living within their means'(whatever this even means) vs those who don't, and likewise those deserving ones who get access to social housing and those who don't or won't. Someone is going to have to decide and adjudicate between the 'deserving and the undeserving' and sit in judgement on their fellow citizens. Who is qualified to do this?Who could be? That is why the principle of 'universal benefits' has a particular appeal - despite its obvious drawbacks. The Guardian ran an article on a concept that is gaining wider appeal called 'basic income.' i think it might also be trialled in Scotland. https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...versal-basic-income-trial-too-good-to-be-true

There was very good academic piece on equality done a few yrs ago that might be of interest. http://www.philosophy.rutgers.edu/joomlatools-files/docman-files/4ElizabethAnderson.pdf

On the broader issue I think we do need to tackle the issue of meaning in people's lives going forward. Particularly in view of the demise of routine work roles as technology evolves. A survivor of the Nazi death camps, Viktor Frankel, wrote a gem of a book called ' Man's search for Meaning.' The conclusion of this seminal work was that man (sic) needs a purpose, and that the purpose has to be outside of himself, in others. I think we all know that a raison d'etre is a core element of our psychological welfare, and maybe we need to look at ways this can be inculcated into people's lives. The curious thing I notice in society is that a large proportion of our prison population comes from a few districts from the larger cities. We spend a fortune locking up people, yet comparatively little in educating them, particularly the most disadvantaged. I imagine a good place to start would be to look at social supports and welfare as an investment. I used to live in a major EU city with a superb social care system. Unsurprisingly, crime is low and, by almost every barometer of human progress, outcomes are better. We know this is true in almost all Nordic countries. This isn't rocket science. But it must begin with getting away from dividing people into the deserving and the undeserving.
 
noproblem said:
Maybe cut off the soft financial supply and see what the reaction would be. Just for starters.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
There are lots of people gaming the system why are you so hell bent of hitting the people who have nothing to fall back on, look around you and you will see lots of greedy people gaming the system why not start there,

Unless I picked up purple incorrectly he is posting about the young adults and what we can do to help them feel the can contribute and feel part of our society,
 
Last edited:
DeclanDublin said:
The curious thing I notice in society is that a large proportion of our prison population comes from a few districts from the larger cities. We spend a fortune locking up people, yet comparatively little in educating them, particularly the most disadvantaged. I imagine a good place to start would be to look at social supports and welfare as an investment. I used to live in a major EU city with a superb social care system. Unsurprisingly, crime is low and, by almost every barometer of human progress, outcomes are better. We know this is true in almost all Nordic countries. This isn't rocket science. But it must begin with getting away from dividing people into the deserving and the undeserving.
Click to expand...

Your comments bear no relation to actual government spending in Ireland.

In 2017 government spending in Ireland was:
I think the wheel has spun the other way. There's a generation of criminals the streets today who should be in prison, who are in their 20s and no amount of social protection or eduation spending will reach them. Look at the guys involved in feud incidents they all have charge sheets as long as your arm. They should have been put away for decades for the offences they've already committed, so they wouldn't be in a position to commit even more serious crimes.

I don't know why the outcomes are so different for Ireland v Nordic countries, is it in how they are spending their money? But one thing for sure, it is not as simple as mere budgetary priorities.

I'm not sure how much of the Nordic experience is transferrable to Ireland... They have their own conundrums to crack... Sweden has a murder rate twice that of Norway... why?
 
Last edited:
This is obviously a complex problem odyssey, and probably not amenable to short answers. The problems may relate more to how money is spent and separately how the legal system works, amongst many other factors. Early childhood intervention is shown to help in terms of offending by working in areas of educational disadvantage via the DEIS scheme. There is a strong argument that money spent in earlier years can be saved by not incarcerating people in later years. That poverty, disadvantage and crime are linked are self-evident. Some info on this is here: https://www.education.ie/en/Schools...livering-Equality-of-Opportunity-in-Schools-/ I heard an interview on Marianne F. 2 weeks ago with 2 people from the inner city in Dublin. One telling point was that they felt excluded. One mentioned that the joke in the inner city was that they belonged to the outer city. The reference was in relation to the IFSC which abuts some of Dublin's most deprived areas. People felt it was where the 1st world met the 3rd and never the twain should meet. Such levels of exclusion and alienation are not conducive to solving the problem. As for the revolving door of criminality and bail, one would have to look at how this works and its obvious failings. I think there are strong vested interests that gain from the whole justice system and resist change. Wasn't this a point made by the Troika when they were here? One we never addressed.
 
The old concept of hard power and soft power come to mind. In international terms, using the USA as an example, hard power is the military and soft power is McDonald's and Disney and Hollywood.
We need both here too; we need to show those who engage in a criminal lifestyle, i.e. multiple convictions and a life funded by crime, that they will spend most of their life in prison but we also need to show people that there is an alternative.
I spoke to a guy from Finland before about the difference between here and there and he said that in Finland receiving welfare was seen as a personal failure, that you were living off your neighbours and generally quite humiliating whereas in Ireland is was a right and a perfectly acceptable lifestyle choice for some people.
 
DeclanDublin said:
I heard an interview on Marianne F. 2 weeks ago with 2 people from the inner city in Dublin. One telling point was that they felt excluded. One mentioned that the joke in the inner city was that they belonged to the outer city. The reference was in relation to the IFSC which abuts some of Dublin's most deprived areas. People felt it was where the 1st world met the 3rd and never the twain should meet. Such levels of exclusion and alienation are not conducive to solving the problem.
Click to expand...

It would have been interesting if she had asked them if they felt their lives would be better if instead of the IFSC next to them, they'd rather have any deprived area? Ask them where they think the money that funds their schools comes from - in part it comes from the people who get up early to work in the IFSC. Do they see that connection???
They certainly seem to be alienated, I am not at all convinced that they are excluded.

Those areas were even more deprived, in material terms, in the 1950s and 1960s. Yet there didn't seem to be alienation. Why? You were expected to work and earn and make your way and it was seen as a personal failure if you did not (as per Norway). That is the view of my parents, and they grew up on the same streets that today people are being shot on around D1. They wouldn't even understand the concept of alienation, and if anyone tried to exclude them, they'd get an earful.

We need to get these people working. In society. Feeling useful. And welfare (as Ireland doles it out) is stopping that from happening, though it is alleviating the material deprivation of earlier times.
 
We need to stop rewarding people for the simple act of reproducing - if you have a kid, here's €140 per month and you've now got a much better chance of getting a council house!
-The father's need to be hit hard to pay for the kids they produce (automatic deductions from welfare or wages).
-Pay girls/women at risk of poverty/having multiple children too soon to not have babies i.e. give them an allowance until they reach a certain age...tie further education, work experience etc into the equation
-Cap social welfare. It should not pay more than the average industrial wage to have a couple of kids and never have worked a day in your life.

Stop giving people social housing in the areas in which they grew up. Break the cycle, get them away from the bad influences. Working people have to move counties/countries to chase jobs and no one shrieks about them leaving their 'support networks' or 'communities'.

Put criminals in jail, not out on bail, not on continuous suspended sentences pending probation reports etc. Stop concurrent sentencing...it's a licence to commit as many crimes as possible in a short space of time after getting caught for one.
This will mean taking on the real Government of Ireland, the legal industry. The Troika tried and didn't succeed. Putting criminals away for long time will mean less legal aid for our Betters and it will be hard to get this through, but it simply has to be done.
The PD's/FF spent millions on a few fields in North Dublin for a prison back in the boom. Build the thing and start locking hundreds of recalcitrant people up until the message gets out there. Or even better, build it well away from Dublin and spread some jobs around.

Keep ploughing money into schools in deprived areas and into sports facilities. Get them into college where a whole new world opens up, if thats suitable. Otherwise get a proper apprentice scheme going in this country...plumbers, electricians etc earn big money and they are good jobs which are in demand. Get the word out there, let the children in these areas see another life is possible.
 
Last edited:
Delboy said:
We need to stop rewarding people for the simple act of reproducing - if you have a kid, here's €140 per month and you've now got a much better chance of getting a council house!
-The father's need to be hit hard to pay for the kids they produce (automatic deductions from welfare or wages).
-Pay girls/women at risk of poverty/having multiple children too soon to not have babies i.e. give them an allowance until they reach a certain age...tie further education, work experience etc into the equation
-Cap social welfare. It should not pay more than the average industrial wage to have a couple of kids and never have worked a day in your life.

Stop giving people social housing in the areas in which they grew up. Break the cycle, get them away from the bad influences. Working people have to move counties/countries to chase jobs and no one shrieks about them leaving their 'support networks' or 'communities'.

Put criminals in jail, not out on bail, not on continuous suspended sentences pending probation reports etc. Stop concurrent sentencing...it's a licence to commit as many crimes as possible in a short space of time after getting caught for one.
This will mean taking on the real Government of Ireland, the legal industry. The Troika tried and didn't succeed. Putting criminals away for long time will mean less legal aid for our Betters and it will be hard to get this through, but it simply has to be done.
The PD's/FF spent millions on a few fields in North Dublin for a prison back in the boom. Build the thing and start locking hundreds of recalcitrant people up until the message gets out there. Or even better, build it well away from Dublin and spread some jobs around.

Keep ploughing money into schools in deprived areas and into sports facilities. Get them into college where a whole new world opens up, if thats suitable. Otherwise get a proper apprentice scheme going in this country...plumbers, electricians etc earn big money and they are good jobs which are in demand. Get the word out there, let the children in these areas see another life is possible.
Click to expand...


Completely agree with this. Some people are beyond help yet we seem to think we should help them no matter what. We are all great at saying we should do this or that but when it affects us personally then its a different story. Look at those who object to planning permission for social housing. They are all in favour of more housing but "not in my back yard".

Criminals should be put in prison full stop. They are a menace to society we seem to look after the criminal but not the victim. At what point do we actually look at wider society and say if someone is an habitual criminal they should lose their freedom rather than have society suffer just because we think the criminal can be rehabilitated. How often do we here in the media of some one with multiple convictions in front of a judge. These people will never change if they have not changed with the chances they have received in the past what makes us think they will change now.
 
The Horseman said:
These people will never change if they have not changed with the chances they have received in the past what makes us think they will change now.
Click to expand...
There is a strong link between crime and addiction, particularly drug addiction. Without rehab sending addicts to prison is zero deterrent. Therefore if we want addicts to shop breaking the law then send then to rehab rather than prison.
 
I think there's an immutable link between poverty, exclusion and crime. I agree people need to have work, and that's linked to a sense of well-being and belonging. There may well have been a different spirit in the 50's or 60's much like there was a certain camaraderie during the blitz. Drugs changed all that. As did the wide availability of guns. We are where we are. My point remains that dealing with poverty and its consequences through education is perhaps the only way to solve the problem long term.
 
DeclanDublin said:
I think there's an immutable link between poverty, exclusion and crime. I agree people need to have work, and that's linked to a sense of well-being and belonging. There may well have been a different spirit in the 50's or 60's much like there was a certain camaraderie during the blitz. Drugs changed all that. As did the wide availability of guns. We are where we are. My point remains that dealing with poverty and its consequences through education is perhaps the only way to solve the problem long term.
Click to expand...
Agreed but, again, poverty is a symptom of other problems. Poverty doesn't cause lack of education, bad parenting, antisocial behaviour, exclusion and crime; lack of education, bad parenting, antisocial behaviour, exclusion and crime cause poverty.
 
Purple said:
There is a strong link between crime and addiction, particularly drug addiction. Without rehab sending addicts to prison is zero deterrent. Therefore if we want addicts to shop breaking the law then send then to rehab rather than prison.
Click to expand...

Or let's just cut out the justice costs entirely and legalise it... Think it'd be a lot cheaper to treat it as a rehab issue than a criminal one, and we wouldn't have powerful criminal gangs being created from its profits.
 
odyssey06 said:
Or let's just cut out the justice costs entirely and legalise it... Think it'd be a lot cheaper to treat it as a rehab issue than a criminal one, and we wouldn't have powerful criminal gangs being created from its profits.
Click to expand...
I agree. Talk to the Gardai and ask them how many cases they see as mental health issues are treated a criminal issues.
 
A mother with a loaded gun hidden in a pram along with a child, on her way to hand that gun to a criminal friend and then she's let go by our justice system???????? Only in Ireland!
 
noproblem said:
A mother with a loaded gun hidden in a pram along with a child, on her way to hand that gun to a criminal friend and then she's let go by our justice system???????? Only in Ireland!
Click to expand...
There was a clear exonerating circumstance there though; she's a woman.
 
We can differentiate between long term preventative interventions, like early childhood education and supports, and dealing with immediate issues. By the time someone is actively engaged with the criminal justice system rehabilitation is very difficult (but not impossible, depending on the nature of the offences). Of course society needs to be protected from dangerous and habitual criminals.But the next generation are coming shortly behind.

I think the main point here is on the long-term. Children do not choose their environment, culture or parents. Good quality early intervention can help break the cycle. One great difficulty is ensuring that it is "good quality" and that it is maintained (even a good service can deteriorate quickly unless management and quality control are on the ball). Simple child-minding is not enough - nor giving cash to parents to do "more of the same".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top