Poverty in Ireland

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...
Agreed. We need to decriminalise drugs and provide safe injecting sites. This has happened in Portugal with some promising results Altho I have to disagree Purple about poverty not being a root cause of most other social problems. Without a doubt, addiction exists everywhere in society, but the combination of addiction, cultural norms, exclusion, even low societal expectations, means that people born in certain areas, generally poor areas, continue to be poor and show up disproportionately in the justice system. Slum clearance across the world has generally led to improved outcomes at all levels. When I was living in major EU city that consistently ranks as the best place to live in the world, there was a commitment to ensuring people from various economic groups were mixed into all areas. Social housing appeared everywhere. There are no ghettos.
 
Well this thread is controversial. I was expecting some bleeding hearts to come along. I'm happy to see they're not here yet. I agree with most of the posts so far.

For my 2c. I'm all for education and improving peoples lives to allow them to lift themselves out of poverty. We also need a stage where we start to put the rights of the people who contribute to society ahead of the people who damage it. I think we're skewed towards protecting the vulnerable, which is correct, but we seem to include criminals in the vulnerable category.
Look at the newspapers any day of the week. Career or serious criminals are being given suspended sentences every week. The extenuating circumstances (from recent cases I've seen) include gender, whether the person is a parent and whether the person is really sorry for committing crime number 50 for which they're in court. At some stage we need to draw a line under some criminals and say for the safety of society we need to lock you up for a long time. Give people a fair chance but if you're up for conviction number 10 or 20 or more then who's going to object to throwing away the key for a long time.

An example is that "lady" that got the suspended sentence for carrying a loaded gun. Her time was suspended due to her "personal circumstances". https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2018/0219/941809-nikita-murtagh-court/
Do we have to wait for somebody to be murdered with the gun before she should get a reasonable sentence? If that's me, or somebody in my family I won't give a damn about her personal circumstances. And what were here personal circumstances. Is that a defense I can use if I'm ever in court. If it's good enough for somebody carrying a loaded gun it should be good enough for me if I'm ever in court (hopefully if I am it'll be for a significantly lesser crime). It must be pretty demoralizing for the Gardai? Why bother? Put your life at risk to stop these criminals and they just go through a revolving door.
 
I'm not suggesting that the areas of highest crime are poor. I am suggesting that the simple fact that they are poor is not the root cause for all of the other issues. You said it yourself with "but the combination of addiction, cultural norms, exclusion, even low societal expectations, means that people born in certain areas, generally poor areas, continue to be poor and show up disproportionately in the justice system" The factors you listed result in these areas being poor, not the other way around.
 
There is a conspiring of circumstances that lead to poor outcomes. Is poverty a key driver? I think it is. Is it alone? No. You could list out innumerable factors that, in the round, combine to continue the cycle of poverty. Poor parenting, addiction(s), poor achievement of parents, bad health and poor health choices, abuse, a culture of dependency, lack of employment, etc. The list could go on. But I think the experience of most societies that education is the key driver of better outcomes across the board. So I think the solution to it is evidenced in more socially cohesive societies by addressing the problem(s) in a range of ways that empower people to avail of and make better choices and achieve better outcomes. Tackling deprivation, however it arises would be part of that solution. What seems important to me is to take out the blaming element that often creeps into these debates and which achieves nothing. I know people who grew up in poor areas, or with poor parenting and more and never resorted to crime. We probably all do.This doesn't change the fact that something about how we organise society isn't working. The problem exists, however it was caused it needs to be addressed. From a purely financial basis, if nothing else, education would seem to be the way to tackle it. We need to invest in kids education so we don't have to lock em up later.
 
The might be up before the courts I suspect there are higher crime rates we never hear about, Lots are doing a good job that we never hear about,
 
I'm going to (try) avoid clashing with the stereotypical, prejudiced and ill-informed commentary contained within some of the posts above and stick to what I think the OP is basically trying to do, namely, commence a discussion that brings with it progressive ideas that may break the perpetual cycle of poverty that is prevails in some areas of our society.
The level of poverty can, and does, vary within society, but also within all our perceptions of what poverty is. So even trying to define what is poverty, absolute and relative, is a cause for disagreement in itself and thus lends itself to the political system to somehow unravel those disagreements into some sort of policy which invariably not everyone agrees with.

So some things I agree with in the OP are the overall sentiment to try find a way to break the cycle of poverty, and, perhaps more crucially to end the perpetual political solution of simply throwing more and more money at a problem in the vein hope it will fix it (or for the more cynically minded, move off the agenda).

What I may not agree with is that in the absence of alternative, progressive ideas to end the cycle of poverty is that in actual fact the welfare system as it is, is the best way. Notwithstanding the very valid point that while on-paper our society is equal, in reality there are huge gaps in our society. And while the welfare system does paper over a lot of those gaps, I would add that those supports do provide a security base for a lot of honest hard-working people who through no fault of their own may have got a bum deal somewhere along the way, illness, death in the family, job loss, alcohol addiction, gambling addiction, assaulted or raped or robbed...even to have been broken-hearted can set off a chain of events that lead to wrong decisions being made and ultimately to poverty and dependency.

So I think it's a good idea to have the discussion, but I would be wary of laying blame or responsibility at feet of any particular grouping for societal poverty. Instead, it would be refreshing to hear some ideas that are untypical responses.
I have a few ideas around use of technology and attitudes to alcohol which I hope to share during this discourse.
 
TheBigShort said:
I'm going to (try) avoid clashing with the stereotypical, prejudiced and ill-informed commentary contained within some of the posts above
Click to expand...

How dare you.

You don’t have to agree with other posters. It may be the case that they all share a similar outlook.

But what gives you the right to come along with condescending snotty remarks like that in a thread where people have been expressing concerns about important issues in Irish society and making genuine efforts to suggest possible approaches to dealing with those issues.
 
You may even had something worth reading to contribute, coming from a different perspective. But after that opening I wasn’t going to read any further.
 
I'm not suggesting we spend less. We may have to spend more. What I am suggesting is that we have an end goal and a plan on how to get there rather than just sustaining the intolerable.
 
Purple said:
I'm not suggesting we spend less. We may have to spend more. What I am suggesting is that we have an end goal and a plan on how to get there rather than just sustaining the intolerable.
Click to expand...

Which brings the topic nicely onto how the cycle of poverty can be broken by other means.
Alcohol is, or rather abuse of of alcohol is a major factor in creating and perpetuating the cycle of poverty imo. However, aside from some public awareness campaigns (mostly drink driving) very little of significance is ever offered to support the concept of alcohol free lifestyle or to educate, particularly young people, the dangers of alcohol.

Im not for a moment suggesting to be a party-pooper, but when you have young kids there is a tendency to hope that they dont make the same mistakes as I did.

With that, in all my life it has become apparent that either our legislators are beholden to the drinks industry or that all the education, advice, studies on alcohol consumption has left experts to conclude that there are only two significant deterrents in managing peoples alcohol consumption - dont drink and drive and you must be 18yrs and over. Thats it. And neither work very well imo.

So what I propose, given the age of technology that we are in, that someone somewhere thinks of ideas that can better educate people with regard to alcohol, its consumption and its dangers.

One proposal I would suggest, by no means a panecea for any societies alcohol problems is to make the purchase of alcohol a card only purchase. No more cash payments for alcohol.
Hardly revolutionary, but here are some possible effects

1) Underage drinking could be thwarted as debit cards could identify the age of purchaser.
2) For 18yr olds, laws could be set to limit how much money could be spent on debit cards for alcohol products on daily/weekly basis.
3) Penalty points (yes, you read right) could be added to debit cards where anyone is engaged in a drunken brawl, vomiting in a public place, staggering onto public roads etc
4) The penalty points are added to your debit card and the next time you buy a drink, the price has increased say 25%, for six months.
5) On the plus side, anyone without any penalty points will see their daily quota rise as the get older, and also see a price reduction on the purchase.

I suspect there will could be a hundred scenarios as to why none of this would work, or why it is unfair etc...etc...but the underlying point is that our attitude to alcohol is primitive considering the toxic nature of the product when it is abused.
 
Last edited:
Your solution to poverty is a totalitarian state on the unfounded pretext that alcohol is a major cause of poverty...

Limit how much people can spend based on their age??? A state interfering like that in the lives is totalitarian. Whatever revenue our current government needs you can triple it for this totalitarian state with an expanded army of civil servants to police us all in this way.

In any kind of free society... people find a way to indulge their vices... prohibition of alcohol didnt work... illegal drugs are readily available
... I guarantee you an alcoholic will find a way to get that drink unless you have a stasi to stop them.
 
Last edited:
odyssey06 said:
Your solution to poverty is a totalitarian state on the unfounded pretext that alcohol is a major cause of poverty...
Click to expand...

Alcohol abuse, imo, can lead to poverty, and is a factor in perpetuating that poverty.

odyssey06 said:
Limit how much people can spend based on their age???
Click to expand...

Limit how much an 18yr old can spend on alcohol, please read the post.
How much is a 17yr old allowed to spend on alcohol?
Any limits placed on L-drivers before they take the wheel? Any limits on who can smoke tobacco, enter an Adult store, earn a minimum wage, get married, vote, etc...there are plenty of age limits in place for all sorts of things.

odyssey06 said:
Whatever revenue our current government needs you can triple it for this totalitarian state with an expanded army of civil servants to police us all in this way.
Click to expand...

Actually, the thinking would be to reduce government spending.
You see the only way I can have a PP account, is that my debit card verifies my age. So if alcohol can only be purchased by debit card, and you are only 17(?) the card machine will block the transaction.
As for pen points, equip gardai with similar equipment, they swipe the card, job done. No court appearance, no solicitors fees (unless on appeal).


It is not about prohibition of anything. It is about instilling a culture that says even though you have just turned 18yrs tanking up on 10 beers and some vodka shots is a bad start. Its about acknowledging the dangers of alcohol and giving some kids a better opportunity to learn moderate drinking instead of heavy drinking.

Its no panecea, just a new approach.
 
TheBigShort said:
What is the 'soft' financial supply?
Click to expand...

It's called money and in my opinion there's a hell of a lot of people getting it that shouldn't be. Hope that makes it very clear and yes, i've been responsible for some people who were not disabled in being refused the payment. What's more, they didn't appeal it either and are living without it with no problems apart from being very cross with "someone" and have told me so. Hope that answers your question.
 
TheBigShort said:
Alcohol abuse, imo, can lead to poverty, and is a factor in perpetuating that poverty.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree.
The link should be between alcohol content and price, otherwise cheap beer becomes even more popular.
I'm in favour of minimum unit pricing.
I also think there should be far greater educational supports for parents of those who have addiction problems. A course over a weekend for the parents of a 15 year old with drug and alcohol problems teaching them best practice in how to handle their child's addiction problems could literally save lives and would certainly reduce crime and easy the burden for the family of the addict. At the moment the parents have to go blind into a complex, highly charges and potentially dangerous situation wiith lessons learned only in retrospect.
 

Don't usually agree with much of what you say but banning the sale of alcohol (I'd add cigarettes) to underage people via their debit cards is a great idea.
 
PGF2016 said:
Don't usually agree with much of what you say but banning the sale of alcohol (I'd add cigarettes) to underage people via their debit cards is a great idea.
Click to expand...

It's already illegal for them to be sold full stop ... how's that ban working out?
17 year olds can evade that, they'll evade this idea.

The US tried the whole food stamps idea, so that welfare money wouldn't be blown on drink and drugs... did that work?

What might work is allowing 16 and 17 year olds to have drinks in a pub, just pints or wine, no spirits, so they are in a controlled environment instead of a field getting obliterated.
 
I completely agree with TBS on the sale of alcohol being something we should target. I would actually go a lot further personally in that I think it is ridiculous to allow sale of alcohol in supermarkets and would support going back to alcohol only being sold in off licences. It's not that long since this was the case and I think the easy access in supermarkets has led to the surge in people drinking at home. I'm sure many will object to that and I can already hear the arguments saying "I want to buy a bottle of wine to go with dinner" but I still think it is crazy that someone can buy a carton of milk and pick up a bottle of vodka while they're at it.
 

It's not ridiculous. It's not crazy. What's wrong with drinking at home??? I think you are the one with the puritan problem, the fear that someone somwehere is having a good time - not the person picking up a bottle of wine to go with dinner. Which I do often. So if you are demonising those people you are insulting me.

What's crazy is that people say we need more restrictions and higher prices for alcohol without lifting their heads from Ireland ... look at France, they have less restrictions and lower prices.
Do they have more or less poverty than Ireland? More or less alcoholism or social issues with alcohol?

The proposition that we can cure poverty through these kind of restrictions of alcohol has no merit in any way shape or form.

We need to normalise alcohol to show teenagers how to use it properly.
Not demonise it. Demonising it leads 16 year olds getting obliterated drinking in fields. Normalising means the 16 year has a glass of wine or beer with the family at Sunday lunch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register