The Poor Can't Pay but the Goverment thinks they have 3 Billion to spare???

aatraities

Bye folks time to delete this account

Nody

Attempted tear dragger with classics such as "We did not cause it so why do we need to pay it?" (same line totted out by the unions as well I might add) and "The poor are unfairly targeted".

The fact is that social wellfare etc. has increased greatly in a relatively short time span during the good days; yes, they need to pay and yes, there needs to be further cuts (esp. on combi set up of benefits etc.).

Count Dooku

As usual, private sector PAYE workers will pay alone for poor plus welfare fraudsters, public servants, bankers, developers, charity businesses, greedy retailers, greedy landlords etc

ei.sdraob

argh mee eyes, ze gogles do nothing

aatraities

same thing

aatraities

and again

Cookie_Monster

aatraities wrote: »

Is that better?

I think its more the content than the formatting tbh

jmayo

Can someone please explain to me what is the Irish poverty line ?

As other poster has stated it ain't the poor ?? that will be paying, but the normal worker who doesn't happen to be cossetted by big primarily public sector union.

ClayDavis

What the hell is the poverty line? How do you calculate poverty "rates"? And yes for the record I lived on social welfare payments for a few months. I lived very comfortably in fact.

aatraities

and again

aatraities

ClayDavis wrote: »

What the hell is the poverty line? How do you calculate poverty "rates"? And yes for the record I lived on social welfare payments for a few months. I lived very comfortably in fact.

SSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEETTTTTT


know i know a liar when i here one Clay. You have all that basketball money hidden away now don't you?

aatraities

Amateurs seriously do I have to use Google for you????

Nody

aatraities wrote: »

Seems Nody would be happy to live on less than the current dole if the situation arose for him. With 450k unemployed do ye out there are really think cutting to the bone is the best way to get out of this mess?

Say hello to our friend the budget deficit; it is also known as living on borrowed money and adjusting your costs to what you earn...

To avoid double post I'll put your post above here:

aatraities wrote: »

wow Nody no hiding which side of the line you fall on eh???

Well I'm funny this way that I get a bit upset when people want to promise away the money I make. Now if you want to spend your money on the poor then be my guest, I'm not going to stop you but don't do it with MY money.

But seriously even with the advances that were made in social welfare a vast number of those on such payments are still far below poverty rates. Does that seem like much of a gain to you?

You want me to dig up the recent thread about the guy wanting to get his wife fired so they could afford a third child?

I always have wondered why the nordic countries have such high replacements rates for social welfare and yet have such dynamic labour markets as well?

Because using Denmark (the only real one with a dynamic market) offers you 3 years of studies/retraining (and the real deal not some FAS BS) in your life at ~90% of your old salary. After you have used up your 3 years you're out of benefits for the rest of your life basically and gets cut down to minimal benefits.*

*This is from the top of my head, numbers and details could be wrong.

jmayo

aatraities wrote: »

Anyone here have any idea about the supposed complementary nature of high replacement rates and dynamic labour markets?

Who out there with a decent job and good pay, no matter if they have seen a cut these past couple years or felt the huge increases in taxes can honestly say that they wouldn't be completely screwed if they had to live on the dole?

Seems Nody would be happy to live on less than the current dole if the situation arose for him. With 450k unemployed do ye out there are really think cutting to the bone is the best way to get out of this mess?

And how many of those 450k will be helped by keeping a high minimum wage that makes it unattractive to hire people ?

Can I ask where the feck do you and the others think we can find the money to keep social welfare and public spending at the level it currently is at ?

And please do not trott out the usual sh**e about taxing the rich.

aatraities

an again

aatraities

the same

aatraities

and again

Nody

aatraities wrote: »

Yeah that sounds good to me but how do you figure that driving people in to poverty is going to help the economy thereby getting the country out of the deficit problem?

Lets see, actually accepting work for minimum wage? Not earning more from staying home? Actually having an incentive to get a job?

The above category is the "permanent" unemployed who simply don't care.

Now, what would it solve for the people actually looking for work? Well for starters they will not have to deal with a 15 Billion deficit to pay back with their future taxes with interest!

We borrow a lot of money as a country (bank bailouts, tax breaks for the wealthy etc)

Actually we have other threads on the bank bailout and the calculations, if memory serves it came out at less then 2 Bil a year. Tax on wealthy, well currently ~10% of the people pay in over 80% of tha PAYEE tax, hence you should ask why are not the rest of the people contributing more...

but seems the relatively small amount needed to maintain social welfare rates where there are, which is below the poverty level seems to be just a line to far for you eh Nody???

Considering our wellfare budget has not only balloned (see historical numbers) but also costs us billions a year, yes, it is perfectly in line with me. Esp. as the poverty line you wish to draw in the line is such a joke shown by people who has consistently posted here living on it.

And since you seems so fond of the Yankee way of doing things whats wrong with their approach to the deficit?? How many trillion are they in debt now?

We don't have a money press to print with; they do but beyond that "minor" issue please have a look at Greece, Spain or Romania and see what happens if the market don't want to borrow you any more money.

aatraities

more of the same

Count Dooku

aatraities wrote: »

Oh please are you that delusional? 50 billion so far to keep the banks afloat but this 3 billion in cuts that will all come at the feet of the poorest in society is going to really help things?

The poorest decided to stay home when they had chance to stop NAMA, now they will get what they deserve

Nody

aatraities wrote: »

Do you feel the same about your money that is being given away to the banks? I bet you do but don't say it, as you cling on for dear life hoping what ever dismal share holding you have in either of the two pathetic Irish banks might not get completely wiped out.

I don't have a single cent in Irish bank shares; nor before or after the crash (except possibly as indirect from a European/Global fund).

As for the rescue, feel free to actually do your history on it. I've been against NAMA and the NAMA set up from day 1.

jmayo

aatraities wrote: »

Yeah that sounds good to me but how do you figure that driving people in to poverty is going to help the economy thereby getting the country out of the deficit problem?

We borrow a lot of money as a country (bank bailouts, tax breaks for the wealthy etc) but seems the relatively small amount needed to maintain social welfare rates where there are, which is below the poverty level seems to be just a line to far for you eh Nody???

And since you seems so fond of the Yankee way of doing things whats wrong with their approach to the deficit?? How many trillion are they in debt now?

Please stop right now before you have everyone laughing at you.

There is a big difference between the US economy and ours, they print their own currency which is one of the major economic currencies in world, they are one of the major economic players in the world, they are a military super power and you are seriously suggesting we can play by the same rules as the US. :rolleyes:

Basically you are saying lets continue borrowing.
Does it ever cross your mind that some day someone will say WE ARE NOT LENDING YOU ANYMORE ?

See Greece as example.

aatraities wrote: »

Oh please are you that delusional? 50 billion so far to keep the banks afloat but this 3 billion in cuts that will all come at the feet of the poorest in society is going to really help things? You are delusional aren't you?

I think there are a lot of ways to come up with the money. One way would be to get people back to work. It's a neat idea because they stop getting social welfare and they start to pay taxes as well. Some like to call the a twofer. But we don't seem to have any money to spend on getting people back to work because why again???

Shure if we are borrowing 50 billion for the failure of our banks we should add on another 3 billion a year to keep all the so called poor from abject poverty ?

Back to work doing what ?
Oh yeah we will produce goods that will be priced too high to sell, because our cost of production is so high due in part to major factor of high minimum wage.

Yet again I find a person with a huge sense of entitlement.
There is a mindset that believes that "well billions are being wasted on banks so why shoudln't we have billions fed to us".

I am all for helping sick, blind, old, handicapped people and people newly unemployed, but there were thousands who did not work even during our boom times and these same ones are always first complaining with their hands out.
Oh wait they are marginalised so they didn't need to get off their ar**es. :rolleyes:

ei.sdraob

ClayDavis wrote: »

What the hell is the poverty line? How do you calculate poverty "rates"? And yes for the record I lived on social welfare payments for a few months. I lived very comfortably in fact.

if you listen to the Unions they defined the poverty line at 36K a year :rolleyes:

ZYX

Poverty line is usually half the average national wage. So in Ireland poverty line is about €17,000 a year or about €350 a week but is falling.

aatraities

I had forgotten how annoying boards.ie members are

aatraities

Oh boards how long will this take?

aatraities

because understanding requires effort

John_Mc

Don't feed this troll lads, he'll lose interest eventually

ZYX

aatraities wrote: »

Seriously refer to my post on the last page. You don't have a clue what you are talking about.

http://www.socialinclusion.ie/poverty.html

So what is your definition of "poverty line". That article does not give a definition. This one is from Combat Poverty

This is also known as relative poverty, income poverty or risk of poverty. It is measured by setting a relative income poverty line, which shows how an individual's or household's income compares to the average. This line is usually set at a level between 40% and 70% of the average income.

I suppose I should have said 55% of average income rather than 50% so sorry about that. Makes it about €18,500

Scarab80

aatraities wrote: »

15 billion deficit? Where do you get your figures? The deficit stands currently at about 85 billion. How much of that is because of the lavish lifestyle of the poor?

That would be the national debt not the deficit. Out of that 85bn figure, 4 billion currently relates to bank bailouts. The rest relates to an excess of spending over receipts on current and capital items.

The deficit so far this year is 8.9bn, 5.9bn of that has gone to the department of social welfare.

Count Dooku

aatraities wrote: »

We should be trying to get people to work.

How?

Nody

ZYX wrote: »

So what is your definition of "poverty line". That article does not give a definition. This one is from Combat Poverty

This is also known as relative poverty, income poverty or risk of poverty. It is measured by setting a relative income poverty line, which shows how an individual's or household's income compares to the average. This line is usually set at a level between 40% and 70% of the average income.

I suppose I should have said 55% of average income rather than 50% so sorry about that. Makes it about €18,500

Actually they say 60%, but what I really like if you can't do any two of these you are poor.

1. Two pairs of strong shoes
2. A warm waterproof overcoat
3. Buy new not second-hand clothes
4. Eat meals with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day
5. Have a roast joint or its equivalent once a week
6. Had to go without heating during the last year through lack of money
7. Keep the home adequately warm
8. Buy presents for family or friends at least once a year
9. Replace any worn out furniture
10. Have family or friends for a drink or meal once a month
11. Have a morning, afternoon or evening out in the last fortnight, for entertainment

Oh and you forgot to find this lovely tidbit pointing out how flawed their numbers are as well:

median income threshold increased by 98% from €102.44 in 1997 to €202.49 in 2006. Over the same period (1997 – 2006), prices (CPI) increased by just 35.8%, average industrial earnings increased by 61.8% and basic social welfare payments increased by 99.7%.

John is right, I'm out of this thread since clearly the OP has not even bothered to check his own sources.

aatraities

aww now

aatraities

more of the same

Scarab80

Nody wrote: »

Actually they say 60%, but what I really like if you can't do any two of these you are poor.

Or more accurately if you say that you can't do any of those two you are poor. Spend all your money on smokes and booze and can't afford your new nike air max, you're in consistent poverty.

aatraities

silly isnt it?

aatraities

boo hoo

Scarab80

aatraities wrote: »

Ah now don't go and stereotype all poor people that way. Some poor people hate Nike. But look it's not surprising that people like you rush to such simple and evasive tactics when faced with the reality. If you couldn't afford any of the things on that list your friends would think you were a scumbag. Too bad they don't know you really are anyway.

With the level of welfare in Ireland, it would be impossible not to be able to afford the things on that list unless you were spending the money elsewhere.

Post reported.

aatraities

bored yet?

aatraities

Scarab80 wrote: »

With the level of welfare in Ireland, it would be impossible not to be able to afford the things on that list unless you were spending the money elsewhere.

Post reported.

Indeed your class subjugation and depiction of Irish Social Welfare recipients has also been reported. You are very crude. And a bit of wimp really.

aatraities

Boggers, nuff said

Pete_Cavan

aatraities wrote: »

With 450k unemployed do ye out there are really think cutting to the bone is the best way to get out of this mess?

aatraities wrote: »

We borrow a lot of money as a country (bank bailouts, tax breaks for the wealthy etc) but seems the relatively small amount needed to maintain social welfare rates where there are

aatraities wrote: »

One way would be to get people back to work. It's a neat idea because they stop getting social welfare and they start to pay taxes as well. Some like to call the a twofer. But we don't seem to have any money to spend on getting people back to work because why again???

aatraities wrote: »

A debate about useful things requires people to actually know what they are talking about not just make it up to suit themselves as they go along.

Says it all really

aatraities wrote: »

I think there are a lot of ways to come up with the money.

Look I dont care what you read that money tree idea is just not going to work!

ei.sdraob

Count Dooku wrote: »

How?

why of course by taxing the people and companies who create employment even more in order to further various socialist schemes

ei.sdraob

aatraities wrote: »

That's a good question Count Dooku. Something we should ask this government if they weren't to busy making sure they don't loose their pension funds in bank shares that will need to be nationalized.

you didnt answer his question and instead continue finger waving at the banks

you must be a politician, they are good at avoiding questions

thebman

The Poor Can't Pay is a unique civil society coalition of charities, community groups and trade unions which believes that households living in poverty and thousands more at risk of poverty should not be forced to pay the cost of the economic crisis. They have already paid enough.

Yes, lobbiest and special interest groups that all get a piece of pie fear their piece may become smaller shortly and decide to make some noise in the hope the middle class are willing to cough up for them.

aatraities

fail troll is a failure

aatraities

man this is more work than I thought

ei.sdraob

aatraities wrote: »

Oh noes. Those pesky socialists trying to take away your special place in this world.

The funny thing would be if you had even a slightest notion about the levels of taxation that Ireland takes. Where in the OECD ranking do we come folks? How high up the list are we with all of our super luxuriant socialist programmes? Yep thats right 34 in the OECD list. Second last.

We take in less taxes than virtually every other country in Europe and why do people like you always cling to these same weak excuses? Because you haven't got anything else but smoke and mirrors to hide behind. The question has to be asked at some point. Will the people of Ireland continue to believe that we can afford to provide even decent levels of service and social protection when we have a tax regime that would make most Republicans in the States blush with embarrassment.

Table for two with Charlie then I assume?

Yes excellent, continue spending even more money the people of this country don't have on programmes we cant afford

Pete_Cavan

aatraities wrote: »

Oh noes. Those pesky socialists trying to take away your special place in this world.

The funny thing would be if you had even a slightest notion about the levels of taxation that Ireland takes. Where in the OECD ranking do we come folks? How high up the list are we with all of our super luxuriant socialist programmes? Yep thats right 34 in the OECD list. Second last.

We take in less taxes than virtually every other country in Europe and why do people like you always cling to these same weak excuses? Because you haven't got anything else but smoke and mirrors to hide behind. The question has to be asked at some point. Will the people of Ireland continue to believe that we can afford to provide even decent levels of service and social protection when we have a tax regime that would make most Republicans in the States blush with embarrassment.

Table for two with Charlie then I assume?

Look you obviously dont know what socialist means and while you may be able to give some vague definition of economy, social welfare and taxation you how no idea how they work, even on the most basic level. Please, for the sake of the credability of this forum, stop!

Oh and ei.sdraob, love the banging your head against the wall emoticon, a perfect metaphor!

aatraities

seriously this was so ****e

jmayo

aatraities wrote: »

Do you feel the same about your money that is being given away to the banks? I bet you do but don't say it, as you cling on for dear life hoping what ever dismal share holding you have in either of the two pathetic Irish banks might not get completely wiped out.

[/QUOTE]

Why do somepeople believe that everyone, particularly in the private sector, was/is a bank shareholder ?

aatraities wrote: »

I'm laughin at you so don't let me hold you champ. It was an illustrative point about the playground economics that people like you on here trot out over and over again. As you have with the rest of your post. I'm suggesting that we can play the same rules as any other country in the international money market.

No it is you who believes in playground something or other if you think we can play by the same rules as the USA.
The Chinese have been buying US debt and for the life of me I can't see any reason they would want to do the same for little ould Ireland.

aatraities wrote: »

Yeah accept unlike Greece we played the good boys and payed off the bond holders. SO yes they will keep lending. And if they feel they can make money out of it other will lend even more. You think for a second the money that has been lent so far is anything more than money being lent back to Ireland to pay for money we already borrowed? That's such a great way of doing it. We lend money to country so they can pay us back the money they borrowed last time. And they keep doing it don't they?

You think that because our idiot government payed back the banks bond holders that the bond markets would not pull the rug from under us ?

aatraities wrote: »

Oh yeah the minimum wage is the problem. Even though it's how much higher than our most competitive neighbors? Our input costs are far higher not because of wages but because of monopoly of energy, insurance and bad planning and infrastructure all which cost money to fix and create jobs by doing it. Oh and make us more competitive. Get serious or don't bother answering.

For once in all your posts you have hit on something real about energy costs, but minimum wage is still a factor even if you deny it.

aatraities wrote: »

No that is what you have decided you think is my mindset. The truth would be that I see billions being payed for the mistakes of some very incompetent fools. I don't want billions fed to anyone. I just think we should draw a line under which not to fall any further. It's called decency which you obviously have none of. Which is quite easy if you don't have to struggle to get by.

Post reported.
How to win friends over to your cause. ehhh ?

John_Mc wrote: »

Don't feed this troll lads, he'll lose interest eventually

Pity the original post appeared reasoned even if one did not agree with it, but during the course of this thread the OP has managed to insult quiet a few of us.
If that is the way that this group are going to further their cause then good luck.