Cowen confirms social welfare cuts in Budget

97i9y3941

Please merge if this is suited to another thread,thanks

Cowen confirms social welfare cuts in Budget
Wednesday, 2 December 2009 12:35

The Taoiseach has confirmed there will be cuts in Social Welfare in next week's Budget.

He said the Budget will have to be debated and that there would also have to be a Social Welfare bill to bring the decisions into operation.

The Budget will be delivered next Wednseday, 9 December.



Story from RTÉ News:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1202/budget.html

funny they had no hesitation cutting that,so maybe thats where the payment for the rest is been made up for...

jenzz

Fred83 wrote: »

Please merge if this is suited to another thread,thanks



funny they had no hesitation cutting that,so maybe thats where the payment for the rest is been made up for...

Exactly what I was thinking =- no hesitation at all

Rb

Ah I'm sure they'll change their mind when the f*cking unemployed threaten to go out on strike next.

inforfun

Probably also done in the form of an unpaid leave deal?

IronMan

He also needs to significantly cut rent allowance. It is putting an artifical floor on rent, and is nothing more than a state subsidy. But Frank Fahy and the FF landlord posse won't like that.

jenzz

IronMan wrote: »

He also needs to significantly cut rent allowance. It is putting an artifical floor on rent, and is nothing more than a state subsidy. But Frank Fahy and the FF landlord posse won't like that.

But if they cut rent allowance how does the person pay their rent - people forget so many low income family cannot makes ends meet as it is. When they cut it last year it made no difference to rents - they werent reduced by the landlords - they stayed the same & the person had to stump up the extra amount to meet the rent. Its the family who suffers - the normal joe & their kids.

Qs

Rb wrote: »

Ah I'm sure they'll change their mind when the f*cking unemployed threaten to go out on strike next.

Yeah who'll watch the Jeremy Kyle show then?

Rb

Qs wrote: »

Yeah who'll watch the Jeremy Kyle show then?

The teachers while they're taking their unpaid leave during school term instead of holidays obviously :pac:

Qs

haha brilliant. It all balances out.

milkerman

I have the greatest sympathy for those people recently made unemployed. Two years ago a good labourer on the buildings could clear a grand a week and is now on just in excess of 200 per week. That drop in income is calamitous.
The other side of the coin being those folks who have NEVER worked even through the years of full employment and who seem to exist for no other reason than to absorb resources.
And we are not talking about a few individuals - I suspect the number is in the order of 100,000 across the country. Not to mention the 'career' single parent with the live in boyfriend.

Bull76

What a disgrace and amockery to this country this government is. Punish the needy and helpless, because they don't have the balls to stand up to the unions.
For starters cut all politicans wages by 10% at a minimum no questions asked. Why should they be asked would you like a pay cut, just reduce there pay.
Leave the social welfare alone, The cost of living hasn't dropped enough to justify this. Bench marking works both ways thats why it's bench marking.
If the government had any balls stand up and do whats right for the country as a whole not look after those already well off.

Qs

milkerman wrote: »

I have the greatest sympathy for those people recently made unemployed. Two years ago a good labourer on the buildings could clear a grand a week and is now on just in excess of 200 per week. That drop in income is calamitous.

It is a terrible predicament for many but lets be honest, labourers should never have been on a grand a week in the first place.

ceret

Fred83 wrote: »

funny they had no hesitation cutting that,so maybe thats where the payment for the rest is been made up for...

Social welfare cuts were always planned.

jenzz wrote: »

But if they cut rent allowance how does the person pay their rent - people forget so many low income family cannot makes ends meet as it is. When they cut it last year it made no difference to rents - they werent reduced by the landlords - they stayed the same & the person had to stump up the extra amount to meet the rent. Its the family who suffers - the normal joe & their kids.

Yeah it'll be tough on people. But there are lots of empty houses now, rent *is* coming now. CSO is recoding an approximate 30% fall in rent source

K-9

jenzz wrote: »

But if they cut rent allowance how does the person pay their rent - people forget so many low income family cannot makes ends meet as it is. When they cut it last year it made no difference to rents - they werent reduced by the landlords - they stayed the same & the person had to stump up the extra amount to meet the rent. Its the family who suffers - the normal joe & their kids.

Most landlords have cut rent. If they don't, leave and they can try and get it of somebody else.

Daithinski

K-9 wrote: »

Most landlords have cut rent. If they don't, leave and they can try and get it of somebody else.

Leases?

Rev. BlueJeans

This was inevitable. Cuts across the board are one thing (and I don't disagree with them in principle), but there is a lot more that needs to be done.

Genuine applicants need to be supported, trained (and not by a 1 billion a year behemoth-that needs reform too, to say the least), and ultimately weaned off the teat before they get stuck in a rut.

Working for a living needs to be an aspiration, rather than something to avoid, because you'll do better on the welfare, which it is now for many lower paid occupations.

The dole itself is not the whole story either, there are allowances out there that most working people or the recent unemployed know little of, but the goons in tracksuits, and their parents before them, have down pat.

There has been talk here of a sliding scale of unemployment benefit, reducing year on year. This to my mind would be an excellent move, and should be implemented now. The main problem is, once you give someone something, it is very hard to take it away. It will be very hard to see someone who has mucked in for the last ten years, get lumped in with some bollix who hasn't done a tap for fifteen years, but I can't see another way forward.

I also feel that, in tandem with reshuffling the way we provide public services, extra credits could be offered to those on the live register with suitable skills to engage in community projects, and I don't just mean filling potholes either. On a temporary basis, people could provide home help, assistance with civic projects. Anything basically, and maintain some self esteem for themselves into the bargain.

A radical rethink is needed here, and nobody should be overlooked, in either sense.

K-9

Daithinski wrote: »

Leases?

So sue a Social Welfare recipient?

Fighting Irish

Fred83 wrote: »

funny they had no hesitation cutting that,so maybe thats where the payment for the rest is been made up for...

It's about time they say "Fook the people who have failed, we'll reward the people who were sensible"

ps not all people on the dole have failed, but most have

seclachi

Fighting Irish wrote: »

It's about time they say "Fook the people who have failed, we'll reward the people who were sensible"

ps not all people on the dole have failed, but most have

Uh yeah, because every filthy stinking builder who lost his job was just out to destroy the economy anyway, so cut there dole ! We can totally keep the public sector going at its current rates after all, we just have to cut everything else to the bone.

Joe1919

Rb wrote: »

Ah I'm sure they'll change their mind when the f*cking unemployed threaten to go out on strike next.

The unemployed should organise a 'day of work' in protest at the cut. If the government refuse to concede to their demands, an all out 'work out' should be organised.
The unemployed should work for as long as it takes until the governments submits to their demands.

97i9y3941

ok there are people who where able to work during the good times but are committing fraud as it is by sitting on it for years even before the boom*god knows why they where never called in*,but they are targeting the vunerable again,i doubt a civil servant with kids is living off €204*plus allowances* a week?

murphaph

jenzz wrote: »

But if they cut rent allowance how does the person pay their rent - people forget so many low income family cannot makes ends meet as it is. When they cut it last year it made no difference to rents - they werent reduced by the landlords - they stayed the same & the person had to stump up the extra amount to meet the rent. Its the family who suffers - the normal joe & their kids.

I call bullsh!t on this. I know a bit about it as a landlord see. I have my former home (typical 3 bed semi in Dublin) let to people on Rent Supplement (Rent Allowance is something else but people often confuse the two).

I cut the rent from €1200 to €1100 in January and then to €975 after the changes to Rent Supplement were announced. Unlike some members of the public sector and their unions-I have accepted the economic reality of 2009. I expect rents will fall further and I will drop them in line to whatever is required to keep the tenants in situ. Rent Supplement does indeed provide an artificial floor to rents generally. If it was reduced year on year rents would fall-FACT.

Any landlord who refuses to drop rents in the face of the market falling is as bad as the public sector unions but the difference is, it's his money he's gambling with, not the future generations' of Ireland.

mikemac

murphaph wrote: »

I call bullsh!t on this. I know a bit about it as a landlord see. I have my former home (typical 3 bed semi in Dublin) let to people on Rent Supplement (Rent Allowance is something else but people often confuse the two).

I think what jenzz was aiming at is that small bedsits that rent to single people at around 400-600 per month didn't drop at all! If you are single and can't/won't share a house then a bedsit is your option. Certainly I've read many threads here about bedsit prices not dropping while apartments and houses around the 800 per month and above level dropped.
Though reading it again jenzz mentions families. So maybe not but my point on bedsits still stands

Now you own a 3 bed house and of course rent is dropping, nobody is doubting that.
But it's a different market, a single person getting government assistance with rent could never rent your house

murphaph

mikemac wrote: »

But it's a different market, a single person getting government assistance with rent could never rent your house

And rightly so-why should the taxpayer pay (90%+ of) the rent on a 1300 sq ft house for one person to rattle around in?

In Germany those on the equivalent of rent supplement can avail of 45 sq. m absloute maximum in a not too expensive area. Anything over and above that and the applicant will be told to move before his application will be looked at.

If bedsit rents aren't dropping, the demand must be there or the thresholds for rent supplement are still too high or the tenants have collectively opted not to move to cheaper accommodation. It's one of those three.

mikemac

murphaph wrote: »

And rightly so-why should the taxpayer pay (90%+ of) the rent on a 1300 sq ft house for one person to rattle around in?

Oh, I agree. I never said otherwise.
As for sq ft, they stopped teaching the imperial system in school back in 1980's. Square metres these days

murphaph wrote: »

If bedsit rents aren't dropping, the demand must be there or the thresholds for rent supplement are still too high or the tenants have collectively opted not to move to cheaper accommodation. It's one of those three.

I would also say it's a combination of three.
If you're looking for a bedsit the rents are stubbornly resisting drops for all those reasons.

You seem to be very aware for a landlord, wish more landlords were like you having dealt with many

K-9

mikemac wrote: »

Oh, I agree. I never said otherwise.
As for sq ft, they stopped teaching the imperial system in school back in 1980's. Square metres these days



I would also say it's a combination of three.
If you're looking for a bedsit the rents are stubbornly resisting drops for all those reasons.

You seem to be very aware for a landlord, wish more landlords were like you having dealt with many

My experience of dealing with construction companies and landlords is they are dropping rents, by about 20-30%, which is reflected in the statistics.

There maybe a few resisting but eventually they'll have to reduce. Either that or no tenants.

Tipsy Mac

I think the dole should be cut by 25% on anyone who has been out of work for 5 years plus as they are career dosers. Those who have been made unemployed in the last 5 years atleast made an effort to work and should get what the career dosers got seeing as they payed their way upto now.

amjon

Bull76 wrote: »

Leave the social welfare alone, The cost of living hasn't dropped enough to justify this.

So what? They just have to learn to live with no social life and on beans and toast. Kind of like being a student without the fun.

Marinjohn

I can still hear Cowen,Lenihan,and Hanifan "we will not penalize the most vunerable in our society".Not only have they penalized them,and they are far from finished yet,they have stomped them into a mudhole...What these cuts in Social Welfare will cause is : 1...increase in crime.....2...more traffic jams in Newry,which will result in less money for the exchequere...

kumate_champ07

IronMan wrote: »

He also needs to significantly cut rent allowance. It is putting an artifical floor on rent, and is nothing more than a state subsidy. But Frank Fahy and the FF landlord posse won't like that.

my rent allowance was already cut by about 16euro a week this year, my rent didnt go down. its hard enough finding an extra 16euro a week, but if it gets cut again I'll be struggling

Atwork

amjon wrote: »

So what? They just have to learn to live with no social life and on beans and toast. Kind of like being a student without the fun.

Assuming you have a job, I hope you dont lose it.

K-9

Marinjohn wrote: »

I can still hear Cowen,Lenihan,and Hanifan "we will not penalize the most vunerable in our society".Not only have they penalized them,and they are far from finished yet,they have stomped them into a mudhole...What these cuts in Social Welfare will cause is : 1...increase in crime.....2...more traffic jams in Newry,which will result in less money for the exchequere...

Jaysus, what a negative view of people on SW!

Marinjohn

K-9 wrote: »

Jaysus, what a negative view of people on SW!

I never said I was on SW,never have been, its just my view of what will go wrong
when the cuts are implemented...

seclachi

Marinjohn wrote: »

I can still hear Cowen,Lenihan,and Hanifan "we will not penalize the most vunerable in our society".Not only have they penalized them,and they are far from finished yet,they have stomped them into a mudhole...What these cuts in Social Welfare will cause is : 1...increase in crime.....2...more traffic jams in Newry,which will result in less money for the exchequere...

If your on social welfare your not going to fill up on 50 quids worth of fuel (unless you live next to the border I guess) to do the weeks shopping. I reckon most of the newry gang are off bitching about the recession saying how hard up they are and then buying hdtvs & designer gear.

AKK

Unbelievable.

Ministers will spend in excess of 204 euro at the drop of a hat on a lunch (John O'Donoghue and Brendan Howlin take a bow) yet grossly misleading* 'figures', (*the fall in interest rates and thus mortgage repayments distort these figures - as do supermarket 'reduced prices' on own-brand goods with about as much nutritional value as a bucket of sand), regarding the decline in the cost of living, can be manipulated without a second thought as grounds to take aim at those surviving on social welfare.

The Government will prevaricate and equivocate about making the 'tough' decisions when it comes to reducing the pay of well-remunerated workers in the public service. A far easier decision indeed to cut someone already on the lowest level even further. Sure how are the disenfranchised, lower-than-the-low unemployed going to organise themselves and come after you, eh Brian(s)??

There is no doubt whatsoever that there is scope for reform of the social welfare system, but it is stomach-churning to think that the one concrete decision Mr Cowen has managed to articulate, is one targeting the most vulnerable in society. The immediate starting point of these 'tough' decisions has to be at Cabinet and Oireachtas level and not at the level of borderline poverty just because some people have enjoyed a free ride on social welfare. There are plenty of 'Public Representatives' who have enjoyed and indeed, continue to so enjoy, multiple free rides on the backs of Joe Public. The sheer greed and arrogance of these politicians is baffling. I remember hearing one TD explaining once why their salaries couldn't be touched - it's to ensure you get the best people you see. :rolleyes: It's fairly clear that ability has nothing to do with politics in this country - you only need 3 things to get elected - a 'family' seat, neck like a swan (all the better if it's a brass swan) and utter contempt for the electorate. I appreciate that this anti-politician rant is slightly off-topic but I'm just incredulous that on the same day our 'leaders' skirt around public sector pay reform, they have no qualms about announcing cuts to social welfare.

One final point - every cent of the social welfare payment will be spent by the recipient and put directly back into the local economy. You can be damn sure that they're not squirreling it away into some high-yield deposit account. Surely these cuts will be deflationary??

kumate_champ07

AKK wrote: »

own-brand goods with about as much nutritional value as a bucket of sand),

explain this one please

lmimmfn

if they cut the social, surely those on social should completely be entitled to more days holiday rather than the 2 weeks currently offered? I was only allowed 2 weeks off/not signing when i went to Amsterdam, if they cut social by 5% surely i should get another week?

jenzz

murphaph wrote: »

I call bullsh!t on this. I know a bit about it as a landlord see. I have my former home (typical 3 bed semi in Dublin) let to people on Rent Supplement (Rent Allowance is something else but people often confuse the two).

I cut the rent from €1200 to €1100 in January and then to €975 after the changes to Rent Supplement were announced. Unlike some members of the public sector and their unions-I have accepted the economic reality of 2009. I expect rents will fall further and I will drop them in line to whatever is required to keep the tenants in situ. Rent Supplement does indeed provide an artificial floor to rents generally. If it was reduced year on year rents would fall-FACT.

Any landlord who refuses to drop rents in the face of the market falling is as bad as the public sector unions but the difference is, it's his money he's gambling with, not the future generations' of Ireland.

you seem to call " bullsh!t" on anything I say!

Fact is many rents have not reduced. You may have reduced yours - fair play - but many landlords havent. Reducing a rent SUPPLEMENT rate to a family does not force or ensure a landlord reduces the overall amount.

Cuts to social welfare whether you like it or not will force many lower income families further into poverty. Try it for a week before stating "bullsh!t" . I find it disrespectful to anyone on SW to class their situation as "bullsh!t" . The normal Joes did not cause this mess yet they are the ones paying for it.

lmimmfn

jenzz wrote: »

you seem to call " bullsh!t" on anything I say!

Fact is many rents have not reduced. You may have reduced yours - fair play - but many landlords havent. Reducing a rent SUPPLEMENT rate to a family does not force or ensure a landlord reduces the overall amount.

Cuts to social welfare whether you like it or not will force many lower income families further into poverty. Try it for a week before stating "bullsh!t" . I find it disrespectful to anyone on SW to class their situation as "bullsh!t" . The normal Joes did not cause this mess yet they are the ones paying for it.

750euro a week on welfare with 3 kids isint bad at all though, be tough to get that after tax and all the free medical care, 'societies vulnerable' being hit again

Nody

jenzz wrote: »

Fact is many rents have not reduced. You may have reduced yours - fair play - but many landlords havent. Reducing a rent SUPPLEMENT rate to a family does not force or ensure a landlord reduces the overall amount.

Then the family has the option to move to a cheaper house with a landlord that does.

Cuts to social welfare whether you like it or not will force many lower income families further into poverty. Try it for a week before stating "bullsh!t" . I find it disrespectful to anyone on SW to class their situation as "bullsh!t" . The normal Joes did not cause this mess yet they are the ones paying for it.

Who voted in the current government? Who did not put away any money for the future? Who bought stuff on credit and poor undersized 100% loaned houses? If that was not the normal Joe then please do tell who did.

Reality is Social welfare SHOULD not mean you live a good life; it should be about making every euro count and not include money to go drinking every week.

wicklaman83

Qs wrote: »

It is a terrible predicament for many but lets be honest, labourers should never have been on a grand a week in the first place.

i was never on a grand as a labourer.i was taking home around 700/750,i then got my ticket as a tower crane driver and i was clearing 1200 but i can assure you i wasnt doing 9 to 5

Rev. BlueJeans wrote: »

This was inevitable. Cuts across the board are one thing (and I don't disagree with them in principle), but there is a lot more that needs to be done.

Genuine applicants need to be supported, trained (and not by a 1 billion a year behemoth-that needs reform too, to say the least), and ultimately weaned off the teat before they get stuck in a rut.

Working for a living needs to be an aspiration, rather than something to avoid, because you'll do better on the welfare, which it is now for many lower paid occupations.

The dole itself is not the whole story either, there are allowances out there that most working people or the recent unemployed know little of, but the goons in tracksuits, and their parents before them, have down pat.

There has been talk here of a sliding scale of unemployment benefit, reducing year on year. This to my mind would be an excellent move, and should be implemented now. The main problem is, once you give someone something, it is very hard to take it away. It will be very hard to see someone who has mucked in for the last ten years, get lumped in with some bollix who hasn't done a tap for fifteen years, but I can't see another way forward.

I also feel that, in tandem with reshuffling the way we provide public services, extra credits could be offered to those on the live register with suitable skills to engage in community projects, and I don't just mean filling potholes either. On a temporary basis, people could provide home help, assistance with civic projects. Anything basically, and maintain some self esteem for themselves into the bargain.

A radical rethink is needed here, and nobody should be overlooked, in either sense.

i have never been on the dole so no i dont know what my full entitlements are and i dont wear tracksuits and thankfully my parents are doing what they have done their whole adult lifes and thats work

Fighting Irish wrote: »

It's about time they say "Fook the people who have failed, we'll reward the people who were sensible"

ps not all people on the dole have failed, but most have

i'm 26 yrs old.since the age of 8 i have been working on the sites with my father on saturdays and school holidays.at 17 i left school and got and completed a carpentry apprenticeship.at 21 i got the chance to become a banksman for a towercrane.later that year i did my course and drove a tower crane for 4 and a half years.early last yr the crane work dried up and they put me in a teleporter and got my ticket for that and have been in that till 6 wks ago when i was made redundant.so i have qualifications at carpentry,banksman,towercrane and teleporter and not 1 job out there for me.as someone who has worked most of the life as a child and their full adult life i dont beleive i have failed and i do think i'm entitled to every bit of dole that is being offered

Atwork wrote: »

Assuming you have a job, I hope you dont lose it.

+1

Nody wrote: »

Then the family has the option to move to a cheaper house with a landlord that does.

Who voted in the current government? Who did not put away any money for the future? Who bought stuff on credit and poor undersized 100% loaned houses? If that was not the normal Joe then please do tell who did.

Reality is Social welfare SHOULD not mean you live a good life; it should be about making every euro count and not include money to go drinking every week.

i dont want to live a good life,i want to live a comfortable life without having to go in too debt on my bills and the most i used to drink is 3/4 pints on the odd week end.wheres the harm in that

Rev. BlueJeans

Then I'd have you down as one of the recent unemployed, and not a goon in a tracksuit at all, chap.

The likes of you shoule be supported and trained as I say, and given an outlet for your time should you wish to gain extra credits etc.

It's been proven in the past that its very easy to fall into a rut though even with the best will in the world, and this needs to be discouraged at all costs.

On another note, 1.2 large for driving a tower crane was never going to be sustainable in all fairness.

wicklaman83

what has to be discouraged.you lose a job,you look for a job,cant find a job so you have to get the dole.

1200 for 14/15 hrs a day.5 days a wk and maybe more for working 5 hrs of a saturday is fair is it not

gurramok

About 500million quid in Rent Supplement at last count going to private landlords where some do not provide proper accomodation. There was speculation or was it fact that the councils are eyeing up unsold affordable housing for social applicants. That should put a dent in the rent bill.

Dickerty

gurramok wrote: »

About 500million quid in Rent Supplement at last count going to private landlords where some do not provide proper accomodation. There was speculation or was it fact that the councils are eyeing up unsold affordable housing for social applicants. That should put a dent in the rent bill.

And for social housing, they should sell up on any properties which would fetch a good price and take on new estates which are finished and unsold, make the developers an offer they can't refuse...

gurramok

Dickerty wrote: »

And for social housing, they should sell up on any properties which would fetch a good price and take on new estates which are finished and unsold, make the developers an offer they can't refuse...

The problem is they can't even sell the few thousand(apts) in a high demand area like Dublin docklands!
Price maybe a factor though

If they take on new estates, the councils who are already broke will have to find money to pay for the new responsibilities. (a big reason why they hardly did this during the bubble years)

Hells Belle

lmimmfn wrote: »

750euro a week on welfare with 3 kids isint bad at all though, be tough to get that after tax and all the free medical care, 'societies vulnerable' being hit again

Thats a very ill informed post - who gets €750 a week on welfare my oh was getting €127 per week after working for 15 yrs on a site paying tax, we have 2 kids and we were NOT entitled to a medical card (doctor visit yes). Even with my full time wages we didn't come anywhere close to that, we also were not eligible to claim mortgage relief because I work.

People should look up their facts before attacking people on SW - most really don't want to be on it in the first place and it certainly isn't the high life I can tell you.

jenzz

Nody wrote: »

Then the family has the option to move to a cheaper house with a landlord that does.

Who voted in the current government? Who did not put away any money for the future? Who bought stuff on credit and poor undersized 100% loaned houses? If that was not the normal Joe then please do tell who did.

Reality is Social welfare SHOULD not mean you live a good life; it should be about making every euro count and not include money to go drinking every week.

reality - its not a good life - Its an extreemly difficult one
reality - It is about making every euro count & I can guarantee you for most its making that last euro stretch & stretch & stretch.
reality - Money to go drinking every week - ??? Anyone on SW able to do this ? Couldnt tell you last drink I had in the home let alone out...

Tar & brush coming to mind - Not everyone on SW fits this supposed stereotype people have of them.

We are not all tossers, or scum,or wasters or layabouts or whatever term people may have for SW recipients. We didnt choose to lose our jobs etc.
We are HUMAN. Stop putting all 450 odd thousand of us into the same bracket . Blame those who caused this mess if you want to blame someone. Its not public , its not private sectors its the SYSTEM. Its a mess & back to my initial point. Targeting those who are on the bottom end of the financial ladder with a further loss in income is only going to push more families further into poverty.

jenzz

lmimmfn wrote: »

750euro a week on welfare with 3 kids isint bad at all though, be tough to get that after tax and all the free medical care, 'societies vulnerable' being hit again

€750 a week with 3 kids? I get not much more a MONTH with 2 small kids

gurramok

Hells Belle wrote: »

Thats a very ill informed post - who gets €750 a week on welfare my oh was getting €127 per week after working for 15 yrs on a site paying tax, we have 2 kids and we were NOT entitled to a medical card (doctor visit yes). Even with my full time wages we didn't come anywhere close to that, we also were not eligible to claim mortgage relief because I work.

People should look up their facts before attacking people on SW - most really don't want to be on it in the first place and it certainly isn't the high life I can tell you.

You work where your income is taken into account and is means tested. Whats the total for 2 parents unemployed with 3 kids or a lone parent unemployed with 3 kids, all on welfare?

amacachi

lmimmfn wrote: »

if they cut the social, surely those on social should completely be entitled to more days holiday rather than the 2 weeks currently offered? I was only allowed 2 weeks off/not signing when i went to Amsterdam, if they cut social by 5% surely i should get another week?

No, you shouldn't be entitled to more "holidays". To be perfectly honest someone on the dole shouldn't be able to go away for more than a week a year if even that much. Your attitude basically sums up everything bad the welfare in this country has done to peoples' attitudes. The dole should be to help someone get by til they get a new job, not to fund trips abroad.