Why are the Unemployed given so much?

candysapple

cranky bollix wrote: »

Theres no secret, im going on grant payments from last year, the grant was over 6500, and I know off the top of my head 3 people getting this grant.
1 of them was made redundant.(received redundancy payment)
1 was on the dole for over a year and the other was on the dole for a year and had a mortgage.None of them lived at home and I know 2 of them are getting rent allowance, not sure about the other.
Their all getting the full grant, I dont know what type of grant the rest of the mature students are getting in my year, but I assume their getting the same amount.Its rediculous for them all to be recieving the same amount.If you were on the dole for a year you should be more than happy, getting free fees and a few quid for expenses.not €6500.As Ive said earlier on in this thread, they reckon they have never had it so easy (besides the 1 with mortgage), holidays abroad and new i-mac computers.this is hardly fair on the rest of us who are skint.
and yes I am jealous! why wouldnt I be.

As was mentioned before part of the discussions the Dept. of Education are holding pre-budget is to include the BTEA as a source of income for the means testing of grants. So all of these people from next year will lose the 6500. Also only people who earn less than 22,000 a year (and this must include certain social welfare payments) get the 6500 amount so its unlikely that all the mature students are getting this.

cranky bollix

Ah well, at there doing something about it Know, but they'll still probably get the full grant for this year : 2009/2010

Jugs82

BostonB wrote: »

So the ones on the least income and longest without work get too much help. They shouldn't get more than those not unemployed and with an income.

Ah jez, thats simplifing it a bit..

I have said they do deserve the BTEA, which is alot more in itself than anybody returning to education who is leaving a job gets...

The BTEA is an incentive to upskill and importantly to get people off the live register and is very important - that I'm not disputing

My point is many also get the €6600 grant on top of this which is crazy IMO when compared to other students - as Cranky Bollix said below, most of the people he knows who receive both (BTEA & Grant) have never had it so easy....

Jugs82

candysapple wrote: »

Who gets too much support?
You don't seem to think that people who live on a low income or limited means should be denied support so it's not them. And it doesn't seem to be the people who look for financial assistance (your own GF looked for these and unfortunately didn't qualify for any) whether they qualify or not. The only people I can see that you don't think should receive these supports are those who are 'scamming' the system and nobody can argue with that.

Just because 2 people attend the same course does not mean they have reached that point through by the same path.

Part true - its the system that I have the issue with...

I just think that the wide array of benefits for those returning to education is nuts, especially when you combine BTEA, Grant & other allowances

My point is that if you receive the BTEA, you should not be eligible for the grant - thats it, plain and simple!!

TirNaNog.

cranky bollix wrote: »

Ah well, at there doing something about it Know, but they'll still probably get the full grant for this year : 2009/2010

why dont you find extra work and stop poking your nose into other people's finances and begrudging them?

candysapple

well as I said above and as someone else has already stated that's what they are changing. The idea being that it should now be included as income when being assessed for a grant.

some people will continue to get both however. The BTEA only matches what you were getting through jobseekers benefit or allowance so if you only got 40 per week because your means tested on the income of both you and your spouse then thats all you will receive on BTEA. So, you would still be on a low enough income to earn a grant also.

Jugs82

candysapple wrote: »

well as I said above and as someone else has already stated that's what they are changing. The idea being that it should now be included as income when being assessed for a grant.

some people will continue to get both however. The BTEA only matches what you were getting through jobseekers benefit or allowance so if you only got 40 per week because your means tested on the income of both you and your spouse then thats all you will receive on BTEA. So, you would still be on a low enough income to earn a grant also.

Thats fair enough - it really needed to change so this a step in the right direction

cranky bollix

TirNaNog. wrote: »

why dont you find extra work and stop poking your nose into other people's finances and begrudging them?

very constructive :rolleyes:
find extra work are we living on the same planet.I cant even get enough hours in the job im in.

TirNaNog.

cranky bollix wrote: »

very constructive :rolleyes:
find extra work are we living on the same planet.I cant even get enough hours in the job im in.

Yeah hand out herald am's? sell lighters 5 for a pound on moore st,shoe shine,clean gutters/windows any thing is better than being a grumpy begruder!
Ohhhh I dont live on the planet of the nosey parkers........

redsetter

Can I emphasise that you DO NOT AUTOMATICALLY GET A GRANT if you are on BTEA!! You are assessed on your previous year's earnings. If you worked in 2008 your earnings are taken into the threshold. Depending on your earnings you get a certain level of a grant. SPECIAL MAINTENANCE GRANTS are for DISADVANTAGED students, students whose family income is under 22,300 remember this is gross income. It also depends on how far away the student lives whether they get the 6000 or not.

QUOTE"The fact that you must be one of a range of social welfare payments to qualify just doesnt sit well with me"
Please read the following:


Disadvantaged students who meet a number of conditions can qualify for special rates of grants.
Applicants must qualify for the ordinary maintenance grant for the academic year 2009/2010 and total reckonable income in the tax year January to December 2008 must not exceed €22,308 net of Qualified Child Increases and standard exclusions.


For students, including mature students, who are assessed on parent(s)/guardian income, their parent(s)/guardian must, on 31 December 2008, have been:

• Claiming long-term social welfare payments, or
• Claiming Family Income Supplement or
• Participating in designated programmes (for example, a FÁS training programme).

For students who are assessed on their own income, on 31 December 2008, the student must have been receiving an eligible (long-term) social welfare payment (including long-term Jobseeker's Allowance) or Family Income Supplement or participating in a designated programme.
The full rates of the special maintenance grant are €6,690 (including top-up of €3,270) for disadvantaged students living more than 24 kilometres away from college and €2,680 (including top-up of €1,310) for disadvantaged students living within 24 kilometres of college.

OBVIOUSLY to be disadvantaged you would be on a social welfare payment?

HOW do you think these systems work? It is MEANS TESTING, you are assessed on your income and what you have earned.
If your issue is that the person gets BOTH the grant and BTEA then consider that the person is getting social welfare anyway and would not be in a position to go back if they did not receive this. The special maintenance grant is similar to a scholarship for disadvantaged, for those who have no other support. The double aspect you speak of is available to your girlfriend as a mature student and she is getting it?


QUOTE"So, if you are getting BTEA and are lucky enough to qualify for the grant, you will more likely than not receive the special rate".

No again this is not true,this is too much of a general statement, it depends on what level of grant you are entitled to. You may qualify for a level one, you will not get special rate unless you qualify for a FULL grant and satisfy the means for special maintenance grant.Again BTEA and Grants are seperately assessed and being on btea does not entitle you to any grant.

QUOTE"So on top of the BTEA allowance, those on social welfare heading back to college can potentially get a grant that is double that of the majority of grant holders - Doesn't sound terribly fair to me!!"

Do you know that mature students receive the non adjacent rate for grants automatically?? So this is double the normal grant...do you have an issue with this also??

• Firstly you Girlfriend is a mature student and is receiving automatically the non-adjacent rate which is double the normal rate...does this sound terribly fair to you?
• You say you don't have an issue with BTEA but I think you do as you say "why is it the taxpayers responsibility to fund an unemployed person to return to college"and that you don't see why "current BTEA shouldn't be repaid after the person begins work especially if they had been in receipt of the grant as well". Firstly you cannot know how much tax a person has paid before becoming unemployed, especially in this recession MOST recently unemployed people were taxpayers their whole lives!!! Secondly Most students are assessed on their parents income, their income continues while the student is in college, it doesn't stop, they don't have to pay anything back after college but the person who's only income is social welfare and is receiving an incentive to go back should have to repay??
• The BTEA is to get people into college and out of social welfare. It is being paid regardless of being in college or not. Your argument that those receiving BTEA shouldn't get both that and the grant. If you are assessed individually and do not get a grant it is because you have earned over the limit. If you receive a grant and not BTEA it is because you do not qualify. The grant is assessed seperately, you are begrudging the disadvantaged. Yes there are always those who scam the system but PLEASE try to remember those that don't. you cannot give the option of applying for a grant to one student and not another. A person whose sole income is social welfare and has been for the precious tax year, will get full grant regardless. The only difference is they receive BTEA which I won't argue about again.
  
  
  JUGS82 .It is okay for your girlfriend to receive a special mature student grant but not a disadvantaged student? I noticed you based her monthly income on a 12month period and the special maintenance grant on a 9month period, was this for more effect? your GF will in fact receive 380 per month, not bad I would say, lots and lots of students get absolutely nothing.
  There is a HUGE difference in grant levels for an ordinary grant level and a mature student grant? You have an issue with the HUGE difference in assistance for students so why are you not complaining about this?
  

redsetter

candysapple wrote: »

As was mentioned before part of the discussions the Dept. of Education are holding pre-budget is to include the BTEA as a source of income for the means testing of grants. So all of these people from next year will lose the 6500.

Yes this is partly true except all BTEA shouldn't will lose their grants. BTEA total income is around 10,600e. I can't see them reducing the reckonable income thresholds that low, currently they are 22,300. You will be means tested meaning your BTEA or social welfare payment will be added to your family income..currently it is excluded.
If you are assessed as an individual and your sole income is BTEA or social welfare for the previous tax year you should still receive the grant you are entitled to, and if your BTEA and parents income(family income) is under the reckonable income thresholds you will still qualify for respective grants.

candysapple

Redsetter, I had already said that in a previous post. I was just paraphrasing for that comment. The people whom had been described as receiving 6500 were specifically known to a poster and were said to have been over the 22,300 when all income (inclusive of BTEA and other payments which are currently excluded) were totaled. It was probably a few pages back so you might not have seen it.

redsetter

candysapple wrote: »

Redsetter, I had already said that in a previous post. I was just paraphrasing for that comment. The people whom had been described as receiving 6500 were specifically known to a poster and were said to have been over the 22,300 when all income (inclusive of BTEA and other payments which are currently excluded) were totaled. It was probably a few pages back so you might not have seen it.

Okay thanks, got ya now.:)No harm anyway in putting it up again I spose.