Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Entitlement Culture killing the will to work in Ireland
Options
Comments
-
golfwallah wrote: »True.
But I prefer to focus on what is needed to make change happen. And the way I see it is to promote public debate on the issue of the welfare trap.
There are alternatives such as are being implemented in other EU states like the UK and Holland, where the system is being changed to incentivize work over welfare. Savings can be used to invest in wealth generating activities and/or to reduce our huge debt overhang.
You have to start somewhere and as politicians are generally followers rather than leaders, they will only respond to public pressure for change.
So more openness and public debate is required on key issues like social welfare costs and alternatives, to have a positive impact on the long-term economic well-being of the majority in this country.
Very valid indeed.
However,such Public Debate,in current Irish terms,doubtless centre upon the State taking away badly needed supports from the needy etc etc.
We have to remember that the Irish electorate voted continually,in great numbers,for those household political names who year after year declared in their budget speeches the intention to remove "X,000 People from the Tax-Net"....That sort of policy,if stated to a German,might have sparked a suspicious response along the lines of.."But,Herr Minister,who will then pay for all the Free-Stuff for the others ?"....We however,lapped it all up....:rolleyes:
In my own area of operation,the situation with the DSFA Free Travel Scheme is of note whereby c.748,000 persons out of an adult population of c.3,000,000 are deemed to merit Free Travel on Public Transport Nationwide,a figure to which must be added a further 300,000 Spouse-Partner/Companions,giving a total legitimate figure of c. 1.100,000 or approximately One Third of the Adult Population.
The merits or otherwise of the Free Travel Scheme are not of concern IMO,but rather whether any thought whatever has gone into any analysis of how such largesse can be realistically funded.
I guarantee that,very rapidly after a first post on such a topic,we will have a response pointing towards Bankers...... :rolleyes:Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
Charles Mackay (1812-1889)
0 -
from todays independent.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/coalition-at-war-over-water-charges-30191493.html
Coalition at war over water charges
"It's the most serious disagreement to date. The thing is half-baked, they have not thought through details of key issues like metering, standing charge, ability to pay, vulnerable groups like pensioners, conservation etc. Would not survive public scrutiny if let out in current form. Fine Gael's desire to have a number out there has blinded them to lack of detail on critical issues," a senior government source said.
Here we go again "vulnerable" groups like pensioners, I take it those that he is referring to are those without any kids, probably an inheritance or two down and that most for own their own property? have free transport, most a medical card, fuel allowance, and unbelievably generous pension state pension by any standard?0 -
A paper on human rights will be delivered in Dublin next week according to the irish Times: http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/when-it-comes-to-human-rights-we-want-duty-free-1.1765372
This article presents a more balanced view on rights & responsibilities of individuals in a modern state - one person's rights (or entitlements as some see them) have to be paid for by someone else and the state's job is to ensure rights are paid for.
Over-emphasis on rights over responsibilities is never a good thing.0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,466 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 8081
Idbatterim wrote: »from todays independent.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/coalition-at-war-over-water-charges-30191493.html
Coalition at war over water charges
"It's the most serious disagreement to date. The thing is half-baked, they have not thought through details of key issues like metering, standing charge, ability to pay, vulnerable groups like pensioners, conservation etc. Would not survive public scrutiny if let out in current form. Fine Gael's desire to have a number out there has blinded them to lack of detail on critical issues," a senior government source said.
Sort of seems like a manufactured 'crisis' to me. Why didn't the Labour party kick up a stink about water charges over the last three years instead of waiting five weeks before an election?0 -
Idbatterim wrote: »from todays independent.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/coalition-at-war-over-water-charges-30191493.html
Coalition at war over water charges
"It's the most serious disagreement to date. The thing is half-baked, they have not thought through details of key issues like metering, standing charge, ability to pay, vulnerable groups like pensioners, conservation etc. Would not survive public scrutiny if let out in current form. Fine Gael's desire to have a number out there has blinded them to lack of detail on critical issues," a senior government source said.
Here we go again "vulnerable" groups like pensioners, I take it those that he is referring to are those without any kids, probably an inheritance or two down and that most for own their own property? have free transport, most a medical card, fuel allowance, and unbelievably generous pension state pension by any standard?
Dont forget the countless independent reports and surveys which shows the OAP have barely been affected by the recession. Where as incomes for middle income families have been destroyed. I have yet to see OAPs queuing outside of soup kitchens for free food. You rarely see OAPs shopping in discount stores. But telling OAPs that you have barely been affected by the recession isnt going to get you reelected.0 -
Advertisement
-
Idbatterim wrote: »from todays independent.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/coalition-at-war-over-water-charges-30191493.html
Coalition at war over water charges
"It's the most serious disagreement to date. The thing is half-baked, they have not thought through details of key issues like metering, standing charge, ability to pay, vulnerable groups like pensioners, conservation etc. Would not survive public scrutiny if let out in current form. Fine Gael's desire to have a number out there has blinded them to lack of detail on critical issues," a senior government source said.
Here we go again "vulnerable" groups like pensioners, I take it those that he is referring to are those without any kids, probably an inheritance or two down and that most for own their own property? have free transport, most a medical card, fuel allowance, and unbelievably generous pension state pension by any standard?
This is simplistic. Most people (as evidenced by pay rates) have been barely impacted by the recession, other than in the form of higher taxes. Many pensioners held bank shares and the like and always paid their way, but are now poorer because others are not paying their way.0 -
Idbatterim wrote: »from todays independent.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/coalition-at-war-over-water-charges-30191493.html
Coalition at war over water charges
"It's the most serious disagreement to date. The thing is half-baked, they have not thought through details of key issues like metering, standing charge, ability to pay, vulnerable groups like pensioners, conservation etc. Would not survive public scrutiny if let out in current form. Fine Gael's desire to have a number out there has blinded them to lack of detail on critical issues," a senior government source said.
Here we go again "vulnerable" groups like pensioners, I take it those that he is referring to are those without any kids, probably an inheritance or two down and that most for own their own property? have free transport, most a medical card, fuel allowance, and unbelievably generous pension state pension by any standard?
Yet another clusterf**k from minister hogans department. Between himself, reilly and shatter one must wonder what it takes to get removed from your position in Irish politics. Any of the above would be long gone in most other civilised countries. That they stood behind our great leader during the infamous heave appears to be the only reasonable explanation for the fact that they are still ministers.
Heard Phil hogan on the last word a week or so ago slating the media and basically saying that he will clarify the water charges when he is good and ready and not a minute sooner. The arrogance and indifference was simply incredible.
I am very aware of the fiscal straitjacket we are wearing at the minute and think fg have done probably as good as anybody could have but arrogance and incompetence just boil my blood. The above three have no business running government departments. Time for a shake up mr. Kenny.0 -
Sheldons Brain wrote: »This is simplistic. Most people (as evidenced by pay rates) have been barely impacted by the recession, other than in the form of higher taxes. Many pensioners held bank shares and the like and always paid their way, but are now poorer because others are not paying their way.
holding bank shares is no different than holding a betting slip for the 3.30 at punchestown , good on ye if it proves fruitful but dont come crying to the rest of us if the horse comes in last
pensioners ( for the most part ) didnt contribute enough when they were working to warrant the level of entitlements they draw down today , they are enormously powerful poltically however , which is of course why they recieve the level of entitlements they do0 -
Sheldons Brain wrote: »This is simplistic. Most people (as evidenced by pay rates) have been barely impacted by the recession, other than in the form of higher taxes. Many pensioners held bank shares and the like and always paid their way, but are now poorer because others are not paying their way.
Not entirely true. Low skilled workers pay has dropped substancially, a good few suffered the lost of jobs. Loads have emigrated. The old age pension is 220/week hardly enough to live high on the hog with. Those with private pension unless they had them in low risk funds were sharply hit.
Public service pensioners however have suffered only tax cuts and are still receiving pensions related to public pay rates reflective of boom period pay. The issue of PS pensions is still kicked down the road. No cap has being put on same. A max pension of 50K/year from PS would not be unfair, or even not index/inflation linking those above 50K until Inflation/index has reached taht point if it ever will.0 -
Public service pensioners however have suffered only tax cuts
Not true. These have been cut also.A max pension of 50K/year from PS would not be unfair,
Hardly unreasonable, but it would not provide much a saving either.0 -
Advertisement
-
Farmer Pudsey wrote: »Not entirely true. Low skilled workers pay has dropped substancially, a good few suffered the lost of jobs. Loads have emigrated. The old age pension is 220/week hardly enough to live high on the hog with. Those with private pension unless they had them in low risk funds were sharply hit.
Public service pensioners however have suffered only tax cuts and are still receiving pensions related to public pay rates reflective of boom period pay. The issue of PS pensions is still kicked down the road. No cap has being put on same. A max pension of 50K/year from PS would not be unfair, or even not index/inflation linking those above 50K until Inflation/index has reached taht point if it ever will.
Not true at all.
Firstly, there is absolutely no evidence anywhere of widespread pay cuts to existing employees in the private sector at any time over the last few years.
Secondly, public service pensions have been cut at least twice while the private sector pensioners availaing of the State contributory pension (to which the vast majority of the public sector pensioners are not entitled) have seen no cuts to the State part of their pension.
Thirdly, there are many public sector pensioners with less than €220 a week from the State.0 -
As far as I know, PS pensions in payment were only cut once.
And not by enough, in my opinion.0 -
Not true at all.
Firstly, there is absolutely no evidence anywhere of widespread pay cuts to existing employees in the private sector at any time over the last few years.
Secondly, public service pensions have been cut at least twice while the private sector pensioners availaing of the State contributory pension (to which the vast majority of the public sector pensioners are not entitled) have seen no cuts to the State part of their pension.
Thirdly, there are many public sector pensioners with less than €220 a week from the State.
Those on lw PS pensions below 15-18K should not be touched and maybe above it as well. If you read my post I refered to those on pension of 50K and above. IMO these pension should be capped it could even start a bit lower around 35K. Any pension above 35K should not be indexed or inflation proof. All that is happening is the it is making some familiy's wealthy.
Very few PS last there jobs yes there was VL deals bot no compulsory redundancy. The same cannot be said for the private sector where some suffered the ultimate pay cut the loss of there job. More have emigrated and are working abroad coming home 2-4 time a year. I know two married men one is in Canada and the second is in middle east. It is the loss of employment across the private sector that cut wages also bonus's and benifits have been cut and lots of those starting back to work are on lower wages than before.0 -
As far as I know, PS pensions in payment were only cut once.
And not by enough, in my opinion.Farmer Pudsey wrote: »Those on lw PS pensions below 15-18K should not be touched and maybe above it as well. If you read my post I refered to those on pension of 50K and above. IMO these pension should be capped it could even start a bit lower around 35K. Any pension above 35K should not be indexed or inflation proof. All that is happening is the it is making some familiy's wealthy.
Very few PS last there jobs yes there was VL deals bot no compulsory redundancy. The same cannot be said for the private sector where some suffered the ultimate pay cut the loss of there job. More have emigrated and are working abroad coming home 2-4 time a year. I know two married men one is in Canada and the second is in middle east. It is the loss of employment across the private sector that cut wages also bonus's and benifits have been cut and lots of those starting back to work are on lower wages than before.
Are we still having these 2008 debates? Does nobody check their facts?
http://www.agsi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Pensions-FAQ-updated-for-FEMPI-2013.pdf
Public service pensions above €12,000 were cut in January 2011.
Public service pensions above €35,000 were cut a second time in July 2013.
The cuts on the highest pensions have been in the order of 28%.
At the same time, there are very many wealthy private sector pensioners who have not suffered anything. The contributory pension paid by the state to private sector pensioners has also not been cut.
I have previously shown via CSO figures that the percentage reduction in private sector employees between 2008 and 2013 was only marginally greater than the percentage reduction in the public sector. Why do people still spout this misinformation?0 -
Farmer Pudsey wrote: »Very few PS last there jobs yes there was VL deals bot no compulsory redundancy.
Not true...16 from my department alone.0 -
“Pennies don’t fall from heaven – they have to be earned here on Earth.” – Margaret Thatcher0
-
periodictable wrote: »“Pennies don’t fall from heaven – they have to be earned here on Earth.” – Margaret Thatcher
Interesting considering total social expenditure as a share of GDP remained almost unchanged from 1979-1990 during Thatcher reign.0 -
Your point being?MayoSalmon wrote: »Interesting considering total social expenditure as a share of GDP remained almost unchanged from 1979-1990 during Thatcher reign.0 -
-
Are we still having these 2008 debates? Does nobody check their facts?
http://www.agsi.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Pensions-FAQ-updated-for-FEMPI-2013.pdf
Public service pensions above €12,000 were cut in January 2011.
Public service pensions above €35,000 were cut a second time in July 2013.
The cuts on the highest pensions have been in the order of 28%.
At the same time, there are very many wealthy private sector pensioners who have not suffered anything. The contributory pension paid by the state to private sector pensioners has also not been cut.
I have previously shown via CSO figures that the percentage reduction in private sector employees between 2008 and 2013 was only marginally greater than the percentage reduction in the public sector. Why do people still spout this misinformation?
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.0 -
Advertisement
-
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.0 -
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.0 -
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.0
-
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."MayoSalmon wrote: »That the pennies kept falling of course
Would that we had a conviction politician of her stature in Ireland.0 -
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...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.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/generous-welfare-stops-return-to-work-says-oecd-30209696.html0 -
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 ?Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.
Charles Mackay (1812-1889)
0 -
Appreciate your poinrt and agree with you.
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 ?
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.0 -
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.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.
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.0 -
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.0 -
Advertisement
-
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 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.
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%20Focus0
Advertisement