Sharing the Pain of the Economic Crisis

Morzadec

Read this letter from a 75 year-old pensioner in the Irish Times and I had to say it gave me food for thought. Hats off to the bloke for his honesty and his willingness to put his own self-interest and greed aside for the good of others in this nation.

Source: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0729/1224251569202.html



'Madam, – I am 75 years old, and some 16 years ago retired from one of the major Irish banks after 42 years service. Since then I have received a defined index-linked pension, which, on its own, would enable me to live comfortably, if not extravagantly, particularly at a time when my expenses are low, my family reared, mortgage paid, and my biggest expense is health insurance, generously subsidised by the State by way of tax relief. I would suggest that there are countless thousands throughout the State in a similar position.
Each month when I open my bank statement, I find that this State, which is on its financial knees, lodges €436.60 every week to my account. I look at my ESB bill and see credits for €95, my telephone bill €70. It appears that I am entitled to a TV licence and free travel for life.
I recently returned my medical card (the Government seem very slow to reveal how many cards were returned and the cost of retrieving them). I still pay only €100 a month for prescribed drugs for my wife and myself, I estimate the real cost at approximately €250 per month. In all, the State appears to subsidise me to the extent of €26,000 per annum.
For the past 20 years, I have been a volunteer worker with the Society of St Vincent de Paul. Most of my visitations have been to young mothers living on lone parent allowance in the region of €221 per week. In recent months their rent allowance has been cut by €100 or more per month. If they have children under six, this allowance has been halved, and will disappear at the end of the year. What sort of economic madness subsidises me to the extent of €26,000 per annum and substantially reduces allowances to the most vulnerable in our society?
Countless millions are paid in children’s allowance to wealthy people who simply do not need it. Surely this could be taxed or means-tested?
By all means continue to give, and increase pensions to those who have no other source of income or have modest private pensions.
We have ever-decreasing funds to distribute through our social welfare system, please, please Minister, distribute in a more equitable fashion. – Yours, etc,
RAY DOHERTY.'




All too often when talks about cuts in social welfare, child benefit or OAP benefits comes up there is talk of 'picking on the defenseless' etc... Well this letter shows that there are cuts that can be made that won't harm people's quality of life. A friend of mine is on the dole and is getting 200 euro a week but he is living at home. This is more than he needs. He earns more than I do in my part-time job. Another friend of mine talked about how her mother would spend her child benefit on fancy clothes, as essentially it was surplus disposable income they had no need for at all. This OAP raises valid points as well.


The point is there are cuts that can be made in these areas with people still maintaining a very good quality of life. But unfortunately cuts are being made in other areas where people may not be able to afford it and take the hit.


No one wants to take a hit, but the government should be targetting those who can afford to take it, and the fact is many of these people are those who are on social welfare, pension plans etc...


(BTW this is coming from someone who himself has applied for partial JSA).


Anyway I thought it was a refreshing letter, Thoughts?

Cookie_Monster

I bet he contributed taxes to the state for 40+ years though whereas the single mothers he refers to in the letter have never paid a cent in their lives and probably never will.

What goes around comes around

Fink Goddie

He should spend the rest on booze and drugs!
The dude has no imagination

Poor Uncle Tom

There are examples of our f*cked up governmental system in every paper every day.

rasper

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I bet he contributed taxes to the state for 40+ years though whereas the single mothers he refers to in the letter have never paid a cent in their lives and probably never will.

What goes around comes around

The current system has ensured that they remain in the current povertytrap, instead of thowing about cash on extra childrens allowance, early childcare supplement and all the assoiciated black holes , FF should have sorted out the childcare issue and weened people of SW payments when it had the chance, but rather than doing anything positive they made a bad situation worse, now all they can do is cut off payments to people who have nothing.

ronbyrne2005

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I bet he contributed taxes to the state for 40+ years though whereas the single mothers he refers to in the letter have never paid a cent in their lives and probably never will.

What goes around comes around

I doubt he paid in enough to pay for the 26k a year he says he gets . His taxes paid for all the stuff he and his family used during his working life like hospitals,roads,schools,police etc. He and his family will have received millions in services/benefits during lifetime but paid in less in tax. Many working families till recently(and might still ) were net beneficiaries from state as benefits(childrens allowances,tax credits etc) exceeded income tax.

leincar

Morzadec wrote: »

Read this letter from a 75 year-old pensioner in the Irish Times and I had to say it gave me food for thought. Hats off to the bloke for his honesty and his willingness to put his own self-interest and greed aside for the good of others in this nation.

Source: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2009/0729/1224251569202.html



'Madam, – I am 75 years old, and some 16 years ago retired from one of the major Irish banks after 42 years service. Since then I have received a defined index-linked pension, which, on its own, would enable me to live comfortably, if not extravagantly, particularly at a time when my expenses are low, my family reared, mortgage paid, and my biggest expense is health insurance, generously subsidised by the State by way of tax relief. I would suggest that there are countless thousands throughout the State in a similar position.
Each month when I open my bank statement, I find that this State, which is on its financial knees, lodges €436.60 every week to my account. I look at my ESB bill and see credits for €95, my telephone bill €70. It appears that I am entitled to a TV licence and free travel for life.
I recently returned my medical card (the Government seem very slow to reveal how many cards were returned and the cost of retrieving them). I still pay only €100 a month for prescribed drugs for my wife and myself, I estimate the real cost at approximately €250 per month. In all, the State appears to subsidise me to the extent of €26,000 per annum.
For the past 20 years, I have been a volunteer worker with the Society of St Vincent de Paul. Most of my visitations have been to young mothers living on lone parent allowance in the region of €221 per week. In recent months their rent allowance has been cut by €100 or more per month. If they have children under six, this allowance has been halved, and will disappear at the end of the year. What sort of economic madness subsidises me to the extent of €26,000 per annum and substantially reduces allowances to the most vulnerable in our society?
Countless millions are paid in children’s allowance to wealthy people who simply do not need it. Surely this could be taxed or means-tested?
By all means continue to give, and increase pensions to those who have no other source of income or have modest private pensions.
We have ever-decreasing funds to distribute through our social welfare system, please, please Minister, distribute in a more equitable fashion. – Yours, etc,
RAY DOHERTY.'




All too often when talks about cuts in social welfare, child benefit or OAP benefits comes up there is talk of 'picking on the defenseless' etc... Well this letter shows that there are cuts that can be made that won't harm people's quality of life. A friend of mine is on the dole and is getting 200 euro a week but he is living at home. This is more than he needs. He earns more than I do in my part-time job. Another friend of mine talked about how her mother would spend her child benefit on fancy clothes, as essentially it was surplus disposable income they had no need for at all. This OAP raises valid points as well.


The point is there are cuts that can be made in these areas with people still maintaining a very good quality of life. But unfortunately cuts are being made in other areas where people may not be able to afford it and take the hit.


No one wants to take a hit, but the government should be targetting those who can afford to take it, and the fact is many of these people are those who are on social welfare, pension plans etc...


(BTW this is coming from someone who himself has applied for partial JSA).


Anyway I thought it was a refreshing letter, Thoughts?

I think this guy deserves great credit for his letter to the Irish Times. Bear with me on this, I do most of my work abroad and left the country on the 28th of May and between work and holidays I arrived back on Saturday the 25th of July. I arrived back to a country that has slipped deeper into the mire of recession/depression. I have, from friends and others heard nothing but back biting about how people are not taking the pain. One person in particular had a little dig at me until I put him straight about the amount of tax I pay.

My point is, I can afford it and so can many others. After all my taxes I still take home a six figure salary. I can pay more taxes and probably will. I have absolutely no objection as long as others are doing the same.(I will admit I blame Fianna Fail for all of our ills and will take great pleasure in them being outed at the next general election). Not only can I afford it ,but because of the situation we are in, no matter what government we have we will still have to pay. Here is a personal example. I am a father of five. All little Ms Leincars. The youngest are twins and my child benefit every month amouts to €1144. I don't need this money. I never applied for it. My daughters enrolment in primary school triggered the process of receiving these payments as they were all born abroad. Social welfare payments such as child benefit should and must be means tested and or taxed as there are a lot of people who have no need of it. At the same time people at the higher pay scales must have all tax loopholes closed so that it is seen that everyone is paying their way according to their means.

There is no point in back biting people who are receiving any social and family affairs payments. It will only marginalise them. Even in a perfectly utopian Thatcherite system(I would never advocate that) people will receive payments so we need to suck it up the same way we have sucked up how our country has been and is being run.

BroomBurner

Do you think he would have written in that letter if he was still an average working joe?

No.

leincar

BroomBurner wrote: »

Do you think he would have written in that letter if he was still an average working joe?

No.

Surely thats the point. He's not the average working Joe. For that matter neither am I. He is making a very valid point that like myself he is receiving something that he does not necessarily need, and he is probably willing to make a downward adjustment to his income if it is seen that others are doing the same.

So what if he is not an average working Joe.

Morzadec

BroomBurner wrote: »

Do you think he would have written in that letter if he was still an average working joe?

No.

What exactly is your point here?

creeper1

Really you would be better off spending the money on free condoms in schools and sex education. I am oppossed to making single motherhood any more of an attractive option.

What kind of kids do they become? It's time for young men to take responsibility for the offspring they produce.

Young men are horny as hell so it's up to girls to not give it up or make sure that their boyfriend wears a helmet. More often than not the girls are left alone caring for the baby. But why are they making such poor choices about who they sleep with?

WHy is it so acceptable to have one night stands and not know who the father of your baby is?

thebman

Could always legalise abortion, problem solved :O

Cut benefits as anyone that wants to keep the child should have the ability to raise it.

ronbyrne2005

creeper1 wrote: »

Really you would be better off spending the money on free condoms in schools and sex education. I am oppossed to making single motherhood any more of an attractive option.

What kind of kids do they become? It's time for young men to take responsibility for the offspring they produce.

Young men are horny as hell so it's up to girls to not give it up or make sure that their boyfriend wears a helmet. More often than not the girls are left alone caring for the baby. But why are they making such poor choices about who they sleep with?

WHy is it so acceptable to have one night stands and not know who the father of your baby is?

MAke them take dna tests in order to claim social welfare. Actually the father will probably be on dole or in jail anyway so wont be in a position to contribute.

astrofool

Pensioners vote, single ma's generally don't. Guess who the political parties will make sure are kept more happy?

The medical card was a crazy excess, I know pensioners who buy a brand new car every year for the last 30 years (20 years retired), who were very worried about having to pay their own medical bills. A lot of pressure is also put on them to make sure that the inheritance for their kids is kept in place.

LoLth

they should means test both the pension rate and the social welfare payments.

BUT: they should be quite generously means tested and on a graduated scale. It wont save as much as a cut off point but it will save something and make it easier to swallow while ensuring that those that *need* help actually get it while those that are just topping up a bank account stop profiting.

I know people pay taxes and believe that they are "entitled" to x, y and z but if this continues we wont have anything to give to anyone anymore.

Its not going to solve everything but it cant hurt.

gurramok

creeper1 wrote: »

Really you would be better off spending the money on free condoms in schools and sex education. I am oppossed to making single motherhood any more of an attractive option.

What kind of kids do they become? It's time for young men to take responsibility for the offspring they produce.

Young men are horny as hell so it's up to girls to not give it up or make sure that their boyfriend wears a helmet. More often than not the girls are left alone caring for the baby. But why are they making such poor choices about who they sleep with?

WHy is it so acceptable to have one night stands and not know who the father of your baby is?

They know who the father is alright, they are scamming the system.

It pays to be a single mother to get all the SW entitlements and live handsomely. It does not pay to be married.

DJDC

It pays to be a single mother to get all the SW entitlements and live handsomely.

Come on, lets be realistic. Sure single mothers may be able to survive on SW benefits, they may even be able to have Sky Digitial and a large TV. But international statistics consistencely show that teenage mothers are far more likely to suffer abject poverty, abuse, lower life expectancty etc. This preconception that they have an easy life on welfare is nonsense when in fact most end up trying to survive on dodgy estates riddled by drugs and crime. Their children are also more like to drop out, go to jail and become single mothers themselves. Its a vicious circle of low expectations and low attainment that is a massive burden on the rest of society.

LoLth

In fairness, there are single mothers who didnt choose to get pregnant or who got pregnant and found themselves abandonded. these deserve whatever help they can get. I think people need to keep in mind that there is a distinction between single mother as a circumstance and single mother as a career choice.

Isnt there a law in england that you have to name the father of the child before you can claim for social welfare payments and the father's situation is taken into account when determining the amount you receive... perhaps a variation on this?

name the father:
if the father is employed and willing to assist (and both parties agree) then there's no issue. both are assessed and welfare is given if required

if the father is employed and unwilling to assist : he receives a reduction in tax credits to help offset the welfare payment being made

If the father is unemployed and willing to assist: again no problem, both welfare incomes are taken into account when assessing welfare levels

If the father is unemployed and unwilling to assist: a portion of his welfare is diverted to the child to offset the payments

not sure how to work out multiple fathers or the father of multiple children by different women....

another idea would be the re-introduction of coupons. you can pay for certain items with a social welfare card , eg: childrens clothes, school books etc NOT pints of fat frog or the latest in spangle accessorised belly top. Bills etc are handled using the social welfare number. This will cut down on two things, the aid not going where it is supposed to (sorry, I see to many young girls on the bus pushing a pram loaded down with shopping bags from fashion outlets, using top end mobiles and weighed down with jewellery. if you can afford all that crap then you dont need help from me! FS I havent bought clothes in over a year) , and it will cut down on welfare payments being given to or taken by another member of the family.

On naming the father: if a man is named he has the right to appeal and a DNA test can be performed. if it shows that the claim is correct then the person appealing is liable for the costs of the test (including worker time etc) payable over time by deduction of social welfare or tax credits , or payable in one lump up front or within 30 days.

basically, make it less attractive to have children if you are not in a position to care for them both from the mothers point of view and from the fathers. A bit of responsibility could solve a lot of problems.

gurramok

LoLth has hit it right there. I was aiming my post at the career choice women who do it. I have experience of this from one woman i know who just keeps having kids with the same father year after year in order to keep the welfare payments coming, keep the allocated house and yet the father lives with her on the sly.

If they both worked and got marrried, they will lose everything as its more profitable moneywise and timewise to be on welfare.

Single mothers here don't have a requirement by law to name the father on the birth cert or to qualify for social welfare.