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

Wealthy DCU Econimist targets Social Wel Recipients in Budget

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    gurramok wrote: »
    They father kids?:confused:

    I'm confused too. What do claimant's fathers have to do with anything?
    gurramok wrote: »
    Its not a claim, its real figures from our Welfare govt dept. As you are too lazy to look at the sources, here you go..

    I just asked you to justify your claim. That's hardly unreasonable. After all, you don't do my research for me.
    gurramok wrote: »
    mother of 3 kids is entitled to

    Personal Rate of 196x52 = 10,192
    Qualifying Child 29.80x52 x 3kids = 4,649
    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/social-welfare-payments-to-families-and-children/one_parent_family_payment

    Fuel Allowance = 20x32 (http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/extra-social-welfare-benefits/fuel_allowance)

    Rent Allowance in DCC = 1100x12 = 13,200((http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Schemes/SupplementaryWelfareAllowance/Pages/RentSupplement.aspx )

    Child Benefit of 487x12 = 5,844 (http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/social-welfare-payments-to-families-and-children/child_benefit )


    Grand total of €34,525.

    Game, Set and Match.;)

    Double fault, I'm afraid.
    The rent supplement is a ceiling figure. It doesn't at all reflect what is actually given out, even to your demon single mums with kids. And of course, that's the maximum figure applicable in Dublin city centre, not nationally. It's much less throughout the rest of the country.
    And the child benefit isn't a welfare payment. It is, as I stated earlier, paid to all parents.


  • Options
    #93
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    KindOfIrish wrote: »
    I prefer this money spent for a mother with 3 kids during 12 months, than for a useless half-day trip of a minister to Donegal.

    Both are equally extravagant. The former is an anti-work measure and the latter is doesn't work ;)
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    I'm confused too. What do claimant's fathers have to do with anything?

    Don't they have to pay maintenance?
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    I just asked you to justify your claim. That's hardly unreasonable. After all, you don't do my research for me.

    Wtf? I justified it by giving you the real figures. Are you trolling?
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Double fault, I'm afraid.
    The rent supplement is a ceiling figure. It doesn't at all reflect what is actually given out, even to your demon single mums with kids. And of course, that's the maximum figure applicable in Dublin city centre, not nationally. It's much less throughout the rest of the country.
    And the child benefit isn't a welfare payment. It is, as I stated earlier, paid to all parents.

    So? They get that in DCC as an example where I live. The more kids they have, the more money they get as rent which pays for a better place as I taught you that Rent Allowance is based on humans, not the number of rooms.
    They get 34k take home pay of which 13.2k is rent paid for them to a private landlord.

    The rest is 21k net pay on which to live a pretty good lifestyle on. Add the totals if its a married couple with kids on welfare, they are similar.

    Why the hell would such a person work when its not financially viable?


  • Options
    #94
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    gurramok wrote: »
    Don't they have to pay maintenance?

    To adult children who are claiming benefits? That's a new idea.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Wtf? I justified it by giving you the real figures. Are you trolling?

    No, I simply asked you to justify your figures is all. No need to get shirty. It's considered reasonable to ask people to provide supporting data to justify their factual claims.
    gurramok wrote: »
    So? They get that in DCC as an example where I live.

    And as I said, they don't get that - that's a maximum possible payment. A parent with three children is unlikely to get close to that even in Dublin city centre. And of course, Dublin city centre is hardly the whole of Ireland.
    gurramok wrote: »
    The more kids they have, the more money they get as rent which pays for a better place as I taught you that Rent Allowance is based on humans, not the number of rooms.

    You didn't teach me anything. I made that point before you did, when I explained that the reason parents with children require more rent allowance is because they need more rooms for more people and hence pay higher rent.
    gurramok wrote: »
    They get 34k take home pay of which 13.2k is rent paid for them to a private landlord.

    They don't get any 'take home pay.' They get social welfare benefits which don't come close to 34K at all, even in Dublin city centre. Let me remind you that children's allowance is not a social welfare payment as it goes to all parents with children.
    gurramok wrote: »
    The rest is 21k net pay on which to live a pretty good lifestyle on.

    Firstly, they don't get 'pay'. Secondly, what sort of 'pretty good lifestyle' do you believe is possible in rented accommodation minding three kids on your own?
    gurramok wrote: »
    Why the hell would such a person work when its not financially viable?

    How is it not financially viable? I already gave you the example of a single parent who lost their job and went from 700 a week to 200 overnight. You don't think they'd rather have their job back?


  • Options
    #95
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    And as I said, they don't get that - that's a maximum possible payment. A parent with three children is unlikely to get close to that even in Dublin city centre. And of course, Dublin city centre is hardly the whole of Ireland.

    It cover the Dublin City Council area, not only the city centre. It encloses many suburbs. Rents for a house can be 1,100 here, no probs for that claimant to 'need' it.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    They don't get any 'take home pay.' They get social welfare benefits which don't come close to 34K at all, even in Dublin city centre. Let me remind you that children's allowance is not a social welfare payment as it goes to all parents with children.

    21k cash in the mothers hand a year. We're talking about welfare mothers, not working mothers(they get substantially less for working)
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Firstly, they don't get 'pay'. Secondly, what sort of 'pretty good lifestyle' do you believe is possible in rented accommodation minding three kids on your own?

    Are you serious?

    They get 21k in their pocket per year. Thats cash to you and me. Rent is paid for as well as fuel without touching that 21k. The mother has no childcare costs, she minds the kids on her own or gets a relative to mind them on the sly.
    Plus, if the father is living there without the welfare knowing, its lotto time.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    How is it not financially viable? I already gave you the example of a single parent who lost their job and went from 700 a week to 200 overnight. You don't think they'd rather have their job back?

    Your example is not a claim approved. You provide feck all sources for that 200. Where did you get 200 from?

    Why on earth would the mother get a job? She would have to pay 1100 rent out of her own wages and childcare cost of at least 1500 for 3 kids. She would have to earn maybe 60k to justify coming off welfare, you get it now?


  • Options
    #96
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    gurramok wrote: »
    It cover the Dublin City Council area, not only the city centre. It encloses many suburbs. Rents for a house can be 1,100 here, no probs for that claimant to 'need' it.

    It doesn't mean they get it. It's a ceiling figure you're quoting, the maximum in the country. Do you seriously think that all rent allowance claimants get the ceiling figure? Given the numbers of people I hear about refused anything, or told to move to cheaper or smaller accommodation, I suspect few if any get close to it.
    gurramok wrote: »
    21k cash in the mothers hand a year. We're talking about welfare mothers, not working mothers(they get substantially less for working)

    Or father's hand. Single parents can be fathers too. I'm one. And as we already covered, that's not all benefits. The children's allowance goes to working parents too.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Are you serious?
    They get 21k in their pocket per year. Thats cash to you and me. Rent is paid for as well as fuel without touching that 21k.

    Of course I'm serious. Rent allowance never covers the total cost of rent, firstly, and the last time I bought fuel it was 350 for 500 litres of oil, a fiver a bail of briquettes and 14 a small bag of coal. So they'd have to supplement that significantly too.
    Tell me, what sort of jetset lifestyle do you think a single parent with three kids can achieve on less than 20k a year?
    gurramok wrote: »
    The mother has no childcare costs, she minds the kids on her own or gets a relative to mind them on the sly.

    Why would it be sly to get a relative to mind the kids for a bit if you need to do a shop, or exercise, or simply get an hour to yourself?
    gurramok wrote: »
    Plus, if the father is living there without the welfare knowing, its lotto time.

    If a claimant is not a genuine single parent, then they are committing fraud. As I keep telling you, this is a reason to improve policing of claims, not to implement a blanket cut on those who play by the rules.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Your example is not a claim approved. You provide feck all sources for that 200. Where did you get 200 from?

    They get 225 euro per week job seeker's allowance (or benefit, whichever is the one that people with stamps get.) That's the total of their welfare payment. They have applied for one parent family allowance, but have yet to be interviewed or even receive an appointment for interview.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Why on earth would the mother get a job?

    Why do you keep demonising single mothers? What's your problem with them? You do realise fathers can be single parents too, right?
    gurramok wrote: »
    She would have to pay 1100 rent out of her own wages and childcare cost of at least 1500 for 3 kids. She would have to earn maybe 60k to justify coming off welfare, you get it now?

    Not true, as there are other factors involved, including one parent allowances for working up to 400 odd euro per week, and family income supplements for low income families which working families can obtain whether there are one or two parents present.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    It doesn't mean they get it. It's a ceiling figure you're quoting, the maximum in the country. Do you seriously think that all rent allowance claimants get the ceiling figure? Given the numbers of people I hear about refused anything, or told to move to cheaper or smaller accommodation, I suspect few if any get close to it.

    If they have 3 kids, they can argue for a 3bed house where most are going for 1000 in not so nice areas to 1100 in a decent area. Quite obtainable.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Or father's hand. Single parents can be fathers too. I'm one. And as we already covered, that's not all benefits. The children's allowance goes to working parents too.

    Child benefit goes to all parents.

    Do you get OPFP? If not, why not?
    Do you get Rent Allowance? If not, why not?
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Of course I'm serious. Rent allowance never covers the total cost of rent, firstly, and the last time I bought fuel it was 350 for 500 litres of oil, a fiver a bail of briquettes and 14 a small bag of coal. So they'd have to supplement that significantly too.
    Tell me, what sort of jetset lifestyle do you think a single parent with three kids can achieve on less than 20k a year?

    Rent allowance does in most cases. A 19yr old 'single mother' gets 900 quid in an apt across from me. Max is 930, she negotiated it down to 900. And yes, I did ask her as i know her. Asking rents in the complex are around 1000.

    We mostly use gas central heating or electric heating here in the city so your fuel point is not relevant.

    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Why would it be sly to get a relative to mind the kids for a bit if you need to do a shop, or exercise, or simply get an hour to yourself?

    It helps with childcare. Point is that there is ZERO childcare cost in contrast to a working mother.

    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    If a claimant is not a genuine single parent, then they are committing fraud. As I keep telling you, this is a reason to improve policing of claims, not to implement a blanket cut on those who play by the rules.

    They can't cut them off as its extremely hard to prove. Unless we pay inspectors as private investigators 24/7 to camp out said houses to get proof of who is living where.

    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    They get 225 euro per week job seeker's allowance (or benefit, whichever is the one that people with stamps get.) That's the total of their welfare payment. They have applied for one parent family allowance, but have yet to be interviewed or even receive an appointment for interview.

    Where did you get 225 from? JSA is 196 yes?
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Why do you keep demonising single mothers? What's your problem with them? You do realise fathers can be single parents too, right?

    Most dodgy claimants are single mothers, not single fathers. Single fathers have feck all rights to children where that mother is still alive thanks to our lovely constitution hence most welfare kids with a single parent actually live with the mother.

    Its a different story for married parents. Not getting married is a way of milking the system for welfare parents because if one of them worked they'd lose nearly everything.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Not true, as there are other factors involved, including one parent allowances for working up to 400 odd euro per week, and family income supplements for low income families which working families can obtain whether there are one or two parents present.

    Give us the maths to prove it with sources to back you up.


  • Options
    #98
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    gurramok wrote: »
    If they have 3 kids, they can argue for a 3bed house where most are going for 1000 in not so nice areas to 1100 in a decent area. Quite obtainable.

    And they have to supplement the rent. Going from what one welfare officer told me a few months ago, they could expect to contribute three figures at least.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Child benefit goes to all parents.

    Exactly. It's not a welfare payment. If you have a problem with people receiving child benefit, surely the ones to lose it first ought to be those who least need it? That's David Cameron's thinking on the matter anyway.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Do you get OPFP? If not, why not?
    Do you get Rent Allowance? If not, why not?

    Because I'm not on benefits.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Rent allowance does in most cases. A 19yr old 'single mother' gets 900 quid in an apt across from me. Max is 930, she negotiated it down to 900. And yes, I did ask her as i know her. Asking rents in the complex are around 1000.

    How do you know she's telling you the truth?
    gurramok wrote: »
    We mostly use gas central heating or electric heating here in the city so your fuel point is not relevant.

    I live in Dublin city centre, and I use oil and briquettes.
    gurramok wrote: »
    It helps with childcare. Point is that there is ZERO childcare cost in contrast to a working mother.

    Why, do working mothers not have relatives too?
    gurramok wrote: »
    They can't cut them off as its extremely hard to prove. Unless we pay inspectors as private investigators 24/7 to camp out said houses to get proof of who is living where.

    That's not required. Closer merging of the tax and welfare systems is all that's needed in many cases. Once the absent parent is identified, the systems can be used to identify where they are living.
    If an absent parent is maintaining an address elsewhere and still living with the kids, then they are simply costing themselves additional funds and aren't making anything extra.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Where did you get 225 from? JSA is 196 yes?

    And 20-odd for one kid, remember?
    gurramok wrote: »
    Most dodgy claimants are single mothers, not single fathers. Single fathers have feck all rights to children where that mother is still alive thanks to our lovely constitution hence most welfare kids with a single parent actually live with the mother.

    You don't need to tell me that. I've been campaigning on that issue for years on end. I'm actually the precedent in Irish law on a number of issues. But that still doesn't justify your banging on about demon single mums when everything you object to applies to single fathers with kids too. Simply say single parent.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Its a different story for married parents. Not getting married is a way of milking the system for welfare parents because if one of them worked they'd lose nearly everything.

    That's not true.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Give us the maths to prove it with sources to back you up.

    Here you are - http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/social-welfare-payments-to-families-and-children/family_income_supplement


  • Options
    #99
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    And they have to supplement the rent. Going from what one welfare officer told me a few months ago, they could expect to contribute three figures at least.

    And how is that when they can get 1100?? Do they expect to get a house for 2000 a month?:rolleyes:
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Exactly. It's not a welfare payment. If you have a problem with people receiving child benefit, surely the ones to lose it first ought to be those who least need it? That's David Cameron's thinking on the matter anyway.

    Yes, cut it off from people who earn enough in take home pay and that includes those in my example who take home 21k in welfare.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    How do you know she's telling you the truth?

    Why would she lie especially on what she is entitled to? Why would the landlord accept far less than what other apts are asking?
    Rents in this complex have never been advertised for less than 950pm.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    I live in Dublin city centre, and I use oil and briquettes.

    In a cottage are we? :D
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Why, do working mothers not have relatives too?

    They do. Do they want to mind their kids? Some cannot and have to use expensive childcare. A non-working mother doesnt have to pay for childcare. Big difference.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    That's not required. Closer merging of the tax and welfare systems is all that's needed in many cases. Once the absent parent is identified, the systems can be used to identify where they are living.
    If an absent parent is maintaining an address elsewhere and still living with the kids, then they are simply costing themselves additional funds and aren't making anything extra.

    You're hired ;)
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    And 20-odd for one kid, remember?

    You said they didn't get their claim processed yet. How many kids are involved,is the person a single parent or married with a partner, what is the family residence, under a mortgage or is it a rental? We need more info.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    You don't need to tell me that. I've been campaigning on that issue for years on end. I'm actually the precedent in Irish law on a number of issues. But that still doesn't justify your banging on about demon single mums when everything you object to applies to single fathers with kids too. Simply say single parent.

    Single fathers can't really milk the system. It would be a bit odd for the father to raise the child while depriving himself as a breadwinner for life while expecting the mother to work all her life? Society has not come that far for unmarried parents.

    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    That's not true.

    Err, why not? A single parent can milk the system with maximum benefits while the unmarried father can work and live in the home without welfare knowing. Thats widespread.
    If they got married, they are registered as together and they will lose Rent Allowance and OPFP as he works. Thats how the system goes against working married parents.
    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Here you are - http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/social-welfare-payments-to-families-and-children/family_income_supplement

    You expect them to stay on very low pay for life?


  • Options
    #100
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    gurramok wrote: »
    And how is that when they can get 1100?? Do they expect to get a house for 2000 a month?:rolleyes:

    Rent allowance never covers all the rent. Claimants always have to contribute. That's the point I'm making.
    And in the current climate, welfare officers are telling people to find somewhere smaller, negotiate less rent, etc. Which is fair enough. But it does mean that no one is getting 1100 euro a month rent allowance.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Yes, cut it off from people who earn enough in take home pay and that includes those in my example who take home 21k in welfare.

    But since your 21K includes children's allowance, your hypothetical single parent with three kids would get to keep it, right?
    Seriously, where would you like to draw the line on this?
    gurramok wrote: »
    Why would she lie especially on what she is entitled to? Why would the landlord accept far less than what other apts are asking?
    Rents in this complex have never been advertised for less than 950pm.

    She might lie for any reason. She might not want you to know her true financial status. People are cagey about such things. She might be a figment of your imagination. This is the problem with anecdotal hearsay evidence. It's not reliable.
    gurramok wrote: »
    In a cottage are we? :D

    No. Just a city centre house.
    gurramok wrote: »
    They do. Do they want to mind their kids? Some cannot and have to use expensive childcare. A non-working mother doesnt have to pay for childcare. Big difference.

    But you were making some strange point that single mums somehow had special relatives to mind their kids that working parents don't have. Clearly they don't. Glad to have cleared this up.
    gurramok wrote: »
    You're hired ;)

    They've been attempting to merge the systems since the early Nineties, I believe. They're still not finished. Another classic public sector IT fuck-up of the highest order.
    gurramok wrote: »
    You said they didn't get their claim processed yet. How many kids are involved,is the person a single parent or married with a partner, what is the family residence, under a mortgage or is it a rental? We need more info.

    It's not my position to breach someone else's confidentiality on their personal circumstances. I'm merely saying that they are definitively not better off on welfare than in the 700 euro a week job they previously had.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Single fathers can't really milk the system. It would be a bit odd for the father to raise the child while depriving himself as a breadwinner for life while expecting the mother to work all her life? Society has not come that far for unmarried parents.

    Single fathers de facto are the custodial parents if they're receiving welfare, and are therefore as entitled to anything a single mother can get in similar circumstances. That's why I suggested you amend your term to single parent.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Err, why not? A single parent can milk the system with maximum benefits while the unmarried father can work and live in the home without welfare knowing. Thats widespread.

    We're back to merging the tax and welfare systems, here.
    gurramok wrote: »
    If they got married, they are registered as together and they will lose Rent Allowance and OPFP as he works. Thats how the system goes against working married parents.

    But since your hypothetical unmarried couple are actually breaking the law, if they're caught they'll be prosecuted for fraud.
    You might as well say that the system goes against non-bankrobbing parents, since they don't get as much as bankrobbing parents do.
    gurramok wrote: »
    You expect them to stay on very low pay for life?

    No, I expect you now realise that there are, as I said, financial incentives not to remain on benefits and that people are not better off remaining on them as there are step-up payments to assist them into work.


  • Options
    #101
    Echospace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 82 ✭✭Echospace


    The whole single mother/lone parent/rent allowance/child benefit/medical card/fuel allowance/etc needs to be consolidated into one single payment in my opinion. I don't know ANY single mothers who are struggling or even close to the breadline, in fact the ones I know seem to have lifestyles (sky tv/designer clothes/holidays/eating out/etc) that even I would envy.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but if anyone can give me an example of a single mother who is receiving those payments and actually struggling or not living a VERY comfortable existence, then tell me their outgoings and prove it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    cleremy jarkson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 542 ✭✭✭cleremy jarkson


    Why can't everyone just remove every single unnecessary bit of household expenditure like they did before the boom? Remember when something like a 2 litre bottle of coke was something for christmas time only? Just because we're used to a higher standard of living than that doesn't entitle us to keep it unless we can afford it.

    So, surely if social welfare was cut by 10- 15%, people would still be able to get by, so long as the strip every single luxury from their lives (eg. cigarettes, alcohol, sweets, new clothes just because you don't want people to notice that you've been wearing the same clothes for a year, any sort of unnecessary consumer goods, cinema, sky digital, unaffordable christmas presents, bottled water, selling an unnecesarily good car)? I was only a kid before the boom kicked off but even I remember things being far far leaner back then when my folks were on the scratcher. Ya got to do what's necessary.

    And yeah, I know bankers, politicians etc get away with it but that's life to be honest....there's 450000 unemployed (who also cost the state more than just their 196 a week) and maybe a couple of hundred fat cats...we can go chase them down and take all their money if it makes people happy (which I'd be quite glad to see) but it will do very little to add to the public coffers.


  • Options
    #103
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    Which is why I said earlier that slashing social welfare to nil still wouldn't make as much of an impact as reneging on the guarantees our government gave to the toxic banks.
    If balancing the budget is the main thing, nothing but nothing will make anywhere near the impact that will.
    It's not our debt and we shouldn't pay it.


  • Options
    #104
    fonecrusher1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭fonecrusher1


    Im hearing lots of talk on radio shows about single persons SW payments being cut by up to 25/30%. Now most of this is just rumour mill rubbish but all i'l say is, if the dole is cut by that much, there will be riots.
    If SW is being screwed by whichever scum is doing it, thats up to the government to stop. Punish everyone for their inability to accurately means test people & there will be trouble ahead.

    I know someone who is on the standard 196euro a week, he lost his job a year ago. He lives in a houseshare & uses every cent he recieves to get by. He is actively looking for work. Cut his payments by 30/40 euros & he's basically fcuked.

    There are lots of people out there who are living at home & using their supplement to buy dvds, spend time in the pub, buy the latest trendy runners & generally take the piss. Year after year.

    Cut out the fraud, don't punish the vast majority who really do need whatever they get.


  • Options
    #105
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    How the feck did this thread end up about single parents?

    Anyway, he's a well paid DCU Economist targeting SW recipients.

    I'm sure he'll be happy to take a cut in pay from the taxpayer as well.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #106
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    K-9 wrote: »
    How the feck did this thread end up about single parents?

    Anyway, he's a well paid DCU Economist targeting SW recipients.

    I'm sure he'll be happy to take a cut in pay from the taxpayer as well.

    Some people seem to think that single mothers on welfare are the cause of all evil in life apparently.
    As for the DCU economist, I can only repeat what I said earlier - I await with eagerness his proposals to reform pay structures in third-level institutions to adequately remunerate those who actually teach and remove payment from those who do little but administrate, 'research' and take sabbaticals for hundreds of thousands of euro annually.


  • Options
    #107
    ascanbe
    Registered Users Posts: 3,089 ✭✭✭ascanbe


    If the great heist that is the Anglo bailout/Nama isn't stopped, we'll just be squabbling over crumbs until the inevitable collapse/loss of economic soveriegnty comes.


  • Options
    #108
    Echospace
    Closed Accounts Posts: 82 ✭✭Echospace


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Some people seem to think that single mothers on welfare are the cause of all evil in life apparently.
    As for the DCU economist, I can only repeat what I said earlier - I await with eagerness his proposals to reform pay structures in third-level institutions to adequately remunerate those who actually teach and remove payment from those who do little but administrate, 'research' and take sabbaticals for hundreds of thousands of euro annually.

    Nobody is saying the single mothers themselves are the problem, it's the system in place allowing them to receive that amount of money. If I was entitled to that money, I would also claim it in the blink of an eye.

    However, as a socio-economic group, they are extracting the largest amount of money out of the state's social welfare budget.

    Most people who lose their job are only entitled to claim jobseekers allowance, medical card and POSSIBLY family income supplement. - Maybe €10k/year

    Sick people are entitled to disability benefit/medical card. - Maybe €10k/year

    OAPS are entitled to the state pension/fuel allowance/medical card. - Maybe €12k/year

    Single mothers are entitled to lone parents allowance/child benefit/early childcare supplement/medical card/fuel allowance/rent allowance/back to school allowance/etc amounting to figures in the region of €35,000/year for a single mother with 2 children.

    It has to be addressed.


  • Options
    #109
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    Hold on, we just had two pages of that guff.
    It doesn't add up to anything close to 34K for a mother with 3 kids, as the previous lad claimed, so it certainly doesn't add up to 35K for a mother with 2 kids.
    As a socio-economic group, the people extracting the largest amount of money off the state are AIB and Anglo creditors, needless to say.


  • Options
    #110
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Echospace wrote: »
    However, as a socio-economic group, they are extracting the largest amount of money out of the state's social welfare budget.

    Most people who lose their job are only entitled to claim jobseekers allowance, medical card and POSSIBLY family income supplement. - Maybe €10k/year

    Sick people are entitled to disability benefit/medical card. - Maybe €10k/year

    OAPS are entitled to the state pension/fuel allowance/medical card. - Maybe €12k/year

    Single mothers are entitled to lone parents allowance/child benefit/early childcare supplement/medical card/fuel allowance/rent allowance/back to school allowance/etc amounting to figures in the region of €35,000/year for a single mother with 2 children.

    It has to be addressed.

    What? Married parents aren't a socio economic group? Aren't THE biggest drain on SW?

    Aren't entitled to Unemployment Benefit/Allowance, Dependent Allowances, Child Benefit, Medical Cards for all the family, Fuel Allowance, Rent/Mortgage Interest Allowance, Back to School Allowance etc.?

    PS. Early Childcare Supplement, which was universal i.e. available to all parents up to the age of 5 or so is gone.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #111
    mariaalice
    Registered Users Posts: 12,390 ✭✭✭✭mariaalice


    I am not going to add anything to this debate but i have to say i love your thread title!!!! the fact that it says WEALTHY economist. Would it have made any difference if a POOR economist had said it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    seaniedearg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 32 ✭seaniedearg


    just reading the starting post on this one,

    what?

    an employee who is getting paid in the public sector wants the legs broken under the ones most impacted by the current crisis so that he can keep updating his car ever 2 years....:eek:

    janey mack, get outta dat garden


  • Options
    #113
    Wompa1
    Registered Users Posts: 8,168 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    All social welfare should be looked at. Not everything has come down in price but lately the supermarkets have started becoming cheaper finally. You could get a weeks shopping for under 60 euro if your frugel.

    We should probably do what they did in England and cut child allowance for the wealthiest. Maybe up the tax of the top 5% but nothing too big. Just until things are fixed...I wouldn't approve of that long term.

    Look into the way universities are being funded. I'd suspect they can be quite a drain too.

    Crack down on illegal immigrants in the country.

    Bring in a system in that criminals risk losing their social welfare benefits.

    Long term benefit seekers could do some community work

    The only ones I'd really spare would be people on disabilities and OAPs

    Just my opinion...

    Oh a good one also might be charging money to people requiring emergency services when found to be caused by drunken behaviour. I'd say we're spending quite a bit on that..I heard an extreme example of this in the states where some village didn't have a fire service so they leveraged a fire service from a village a while away. To cover them they needed each house to pay 70 dollars a year.

    Some owner forgot to pay and when his house was on fire they let it burn down until the neighbours house caught on fire, they only helped then because the neighbour had paid the 70..


  • Options
    #114
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Hold on, we just had two pages of that guff.
    It doesn't add up to anything close to 34K for a mother with 3 kids, as the previous lad claimed, so it certainly doesn't add up to 35K for a mother with 2 kids.

    Yes it does, you were shown that at post 90. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68439440&postcount=90

    An it ain't about just single mothers. Its about where its financially better off to be on welfare for parents single or married, that was proven to you.

    Todays rumour mill from the Indo say 1% hike in income taxes and a 10% cut in child benefit. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/income-tax-child-benefit-to-be-hit-in-budget-2373706.html

    I think that brings the lower rate to 27% when all the levies are included?


  • Options
    #115
    Wompa1
    Registered Users Posts: 8,168 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    gurramok wrote: »
    They father kids?:confused:



    Its not a claim, its real figures from our Welfare govt dept. As you are too lazy to look at the sources, here you go..

    mother of 3 kids is entitled to

    Personal Rate of 196x52 = 10,192
    Qualifying Child 29.80x52 x 3kids = 4,649
    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/social-welfare-payments-to-families-and-children/one_parent_family_payment

    Fuel Allowance = 20x32 (http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/extra-social-welfare-benefits/fuel_allowance)

    Rent Allowance in DCC = 1100x12 = 13,200((http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Schemes/SupplementaryWelfareAllowance/Pages/RentSupplement.aspx )

    Child Benefit of 487x12 = 5,844 (http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/social-welfare/social-welfare-payments/social-welfare-payments-to-families-and-children/child_benefit )


    Grand total of €34,525.

    Game, Set and Match.;)

    Did they also get more at X-mas?...was this included?


  • Options
    #116
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    Wompa1 wrote: »
    Did they also get more at X-mas?...was this included?

    Oh yeh, forgot about the Xmas bonus for welfare recipients. I never got a Xmas bonus in my job;)


  • Options
    #117
    R P McMurphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭R P McMurphy


    I blame the Africans because they just leave their childrens' buggys on buses because they can't be bothered to take them off and then just get a new ones from the government :D


  • Options
    #118
    thebigbiffo
    Registered Users Posts: 2,941 ✭✭✭thebigbiffo


    i've 2 kids. I will gladly take a hit in childrens allowance as long as every other area of social welfare is similarly cut back on. both myself and my wife work - i dont believe this makes me any less entitled to the payment in the context of what people get for NOT working or being professional sprog makers.

    every cuts made needs to be equal across all levels.


  • Options
    #119
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    The public sector protected jobs scam is one. Why can't people be sacked?..............Social welfare benefits do need to be addressed, but we do currently have half a million people on the dole..and it's especially unfair when there is little or no work out there for the unemployed.

    Do you not see how ridiculous these comments are?


  • Options
    #120
    i_love_toast
    Registered Users Posts: 194 ✭✭i_love_toast


    greendom wrote: »
    Nice one - criminalise the needy in society, just what is required.

    The needy in society??more like the f*cking greedy!

    Although it looks like a completely fascist way of doing it would be 99% effective. At the end of the day finger printing for personal information is completely common in this day in age for requiring foreign visas etc.
    It would save the government billions from welfare rats double claiming, claiming from NI, false identification etc...

    However it would probably cost around 100m to install....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    fonecrusher1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭fonecrusher1


    thebigbiffo wrote: »
    i've 2 kids. I will gladly take a hit in childrens allowance as long as every other area of social welfare is similarly cut back on. both myself and my wife work - i dont believe this makes me any less entitled to the payment in the context of what people get for NOT working or being professional sprog makers.

    every cuts made needs to be equal across all levels.

    There are plenty of married people with kids in this country who are both working or have one person working on a good wage who put their childrens allowance into the holiday to France savings account. Its just wrong.
    That is just money going down the drain that should be redirected into the pockets of those who need it.

    The completely disproportionate amount of public sector workers is also strangling the country. Can't get rid of any of them now unfortunately as that would create more unemployment. Pay cut the sh!t out of them.;)

    There is going to have to be something done about the level of dole fraud in this country. We're a walkover for getting free money. Must be costing taxpayers millions every year.
    Means testing procedure should be overhauled to enable those who need the benefits most get more than those who live at home with parents/longterm scroungers & catch out double dole thieves/people from outside of ireland illegally claiming.


Advertisement