Entitlement Culture killing the will to work in Ireland

Godge · 23-04-2014 12:37am

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

There is very little comparrison between public and private sector pensions. Ver few private sector workers have a defined benifit pension. For a pension of 35K if we exclude the OAP it leaves a balance of 22K+. This PS retiree would have got a lump sum as well in the region of 100K. There is also the widow/widower element of the pension. To buy an annunity at present with a 2/3 survivor pension the rate is about 4% and this is at 65 for main benificary. So 22K annunity would cost 550K add to this 100K lump sum and a this PS pension would cost 650K.

Any private sector that would have build up such a pension from a defined contributions scheme would seen huge swings he would also have wanted to derisk at exactly the right stage and bought his annunity at the right time. Also any private sector pension annunity based may not be indexed linked and if index linked it is max 2% or inflation which ever is the lessor.

My my the contributory pension which amounts to about 12K/year you think it should be cut. That those who have worked and paid taxes so that Teacher, Gardai, Politicians and other public servants can retire on some of the best pensions in Europe should be cut.

What a load of rubbish.

Are you telling me that Sean Fitzpatrick and Michael Fingleton have seen their pensions cut, or a whole load of other bankers?

Not a chance.

Get off your soapbox and look at the reality. In the same way that nobody in the public sector was getting the €1m pay packages of the top bankers, neither are they getting the pensions that went with those packages. Yet you wouldn't consider those typical of the private sector.

In the same way, there are only 15 or so Secretary Generals, most of the rest of the public sector is retiring on pensions a lot less than that.

As for the lack of cuts to the contributory pension, you must remember that it is not means-tested. So large farmers with huge farms that are renting them out are still getting that pension. So too are many people with big investment pensions.

Farmer Pudsey · 23-04-2014 12:57am

Godge wrote: »

What a load of rubbish.

Are you telling me that Sean Fitzpatrick and Michael Fingleton have seen their pensions cut, or a whole load of other bankers?

Not a chance.

Get off your soapbox and look at the reality. In the same way that nobody in the public sector was getting the €1m pay packages of the top bankers, neither are they getting the pensions that went with those packages. Yet you wouldn't consider those typical of the private sector.

In the same way, there are only 15 or so Secretary Generals, most of the rest of the public sector is retiring on pensions a lot less than that.

As for the lack of cuts to the contributory pension, you must remember that it is not means-tested. So large farmers with huge farms that are renting them out are still getting that pension. So too are many people with big investment pensions.

There is a hell of a lot of PS workers retiring on pensions in excess of 35K. You are right it is obsene the amount that bankers and other have in pensions and I have no issue with them being tackled. However loads of private secttor workers would be doing very well to accumlate a pension pot of 200K, if they took 1/3 as a lumpsum the remainder would give them a pension of about 5350 euro annually. With the OAP this would give them a pension of less than 18K/year. It is I think less than a retiring CO with full service would recieve.

As well as these large farmers etc there are loads of guards and prision officers that used to retire at 55 and build up credits to draw partial OAP. However as any retired private sector worker would have paid a higher rate of PRSI they have contributed throughout they working life for there OAP. I would consider them entitled to it.

Do you consider that it should be means tested or somthing.Spell it out. I am afraid that all I posted was factually correct, and it is you that are standing on the soapbox Godge. I like the way you bought farmers into it again.

coolshannagh28 · 23-04-2014 1:36am

These exchanges highlight the level of entitlement we have become accustomed to with regard to pensions ,a certain small proportion of society are in a position to ensure that they have extremely high pension entitlements the aforementioned bankers,secretaries general etc however these obscenities do not entitle those further down the ladder to unfair or inflated pension benefits particularly in light of the extreme difficulty in building up any sort of meaningful pension in the lower rungs of the private or self employed sector.

periodictable · 23-04-2014 9:03am

MayoSalmon wrote: »

That the pennies kept falling of course

Thatcher had no problem with the state helping those less fortunate. Her objection was to the substantial minority who used welfare as a refuge from responsibility and a lifestyle. As she said, welfare " replaced incentives favouring work with perverse encouragement for idleness."
Would that we had a conviction politician of her stature in Ireland.

Idbatterim · 23-04-2014 12:56pm

My the contributory pension which amounts to about 12K/year you think it should be cut. That those who have worked and paid taxes so that Teacher, Gardai, Politicians and other public servants can retire on some of the best pensions in Europe should be cut.

That most of us pay in fairness, but how may will have contributed very little or nothing by retirement age? That it isnt somehow benchmarked against what you have paid in, is an absolute joke... We hear about all the outrage about water tax, property tax, mostly from those that contribute very little or nothing, say about E300 a year on the water tax, where the hell is the outrage at over €500 in the €1000 for every thousand being confiscated from your weekly wage over €32,800 not €1000,000 or something ridiculous an insulting €32,800 to subsidise the still outrageous waste, wasters, lack of reform etc etc etc etc...

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/generous-welfare-stops-return-to-work-says-oecd-30209696.html

AlekSmart · 27-04-2014 11:57am

periodictable wrote: »

Thatcher had no problem with the state helping those less fortunate. Her objection was to the substantial minority who used welfare as a refuge from responsibility and a lifestyle. As she said, welfare " replaced incentives favouring work with perverse encouragement for idleness."
Would that we had a conviction politician of her stature in Ireland.

Well,in media terms the search for a political body to blame is becoming so predictable now.

Take the Sabrina McMahon case....initially presented,apparently,by the Irish Times,and as a result followed up assidiously by the "rest of the Irish Print Media world"....

The initial Irish Independent story leaned heavily on the term "Forced",which indicated that Ms McMahon and her children had been forcibly removed from their home....

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/family-sleep-in-car-after-being-forced-from-home-30216941.html

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/childrens-minister-finds-family-living-in-a-car-deeply-disturbing-628782.html

However,as the days passed,and a reasonableness filter began to be applied,the details became a little less clear.....with lots of vague stuff creeping in...as the transcript from 4FM's Neil Boylan interview shows..

http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

Notwithstanding the obvious issues with exposing young children to such carry-on,there are also questions as to what prompted the Media Frenzy in relation to this case.

The initial Kitty Holland piece in the Irish Times suddenly gained legs and just happened to be there to slap Eamonn Gilmore,Frances FitzG and the other Politico's with.

The lack of any form of commonsense background checking IN ADVANCE of running this story so strongly,smacks of lazy editorial practice OR a decision to ignore the reality and instead go for the Political angle instead....Is this a new Irish Times market-placement angle one wonders ?

For the purposes of this thread,the McMahon case details are irrelevant,but the background of a media necessity to have a Political or Administrative "Entitlement" goat to scape is surely open to question ?

periodictable · 27-04-2014 6:43pm

AlekSmart wrote: »

For the purposes of this thread,the McMahon case details are irrelevant,but the background of a media necessity to have a Political or Administrative "Entitlement" goat to scape is surely open to question ?

Appreciate your poinrt and agree with you.
However, take public authority housing....why not garnish welfare payments of those who damage them, instead of giving them a new house?
If someone continues to have kids, but cannot provide for them, why should the state subsidize the results of someone's irresponsible behavior?
Pumping out more kids ought NOT to entitle you to a bigger house or extra child benefit.

bigroad · 27-04-2014 8:16pm

periodictable wrote: »

Appreciate your poinrt and agree with you.
However, take public authority housing....why not garnish welfare payments of those who damage them, instead of giving them a new house?
If someone continues to have kids, but cannot provide for them, why should the state subsidize the results of someone's irresponsible behavior?
Pumping out more kids ought NOT to entitle you to a bigger house or extra child benefit.

I totally agree and those same people seem to have the most kids .Sure why not, they have no childcare costs because they are at home or in the pub and no mortgage to service with hard work like the rest of us.
If you take a family with four kids in social housing and on the dole ,what would a working family have to earn even to equal the social welfare earning of these people.

Godge · 29-04-2014 9:55pm

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

There is a hell of a lot of PS workers retiring on pensions in excess of 35K. You are right it is obsene the amount that bankers and other have in pensions and I have no issue with them being tackled. However loads of private secttor workers would be doing very well to accumlate a pension pot of 200K, if they took 1/3 as a lumpsum the remainder would give them a pension of about 5350 euro annually. With the OAP this would give them a pension of less than 18K/year. It is I think less than a retiring CO with full service would recieve.

As well as these large farmers etc there are loads of guards and prision officers that used to retire at 55 and build up credits to draw partial OAP. However as any retired private sector worker would have paid a higher rate of PRSI they have contributed throughout they working life for there OAP. I would consider them entitled to it.

Do you consider that it should be means tested or somthing.Spell it out. I am afraid that all I posted was factually correct, and it is you that are standing on the soapbox Godge. I like the way you bought farmers into it again.

You didn't post even one link to your so-called facts.

IF you took one-third of the 200k as a lump-sum, you would be getting a lump-sum nearly twice what a clerical officer would get. Like the rest of your s0-called facts, this one is wrong.

Now this point I agree with:

"However as any retired private sector worker would have paid a higher rate of PRSI they have contributed throughout they working life for there OAP. I would consider them entitled to it."

Like the public sector workers you so deride, the contributions will never be enough to pay for the pension. Unlike you, I don't believe in just attacking one side.

periodictable · 29-04-2014 10:09pm

bigroad wrote: »

I totally agree and those same people seem to have the most kids .Sure why not, they have no childcare costs because they are at home or in the pub and no mortgage to service with hard work like the rest of us.
If you take a family with four kids in social housing and on the dole ,what would a working family have to earn even to equal the social welfare earning of these people.

There was a woman on ClareFm yesterday and today complaining that she cannot get social housing and that she's been on the list for the last 10 years.Certain areas she won't go to, and what annoyed me was the sense of entitlement to pick what and where she would live. I believe there is alot more to the story, but the County Council said that she had left the accommodation she was in, so too bad lady, go live in a car.
I have no problem with housing people and helping with rent, but you take what's available else try your luck in some other country. People here have no idea how fortunate they are with the social safety net, but with this woman you'd think it was our fault she was in the situation she found herself in. If you can't provide for your kids, don't have any.

The podcast is here http://www.clare.fm/music/Morning%20Focus

chopper6 · 29-04-2014 10:25pm

periodictable wrote: »

There was a woman on ClareFm yesterday and today complaining that she cannot get social housing and that she's been on the list for the last 10 years.Certain areas she won't go to, and what annoyed me was the sense of entitlement to pick what and where she would live. I believe there is alot more to the story, but the County Council said that she had left the accommodation she was in, so too bad lady, go live in a car.
I have no problem with housing people and helping with rent, but you take what's available else try your luck in some other country. People here have no idea how fortunate they are with the social safety net, but with this woman you'd think it was our fault she was in the situation she found herself in. If you can't provide for your kids, don't have any.

The podcast is here http://www.clare.fm/music/Morning%20Focus

Quite revealing interview:
http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

Sabrina McMahon, who says she was forced to sleep in her car with her three children last week, spoke to Niall Boylan on 4FM earlier today and their discussion shed more light on her predicament.
It came after a ‘good samaritan’, who wishes not to be named, came forward and paid for Sabrina, a former dental nurse and carer, and her children to stay in Bewley’s Hotel for the next four weeks.
Niall Boylan: “How old are your kids by the way?”
Sabrina McMahon: “I’ve a five-year-old, Karl, he’s a boy, and then I have a three-year-old, she’s only gone three since January, and I’ve an 18-month-old girl as well.”
Boylan: “God, your hands are full, certainly. Give us a little background if you can, Sabrina, and how you ended up in this situation in the first place. You were originally living in Kildare weren’t you.”
McMahon: “I’m from Dublin all my life and I’ve up to Kildare, if would have been nine and a half years ago now but after, nine, after, it would have been seven years, seven and a half years, my boyfriend had walked out on us, so I decided to come to Dublin just for a Christmas, for the kids.”
Boylan: “Yeah.”
McMahon: “To my father’s, and when we went back up to Athy, junkies had taken over the house. They had smashed up the whole house and totally, totally ruined the house.”
Boylan: “OK, this was the house that you were renting at the time was it? Yeah?
McMahon: “Yeah.”
Boylan: “OK. So were you getting rent allowance then from…”
McMahon: “No, sorry, I wasn’t renting the house, I was supposed to be buying it.”
Boylan: “Right, OK.”
McMahon: “Then seven years later, after me coming back down to Dublin for the Christmas, when I went back up, after the house had been vandalised and everything, I had rang the bank and I told them I wasn’t going to stay there and..”
Boylan: “OK, so who was paying for the house at that time that you were living in it?”
McMahon: “I was. I thought I was paying, like I paid a solicitor, in 2005, 2,900 pound, thinking that I was going to be paying a mortgage. I got a piece of paper off him, I thought that was the deeds of the house and then seven years later, when I phoned back up – after the people had wrecked the house – I was told that the house, I’d never signed any deeds to the house.”
Boylan: “But who was paying for it, for the seven years? I’m just curious, nobody was paying for it for the seven years? And you were fooled into thinking you were eventually going to be allowed to buy it?”
McMahon: “Yeah, yeah, it was me who was paying for it.”
Boylan: “All right, OK, so you were paying a kind of rent every week then obviously, or every month?”
McMahon: “A mortgage it was.”
Boylan: “A mortgage. Right. Ok. And you were working at the time then, were you?”
McMahon: “Yeah, yeah.”
Boylan: “All right, OK. So what happened then, your relationship broke up?”
McMahon: “The relationship. Well it wasn’t that it broke up, he walked out on us.”
Boylan: “Right. OK. And kind of left you high and dry. So you were left in a situation. Now you’d already been on the council list [housing waiting list]. How long have you been on the council list now?”
McMahon: “I’m on the council list over a year now.”
Boylan: “Over a year. OK. And in the interim have they offered to give you a rent allowance to get you to rent somewhere in the meantime?”
McMahon: “They have, and even the council have said themselves that there’s nowhere accepting rent allowance. No landlord will accept rent allowance.”
Boylan: “Yeah, they are landlords who’ll refuse to accept it for whatever reasons. Yeah, they have different reasons for refusing people on rent allowance, I don’t know why they do that. It’s kind of a bit of snobbery I think more than anything else.”
McMahon: “I know, yeah. It’s terrible.”
Boylan: “So you haven’t been able to find somewhere in Dublin though, so it’s not the case the council wouldn’t give you the money. It’s just you haven’t been able to find somewhere to live?”
McMahon: “Haven’t been able to find anywhere to live, no.”
Boylan: “OK, well, you see, because the story kind of makes out in the paper that, you know, you’re being left homeless but it’s just a case of not being able to find somewhere, is it?”
McMahon: “Well, the homeless unit will not, they have told me to go back, the homeless unit in Tallaght have told me to go back to Athy because I lived there two and a half years ago, that was my last permanent address.”
Boylan: “Yeah.”
McMahon: “I’d to go back up there, onto the homeless, up there, try get a house up there, reschool my kids, my three-year-old child, she needs speech therapy, I’ve been waiting a year and a half for that, and she’s due that next month, and they told me I’d have to get all that done back up in Athy. I’m isolated up there…”
Boylan: “Because like everybody else, you have to go onto the list, the council list now is something live seven to eight years, depending I suppose on your circumstance and, like everybody else, you have to go onto that list I suppose.”
McMahon: “Yeah.”
Boylan: “So what are you hoping to get? Are you hoping that the council will kind of bump you up the list a little bit and will give you something in Dublin, in Tallaght is it?”
McMahon: “I don’t know what’s going to happen from here, you know? I haven’t got a clue what’s going to happen.”
Boylan: “But why were you sleeping in the car? When there was an opportunity I suppose, when you had the rent allowance, if you needed to go back to Kildare, you have relations here, your parents are here and your sister I think lives here as well.”
McMahon: “Nobody is allowed let anyone stay in their house. The council has even told me that, that I shouldn’t have been staying in anyone’s house at the start, that if you stay in anyone’s house, they’re going to be charged for rent.”
Boylan: “Oh, right. OK.”
McMahon: “If you have another person staying in the house.”
Boylan: “Oh right because they’re on rent allowance as well at the time, is it?”
McMahon: “Yeah.”
Boylan: “Oh right, OK. So if they have you, you’re technically a lodger, so they should be charging you.”
McMahon: “OK, all right. Well it’s all jumping through loopholes.”

periodictable · 29-04-2014 10:47pm

chopper6 wrote: »

Quite revealing interview:
http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

I don't know if the people having kids are getting more stupid/less educated or are betting on the state to pay for them. The mortgage thing...what on earth is going on with that??
Makes you want to lock the gates and live abroad for most of the year.

chopper6 · 29-04-2014 10:54pm

periodictable wrote: »

I don't know if the people having kids are getting more stupid/less educated or are betting on the state to pay for them. The mortgage thing...what on earth is going on with that??
Makes you want to lock the gates and live abroad for most of the year.

The technical term is "bullshiiting on stilts"

She half hatched a plan to get herseelf an upgrade through popular sympathy but got her lines wrong and blew her story.

AlekSmart · 30-04-2014 2:08pm

chopper6 wrote: »

The technical term is "bullshiiting on stilts"

She half hatched a plan to get herseelf an upgrade through popular sympathy but got her lines wrong and blew her story.

True,and in the process blew a gaping hole in the good ship Irish Times's hull.

Kitty Holland's professional journalistic credibility surely needs refreshing now ...not to mention the Irish Times's Editorial processes ?

I'd also have to give some credit to South Dublin and Kildare CC's for the restraint they displayed in the face of the Ms Holland led, cheap-shot vilification effort.

Geuze · 02-05-2014 3:07pm

Geuze · 02-05-2014 3:11pm

This Eurostat data may have been posted before, sorry about that.

In 2011, we topped the EU for the number of households with VLWI.

AlekSmart · 02-05-2014 11:57pm

Geuze wrote: »

This Eurostat data may have been posted before, sorry about that.

In 2011, we topped the EU for the number of households with VLWI.

AH but by 2014 Irish Government Policy meant that trend had been reversed.....(in at least ONE household)

http://www.independent.ie/business/former-taoiseach-brian-cowen-appointed-to-board-of-topaz-30239366.html

Godge · 08-05-2014 4:36pm

Geuze wrote: »

This Eurostat data may have been posted before, sorry about that.

In 2011, we topped the EU for the number of households with VLWI.

It is an incredible statistic.

NIMAN · 08-05-2014 9:37pm

Just read that dialogue from the radio show, and that woman sounds like she is full of it.

Story changing by the line. What sort of parent or family member would let their daughter and 3 kids sleep in a car?

Also think she is looking for sympathy big style, fresh in the knowledge that Councils normally back down when they run the risk of getting bad press.

What sort of person doesn't even know if they are paying rent or mortgage or whatever?

AlekSmart · 09-05-2014 12:28am

NIMAN wrote: »

What sort of person doesn't even know if they are paying rent or mortgage or whatever?

What sort of Professional Journalist would rush off and make this womans case a cause célebre without so much as a nod at the inconsistencies so readily identified in that Niall Boylan interview.....:rolleyes:

road_high · 17-05-2014 4:43pm

Geuze wrote: »

Is this to do with the % of houses where people are not working? If so this is a truly frightening stat. It basiclaly means people that are working are propping up the rest of this farce.

Farmer Pudsey · 17-05-2014 5:22pm

road_high wrote: »

Is this to do with the % of houses where people are not working? If so this is a truly frightening stat. It basiclaly means people that are working are propping up the rest of this farce.

We have two frightening stastics in Ireland the first is the number of households that no one works in. The second is the number of single parent family's which are dependant on the state. We also have the one of highest disability rate world wide.

You ask yourself why

After a while the answer is obivious

Geuze · 17-05-2014 10:03pm

road_high wrote: »

Is this to do with the % of houses where people are not working? If so this is a truly frightening stat. It basiclaly means people that are working are propping up the rest of this farce.

It is truly frightening, yes.

I only discovered it during last year or two.

It's published by Eurostat, and each country collects the data as part of the SILC survey.

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/silc/2012/silc_2012.pdf

Now, the CSO tend to focus on three measures of social exclusion:

(1) no. of people at-risk-of-poverty
(2) no. deprived
(3) no. in consistent poverty = being (1) + (2)

But Eurostat also discuss the VLWI measure.

Geuze · 17-05-2014 10:05pm

Households with very low work intensity

The work intensity for each household is calculated by
dividing the sum of all the months actually worked by the
working age members of the household by the sum of the
workable months in the household — i.e., the number of
months spent in any activity status by the working age
members of the household. A working age person is defined
as a person aged 18-59 years, who is not a dependent child.

A work intensity equal or inferior to 0.20 is considered as
very low.

Here is the raw data:

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_lvhl11&lang=en

Geuze · 17-05-2014 10:13pm

Maybe this definition is clearer:

People living in households with a very low work intensity are defined as people of all ages
(from 0-59 years) living in households where the adults (those aged 18-59, but excluding student aged
18-24) worked less than 20% of their total potential during the previous 12 months.

golfwallah · 17-05-2014 10:51pm

We shouldn't really be surprised at how badly Ireland rates as regards low work intensity when Minister for Social Protection, Joan Burton regards welfare as a stimulus for the economy - as if it hadn't to be paid out of taxes on earned income.

And then we hear she has ambitions to be the next leader of the Labour Party, whose present leader is calling for tax cuts, as if they had been imposed out of the blue by their coalition partners, Fine Gael.

Are these folk nuts or do they think the electorate are nuts?

I truly hope they get their just rewards in the forthcoming elections.

_Kaiser_ · 26-05-2014 11:51am

Geuze wrote: »

Maybe this definition is clearer:

People living in households with a very low work intensity are defined as people of all ages
(from 0-59 years) living in households where the adults (those aged 18-59, but excluding student aged
18-24) worked less than 20% of their total potential during the previous 12 months.

The problem with those who have chosen welfare as a career choice (I refuse to use the term Long term unemployed as that includes anyone over 12 months which isn't a reliable metric when you factor in the effects of a recession) is that once they're over say 35 - or maybe younger depending on the field - they're effectively unemployable in the majority of cases.

No employer is going to take a risk on someone that age starting from scratch (Jobsbridge aside) when you'll have dozens or more of qualified people with a track record competing for the same job. How do you explain a 15/20 year career gap on a CV? Example: My cousin took redundancy in 2001 and hasn't worked since because he hasn't had to basically. He worked in IT prior to that though and there's no way he'd get back in! *I* wouldn't even hire him to do desktop support and it'd mainly be due to his attitude since he was laid off.

Discriminatory, ageist or whatever other PC term you want to apply? Probably, and you can be sure that won't be the reason given, but reality for such people? Almost definitely!

The only answer really is how to deal with the <25 and the next generation(s) of such people and that's where the effort and money should be spent. The others we'll just have to accept as a "bad debt" I think.

Geuze · 19-06-2014 8:18am

The problem of high rates of VLWI households in Ireland is in the news again today.

NESC launch a study on it.

Press release:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/news-events/press-releases/latest/nesc-publishes-report-137-jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

Study:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/publications/publications/nesc-reports/jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

Rightwing · 19-06-2014 10:30am

Geuze wrote: »

The problem of high rates of VLWI households in Ireland is in the news again today.

NESC launch a study on it.

Press release:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/news-events/press-releases/latest/nesc-publishes-report-137-jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

Study:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/publications/publications/nesc-reports/jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

I don't know which is worse, quangos or the unemployment problem.

They both 'stimulate the economy' anyway I suppose , if nothing else.

realitykeeper · 22-06-2014 11:01pm

I agree with the OP and it would appear many others do also. Is there a more thanked opening thread anywhere in the forum?

No Pants · 23-06-2014 6:44pm

realitykeeper wrote: »

I agree with the OP and it would appear many others do also. Is there a more thanked opening thread anywhere in the forum?

Might be one or two somewhere that don't open with anecdotal evidence, sure.

RichardAnd · 24-06-2014 7:31am

chopper6 wrote: »

Quite revealing interview:
http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

I’m not too sure what to make of that interview. The only thing I can say is that the lady in question didn't seem too sure of what she was saying.

One thing that I can take from that is that it does highlight how dependant so many people are on the mechanisms of the state. This is especially true for those with children. I noticed that she mentioned that her child is in need of speech therapy and that she has been waiting for it for some time. I can only assume that she meant that she is waiting for the state to provide her with speech therapy.

I’m not going to turn this into an attack on a single individual because in truth, I feel sorry for her. It just seems to me that the cost of living is so great for those with kids that many are totally dependent on the state to manage.

The lessons I will take from this? Don’t have kids!

murphaph · 25-06-2014 12:10pm

Huh? She was paying what she thought was a mortgage (to whom??) and it turns out she wasn't the owner? Story stinks, sorry.

Idbatterim · 25-06-2014 3:06pm

an extract from indo article earlier, "it would only effect higher income households" yeah the ones from 33k or 44k (married) and up. The real fat cats, paying childcare, mortgage or rent, car etc... myself and Tom McDonnell have a serious difference on what is equitable is and isnt! Can I ask why any time I see one of his ilk on the left wing RTE etc, they are never challenged on their bulls*t?

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/nevin-institute-reduce-budget-adjustments-to-800m-but-no-tax-cuts-30381810.html

But NERI also warned that there wasn't any room for tax cuts as this would harm public services.

"Some of the tax cuts that we've heard about is concerning," said Dr Tom McDonnell of the institute.

"For example, changing the threshold on the marginal rate of income tax. That would only affect a small proportion of households, and of course those are the higher income households. Obviously that would be inequitable but it would also not be particularly effective in boosting demand.

"Higher income households are better able to save, so that would be a particularly poor choice of tax cut."
- See more at: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/nevin-institute-reduce-budget-adjustments-to-800m-but-no-tax-cuts-30381810.html#sthash.6eJVrKck.dpuf

Shelflife · 26-06-2014 11:43am

My son (17) got a summer job, last week worked 20 hrs and got €140 gross. He paid 4% usc charge €5.60 and rec a net wage of €134.40.

Later that evening he played tag rugby and was chatting to one of his team mates (a bit older then him) who told him that he gets €100 a week for doing nothing.

So 17yr old tries to earn a few bob and gets taxed , 19yr old sits on his hole all week and gets €100.

Funny I pay plenty of tax myself, but the fact that my son made an effort and gets taxed really annoyed me. esp after he told me of his chat with his team mate.

OldNotWIse · 26-06-2014 11:48am

Shelflife wrote: »

My son (17) got a summer job, last week worked 20 hrs and got €140 gross. He paid 4% usc charge €5.60 and rec a net wage of €134.40.

Later that evening he played tag rugby and was chatting to one of his team mates (a bit older then him) who told him that he gets €100 a week for doing nothing.

So 17yr old tries to earn a few bob and gets taxed , 19yr old sits on his hole all week and gets €100.

Funny I pay plenty of tax myself, but the fact that my son made an effort and gets taxed really annoyed me. esp after he told me of his chat with his team mate.

There are two ways of looking at that. Are you annoyed that your son paid tax on his small earnings? Or by the fact that his friend gets money for nothing?

No Pants · 26-06-2014 12:05pm

Shelflife wrote: »

My son (17) got a summer job, last week worked 20 hrs and got €140 gross. He paid 4% usc charge €5.60 and rec a net wage of €134.40.

According to this, he should not be liable for USC until he earns more than €10,036, so tell him to keep his payslips and make sure to request it back when he returns to being a student.

Idbatterim · 26-06-2014 12:42pm

the thing is the low paid are taxed virtually nothing, welfare needs to be cut down to subsistence levels after a while and create more jobs and cut marginal rate with the remainder, watch the work reward ratio soar. Its morally beyond a joke. I have a mate, who got his accommodation paid for and saved enough to go to euro 2012 while still going out at least once per week and living a decent lifestyle... I also agree with the welfare cuts for the under 25's, it was blunt and maybe someone who contributed to the system were shafted, but leaving school at 18 and being able to claim over E200 per week at one stage, while living at home, is beyond madness. Its at the level where if you dont have much drive or family dont have a work ethic, how I see people of that disposition can just end up on it as a way of life, as the government encourage them and say that its a choice for you to make, without looking at the massive implications it has on that individual, society and our finances...

You know what, the more you think about it, them more you would wonder, who really are the have and have nots! Have medical card, free house, few hundred euro a week, no income taxes, got knows what else they get v the supposed "haves" work related expenses, income taxes, rule themselves out of a host of freebies to earn **** money when you factor in the cost of living here and how generous the welfare system is...

OldNotWIse · 26-06-2014 1:50pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

the thing is the low paid are taxed virtually nothing, welfare needs to be cut down to subsistence levels after a while and create more jobs and cut marginal rate with the remainder, watch the work reward ratio soar. Its morally beyond a joke. I have a mate, who got his accommodation paid for and saved enough to go to euro 2012 while still going out at least once per week and living a decent lifestyle... I also agree with the welfare cuts for the under 25's, it was blunt and maybe someone who contributed to the system were shafted, but leaving school at 18 and being able to claim over E200 per week at one stage, while living at home, is beyond madness. Its at the level where if you dont have much drive or family dont have a work ethic, how I see people of that disposition can just end up on it as a way of life, as the government encourage them and say that its a choice for you to make, without looking at the massive implications it has on that individual, society and our finances...

You know what, the more you think about it, them more you would wonder, who really are the have and have nots! Have medical card, free house, few hundred euro a week, no income taxes, got knows what else they get v the supposed "haves" work related expenses, income taxes, rule themselves out of a host of freebies to earn **** money when you factor in the cost of living here and how generous the welfare system is...

This

comongethappy · 26-06-2014 2:09pm

OldNotWIse wrote: »

This

Well it can't be done anyway so its moot.

The parents income is taken into consideration when applying for JSA, the youth would probably receive a fraction of the €100 maximum he could qualify for.

Even then its subject to assessment from the DSP, that the youth is seeking work or training.

Shelflife · 26-06-2014 6:33pm

OldNotWIse wrote: »

There are two ways of looking at that. Are you annoyed that your son paid tax on his small earnings? Or by the fact that his friend gets money for nothing?

More by the fact that his mate gets money for nothing and in his case not even bothering to look for anything either. Don't mind him paying a few euros tax, but it's a joke that someone living at home gets €100 for nothing.

Where's the incentive to get a job at that age ?

OldNotWIse · 27-06-2014 9:54am

Shelflife wrote: »

More by the fact that his mate gets money for nothing and in his case not even bothering to look for anything either. Don't mind him paying a few euros tax, but it's a joke that someone living at home gets €100 for nothing.

Where's the incentive to get a job at that age ?

I agree with you completely.

Entitlement Culture killing the will to work in Ireland

Comments