"We must dismantle our culture of dependency"

[TheBigShort]

If 3,500 have their benefits cut and 2,000 of them repent the follow year and engage, I would expect the DSP to consider this a success and make a big deal about it. I can't find any stats on how successful or otherwise cutting benefits has been at getting people back on full benefits - so I have my doubts that it has actually been successful (beyond the actual cutting of benefits - which the DSP does publish stats about). If people stay on cut benefits, the numbers keep increasing year on year - as my calcs assumed.

Or perhaps making a big deal of how those on welfare have 'repented' or come crawling back, may not be the most politically astute thing to do?

If people stay on cut benefits, the numbers keep increasing year on year - as my calcs assumed.

Or actually get a job, or emigrate?

You mean apart from your own?

Well, considering im against the notion of dismantling the apparent 'welfare culture', im not really sure what ideas I would be expected to dismantle it.
On the other hand, I have mentioned that a welfare sum equivalent to the last earned wage could be considered. Reducing incrementally down to a basic rate the longer someone remains unemployed. But I would imagine that would cost more tax €€€€€'s and given the premise of this topic (workers overburdened with tax), the chances of that being implemented any time soon would be zilch!

 

[orka]

Or perhaps making a big deal of how those on welfare have 'repented' or come crawling back, may not be the most politically astute thing to do?

Really? I would expect it to be a popular message with most of the electorate - 'we targeted those who refused to engage and we have succeeded in getting some/many to engage'. Why would politicians not want to give that message?

 

[Deiseblue]

No problem Okra , not really rocket science - I thought both queries were apt .
Hence the like although I should say that my views on this discussion would broadly be in line with BS's

 

[TheBigShort]

Really? I would expect it to be a popular message with most of the electorate - 'we targeted those who refused to engage and we have succeeded in getting some/many to engage'. Why would politicians not want to give that message?

Because as I pointed out before, the reasons for not engaging in the first instance are varied. For instance, which politician would be proud to say that the department reduced the payment of a single mother living in Sligo, with no car, because she wouldn't attend an interview in Galway?
Or which politician would be proud to say we reduced the welfare on some of those considering emigration as an option for their futures?
Or a 55 yr old fork lift driver (unemployed for 1st time in his life in 2013) refused to do an ECDL course?
Political suicide in my opinion.

 

[orka]

Because as I pointed out before, the reasons for not engaging in the first instance are varied. For instance, which politician would be proud to say that the department reduced the payment of a single mother living in Sligo, with no car, because she wouldn't attend an interview in Galway?
Or which politician would be proud to say we reduced the welfare on some of those considering emigration as an option for their futures?
Or a 55 yr old fork lift driver (unemployed for 1st time in his life in 2013) refused to do an ECDL course?
Political suicide in my opinion.

But that's information the DSP does already give us - they tell us they reduced benefits for 14,279 people. I'm querying why they don't give us updates on the follow-on - how many are still on reduced benefits, how many have left the country, how many have engaged etc.

The strategy has been on the go since 2011 with annual updates provided by the DSP. Politicians aren't proud/not proud as far as I can see nor has there been political suicide - the numbers are just the numbers.

 

[TheBigShort]

I'm querying why they don't give us updates on the follow-on - how many are still on reduced benefits, how many have left the country, how many have engaged etc.

I don't know. You would have to contact the Dept for that.
The point being however, that just because they dont publish such information doesnt mean to say that it does not occur. Like I said, the reasons for non engagement are varied, its inconceivable to me that the 14,000+ figure is a static figure, only to be added onto each year with further detections of non engagement, and not reduced for a number of reasons such as obtaining employment.

 

[Purple]

For instance, which politician would be proud to say that the department reduced the payment of a single mother living in Sligo, with no car, because she wouldn't attend an interview in Galway?

Would that happen though?

Or a 55 yr old fork lift driver (unemployed for 1st time in his life in 2013) refused to do an ECDL course?
Political suicide in my opinion.

if you are 55 and the only skill you have acquired in 35 years is the ability to drive a fork lift truck then you should be ashamed of yourself and gladly take an ECDL course rather than live off your neighbours for the next 30 or 40 years.

 

[Gerry Canning]

Re Dagny Juel,s posts.

In US its commendable to be {The self made man} .That is the same here , the difference is that we largely protect by our system those caught in poor situations. Those of us who have been on dole over the years remain appreciative , the dole meant we didn,t fall too far and it enabled us to pick up without too much hassle. Most of (dole) type recipients have moved into gainful /tax paying/ society affirming work.
From my reading of USA their (self-made men) seem to have an inordinate wealth and if you fall between the cracks in USA , you are banjaxed !
It also appears than in USA ,as in Ireland , Joe Citizen is effectively on the hook for massive mortgage debt , is that not a culture of dependency by the (entrepreneurs)!

Socialism built on {they just take a pay cut}.That's not a sensible comment.
The US seem to think that we in Europe are all Socialists , maybe we are , but I really think most fair minded thinking people would prefer the (albeit) flawed systems in Europe to the US one , or indeed the so called socialism of places like Venezuala.

 

[Purple]

Gerry, given that a welfare system should help people while at the same time encouraging and enabling upward mobility I prefer ours as we have more/better upward mobility here than they have in the USA.

 

[Firefly]

For instance, which politician would be proud to say that the department reduced the payment of a single mother living in Sligo, with no car, because she wouldn't attend an interview in Galway?

What's wrong with Sligo?

 

[TheBigShort]

Would that happen though?

It was implied by Orka that it would or should. She couldn't understand how the DSP would not make a big deal out of successfully getting people whose welfare was cut to re-engage with the DSP.
In my view, no government department could make such claims without the approval of the Minister in charge.

if you are 55 and the only skill you have acquired in 35 years is the ability to drive a fork lift truck then you should be ashamed of yourself and gladly take an ECDL course rather than live off your neighbours for the next 30 or 40 years.

Where did I say that it was the only skill obtained by the fork lift driver? And having contributed social insurance and made pension contributions for 35 years, there is little chance that the driver will be living off his/her neighbours?
Fork lift drivers are a vital, indespensable part of any functioning economy and nothing to be ashamed of.
Snobbery coming to the fore again.

 

[orka]

It was implied by Orka that it would or should.

Wow. Another prize for you for making stuff up. Where did I imply this?

She couldn't understand how the DSP would not make a big deal out of successfully getting people whose welfare was cut to re-engage with the DSP.

Not true. I don't think there are large numbers of people re-engaging ~ so the DSP can't make the claim so they don't publish any stats. I think the number of people on cut benefits gets bigger each year - you don't seem to share this view but you have nothing to back this view up. The only official data we have is that 14,279 people had their benefits cut.

In my view, no government department could make such claims without the approval of the Minister in charge.

Information on numbers of people coming off reduced benefits is not a 'claim' - it's just data.

 

[Purple]

It was implied by Orka that it would or should.

No, I don't think so.

Where did I say that it was the only skill obtained by the fork lift driver? And having contributed social insurance and made pension contributions for 35 years, there is little chance that the driver will be living off his/her neighbours?

You said he was a forklift driver. That suggested to me that was his main marketable skill. If he'a also a particle physicist then you should have let us know and, more importantly, he should have let the DSP know. Social insurance payments over 35 years for someone on the pay of a forklift driver wouldn't cover their welfare payments for more than a few years. If, after 35 years, the peak of their professional prowess was to be able to drive a forklift, then it's reasonable to assume that they were unskilled for most of that time.

Fork lift drivers are a vital, indespensable part of any functioning economy and nothing to be ashamed of.
Snobbery coming to the fore again.

You see there's your problem right there; you keep assigning motive to other peoples posts based on your preconceptions.
I had a forklift licence for years. We have 6 guys in work who hold them at the moment. They do other things as well though because just being able to drive a forklift is of no real value to any business. If that's all you can do you are just one step above unskilled. After 35 years in the workforce you would have to be an utter mutton head if that's the only skill, or even the main skill, you have.
By chance are you referring to a warehouse operative or technician who, along with being able to drive a forklift would have to know how to interact with an MRP system such as SAP, maintain records and stock control, understand quality procedures and processes and be an intrinsic part of an integrated logistics and/or manufacturing process?
If so it is you who are, though ignorance and passive snobbery rather than overt and conscious snobbery, undervaluing the skills of an employee because you consider his job to be manual and therefore requiring a lower intellect. This is a common problem with the "middle class" urbanite socialist who subconsciously think of the "working classes" as intellectually inferior and so in need of the protection of the intellectually superior "middle classes", a bit like the concept of the white man's burden. Therefore if this does apply to you then you are in good company. Of course I could be completely wrong and you aren't from an educated middle class non-manual working background.

 

[TheBigShort]

Wow. Another prize for you for making stuff up. Where did I imply this?

Forgive me, for misinterpreting this quote from you.

Really? I would expect it to be a popular message with most of the electorate - 'we targeted those who refused to engage and we have succeeded in getting some/many to engage'. Why would politicians not want to give that message?

[/QUOTE] Not true. I don't think there are large numbers of people re-engaging ~ so the DSP can't make the claim so they don't publish any stats. I think the number of people on cut benefits gets bigger each year - you don't seem to share this view but you have nothing to back this view up. The only official data we have is that 14,279 people had their benefits cut.
Information on numbers of people coming off reduced benefits is not a 'claim' - it's just data.[/QUOTE]

Just because you dont think that people are not re-engaging then it doesnt mean it doesnt occur either.
There is plenty of data showing levels of emigration from the country and levels of unemployment falling.
Neither of us have, or have not the data we specifically require. To me, other data such as increasing employment figures, emigration stats over the said period, make it in conceivable to me that this would not include some of 14,000+ figure that you identified.

 

[TheBigShort]

You said he was a forklift driver. That suggested to me that was his main marketable skill. If he'a also a particle physicist then you should have let us know and, more importantly, he should have let the DSP know

I did say a forklift driver, that is correct. But for expedient purposes I didnt provide a full bio.
But he was also a former League of Ireland player (his first love) and is currently engaged in a voluntary capacity with the Irish womens soccer team. He is also actively involved in coaching kids at his local soccer club.
His wife runs a small florists and he frequently helps out at busy times of the year. He is not computer literate, and has no inkling in that regard. Hence his refusal of the ECDL course. But as you can see he has more skills (perhaps more that im unaware of).

You see there's your problem right there; you keep assigning motive to other peoples posts based on your preconceptions.

I apologise for my snobbery remark. Its just I never said his only skill was fork lift driver. But even if it was, there is nothing to be ashamed of.

After 35 years in the workforce you would have to be an utter mutton head if that's the only skill, or even the main skill, you have.

I retract my apology.

If so it is you who are, though ignorance and passive snobbery rather than overt and conscious snobbery, undervaluing the skills of an employee because you consider his job to be manual and therefore requiring a lower intellect.

I value all the manual jobs on par with any other.
You can have all the great ideas, from all the great scientists and entrepreneurs, but that is what they will remain, just ideas, without the input of all the workers elsewhere.

And for someone who doesn't like the archaic language of class identity, you are pretty loose with the terminology yourself.

 

[orka]

Forgive me, for misinterpreting this quote from you.

Sigh... The sequence of posts was:

If 3,500 have their benefits cut and 2,000 of them repent the follow year and engage, I would expect the DSP to consider this a success and make a big deal about it. I can't find any stats on how successful or otherwise cutting benefits has been at getting people back on full benefits - so I have my doubts that it has actually been successful (beyond the actual cutting of benefits - which the DSP does publish stats about)

Or perhaps making a big deal of how those on welfare have 'repented' or come crawling back, may not be the most politically astute thing to do?

Really? I would expect it to be a popular message with most of the electorate - 'we targeted those who refused to engage and we have succeeded in getting some/many to engage'. Why would politicians not want to give that message?

So, to summarise:

orka: IF (note the big IF!!) the strategy (getting people to re-engage) worked – the DSP would want to publish stats.

BigShort: That would not be a politically astute thing to do. [You at least seem to understand here that we are talking about the re-engagement part]

orka: Why not? Good message that the strategy worked and people engaged.


You seem to take this last point as supporting nonsensical engagement efforts. My comment is independent of any comment about to whom or how engagement efforts should happen. It doesn’t say we should do it all costs – just that it’s good if it works and people re-engage (after their benefits are cut). It’s (again) about the re-engagement part of the process not the cutting benefits part (which is what your Sligo single mother and fork-lift driver examples were about).


And this is the point where I realise that I’m engaging in a pointless debate mired in deliberate obfuscation (or maybe just poor comprehension skills) so I’ll leave y’all at it.

 

[TheBigShort]

Sigh... The sequence of posts was:So, to summarise:

orka: IF (note the big IF!!) the strategy (getting people to re-engage) worked – the DSP would want to publish stats.

BigShort: That would not be a politically astute thing to do. [You at least seem to understand here that we are talking about the re-engagement part]

orka: Why not? Good message that the strategy worked and people engaged.


You seem to take this last point as supporting nonsensical engagement efforts. My comment is independent of any comment about to whom or how engagement efforts should happen. It doesn’t say we should do it all costs – just that it’s good if it works and people re-engage (after their benefits are cut). It’s (again) about the re-engagement part of the process not the cutting benefits part (which is what your Sligo single mother and fork-lift driver examples were about).


And this is the point where I realise that I’m engaging in a pointless debate mired in deliberate obfuscation (or maybe just poor comprehension skills) so I’ll leave y’all at it.

Except the 'good message' that you mention, could, even if only for political purposes, could be interpreted as a bad messge.

Govt Minister: The policy of cutting welfare has in fact been a successful tool to nudging some of those, who refused to engage with the Dept at all, into actual engagement, and subsequently restoring their welfare rates.

(All good spin)

Opposition: Minister, does the figure of those whose welfare was cut include a single mother living in Sligo, asked to attend an interview in Galway, with no real means of transport or childcare provision? Does it include a 55yr old man, who for the first time in his life, finds himself unemployed and is asked to attend a course that holds no value to him?
Are these the type of people who you class as 'non-engagement'? Are you for real? These are real people, with real qualities, who contribute to society, and dont need the big, bad, department bullying them by way of cuts to their welfare.

(All bad spin)

And the media loves headlines....

 

[Purple]

I did say a forklift driver, that is correct. But for expedient purposes I didnt provide a full bio.

But he was also a former League of Ireland player (his first love) and is currently engaged in a voluntary capacity with the Irish womens soccer team. He is also actively involved in coaching kids at his local soccer club.

His wife runs a small florists and he frequently helps out at busy times of the year. He is not computer literate, and has no inkling in that regard. Hence his refusal of the ECDL course. But as you can see he has more skills (perhaps more that im unaware of).

I specified marketable skills. His community activities are of no consequence from an employment perspective. He may be good at baking with his kids or grandkids and be brilliant at doing great voices when he reads stories to them but that’s not much use on a CV.

If he is a forklift driver and he does not have basic computer skills he is severely limiting his job prospects and the DSP is absolutely correct to try to get him to do an ECDL course. Most stores people are the first or/and last step in the process, whatever the process may be within an organisation. If they cannot maintain quality and traceability then the organisation cannot function. Therefore a forklift driver who cannot input data can’t get a job in any modern organisation (Multinational, Logistics company, ISO Certified Manufacturing plant of any kind etc.). By refusing to learn what is a basic skill in a modern workplace he effectively opting out and he should not get welfare payments.

I apologise for my snobbery remark.

Apology accepted.

Its just I never said his only skill was fork lift driver. But even if it was, there is nothing to be ashamed of.

Eh yes, there is. Settling for mediocrity is not OK.

I retract my apology.

Too late, I already accepted it.

I value all the manual jobs on par with any other.

I don’t, because I know about them.

A surgeon is a manual job. So is a butcher. I value the skills of a former more.

A carpenter is a manual job. So is marquetry and inlay. I value the latter more.

A general machine operator is a manual job. So is a Toolmaker. I value the latter more.

Using a brush to sweep the streets is a manual job. Using a brush to paint a portrait is also a manual job. I value the skill of the latter more.

You can have all the great ideas, from all the great scientists and entrepreneurs, but that is what they will remain, just ideas, without the input of all the workers elsewhere.

Scientists and entrepreneurs are workers; they work. Everyone who works is a worker. Some work in the paid economy, some work in the community or voluntary sectors. We are talking about employees and others who work in the paid economy. Please use language appropriate to the 21st, or even the 20th, century.

And for someone who doesn't like the archaic language of class identity, you are pretty loose with the terminology yourself.

Only to point out how absurd and destructive it is.

 

[Purple]

Opposition: Minister, does the figure of those whose welfare was cut include a single mother living in Sligo, asked to attend an interview in Galway, with no real means of transport or childcare provision? Does it include a 55yr old man, who for the first time in his life, finds himself unemployed and is asked to attend a course that holds no value to him?
Are these the type of people who you class as 'non-engagement'? Are you for real? These are real people, with real qualities, who contribute to society, and dont need the big, bad, department bullying them by way of cuts to their welfare.

You seem to have a very low opinion of the people in the DSP. Are you suggesting that's the reason for this problem?

 

[TheBigShort]

You seem to have a very low opinion of the people in the DSP. Are you suggesting that's the reason for this problem?

No, and 'this problem' is pure speculation at this point.