It's great to be unemployed...

MadYaker

jungleman wrote: »

I had to drop out of college due to financial constraints three years ago. I'm now working in a minimum wage retail job to try and save up to go back and complete my studies.

I ventured down to Citizens Information this morning to find out if I was eligible for any kind of assistance whatsoever, even just rent relief. I was swiftly informed that no, I would not be eligible for rent relief nor for the Back to Education allowance. Why? Because I'm currently employed.

This time last year I sent out over 200 CV's and got two job interviews. Thankfully, one of the interviews went really well and I got a full-time job on part time hours, minimum wage. I never intended to go on the dole. The way I see it, I'm fit and able to work, and I'd rather mow people's lawns for a tenner here or there than get any unemployment money from the government.

So by doing this, and not taking the lead of every other person my age who takes the dole instead of looking really hard for a job, I have ruled myself out for any kind of assistance during college. I was basically told that if I have been unemployed for the last nine months I would be better off than working hard like I have been doing.

I think it's an absolute disgrace. In my job I regularly serve customers who boast about how they screw the system; how they get rent relief but have a partner living with them on the sly who covers the other half; how they fund nights out with children's allowance; how they have no desire to work because they have more benefits and reliefs than they know what to do with; how great it is living in a council house while hard working losers are straddled with mortgages.

It makes me sick to my stomach. Not only are they taking the piss out of people who have worked hard for years, only to find themselves laid off and out of a job, but they always seem to have so much cash to spend that it's burning a hole in their wallet. And don't get me wrong, I fully understand that people who thought they'd have a job for life have suddenly found themselves unemployed, many of whom have families to support. I am not lumping them into the same category as these idiots who have never worked a day in their lives and exist to claim any benefit they can.

Really, all I would like would be for people who work hard to be treated on an even keel. After I pay rent, bills, bus tickets and food, I don't have a lot left to spend on myself let alone save. The Irish government make me sick to my stomach that sometimes I am envious of lazy, piss-taking louts.

My advice to you would be to quit your job, apply for education assistance grant or whatever it is and go back to college in september. Im going into my final year of a biochemistry degree next year and I don't really know how the social welfare system works for students but I always hear other people talking about the grants they get (I don't qualify for any of these) and a lot of students unions can also provide financial assistance.

I agree the welfare system is deeply flawed and you seem to be one of the people that has fallen through the cracks. You say you don't want to quit your job and go on the dole and I admire you for that but you need to play the system to your advantage unless you want to be stuck in that minimum wage job for the rest of your life.

gbee

As a recent self employed failure, my experience with SW actively encourages applicants to lie and hide information.

The more bizarre the story you tell them the quicker they believe it, they seemingly have a hard time digesting the truth.

I'm well armed for my next application after my summer work stops again.

BFDCH.

Sin City wrote: »

you forgot shelter as a basic need/right and.if.I dont pay my mortgage ill loose it

surely there are more affordable shelters available?

Stabshauptmann

puffishoes wrote: »

18[8]e is more than enough for a single person to live on if they manage that 18[8]e correctly and don't "mis-spend"

FYP.

I agree whole heartedly.

Here's my estimate of a fair weekly budget of someone under 25.

• Transport 25eur (Thats what I spend on the odd bit of driving, occasional bus, mostly I cycle -alternatively for Dubs, a Rambler 5 Day Adult is €23.00).
• Mobile phone 5eur (20eur monthly deal)
• Food 50eur (to stock my fridge with healthy food for 3 meals a day)
• Personal 40eur (The dole isnt a prison sentence. 40eur would cover the occasion clothes purchase, xbox game, cinema, a nice meal, someone's birthday, a few pints)

SO thats 120eur before you factor in rent and bills.
I would argue that:
A) If they rent within 35km of their family home; or
Were not working when they began the tenancy

Then they should be reduced to 100eur as the maximum dole.
My logic is that you should be living at home, and thus would not need all that 50eur for food.

So I would take 100eur as the basic payment, then add on 30eur for bills if not living at home and a rent allowance payment.

According to the National Youth Council people under the age of 25 account for 20% of the live register. I know this isnt where they wanted to go with that statistic but...

So some rough math on that with many assumptions, there's about a billion euro in savings.
88/188 * (20bn @ 20%) = 1.87bn. Rounding for assumptions to 1bn

The problem is that the 188 is also payable to a 50 year old factory worker in Sligo who just lost his job and have zero prospects of finding a new one. He has no transferable skills, no job opportunities, and though not strictly legal, he will be discriminated against by virtue of his age (too close to retirement).

What's his weekly expenses?
Food for a family of 4? 200eur
Kids 80
Mortgage 225

I'm not even half way there and already well blown the dole!

Sin City

puffishoes wrote: »

How do you think people generally educate themselves?

You think reading a book is beneath you? your reply is not very clear.

I think it takes a bit more than the reading of a book

Stabshauptmann

Rasheed wrote: »

Sorry I don't really understand your point.

I'm picking up on your sentence "Now come here I'm not saying to send people out picking up dog ****e for 12 hours a day when they have a qualification."

You want to assign tasks to the unemployed. All of them fairly menial (which is why they're not getting done at present) but those from middle class backgrounds will get nicer jobs.

If I were unemployed I would not want to be paraded around like a criminal on a chain gang, doing menial tasks you would not do yourself, because you feel I need to earn my unemployment assistance, just so you can have that feeling that you wouldnt be having more fun if you were unemployed too.

I'm not even going to get into the examples of where this has been tried in the past.

I don't really believe in the class system

Your posts reeks of it, whether you consciously realise it or not.

Sin City

BFDCH. wrote: »

surely there are more affordable shelters available?

Can I move me and my family into yours then?

bbam

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

FYP.

I agree whole heartedly.

Here's my estimate of a fair weekly budget of someone under 25.

• Transport 25eur (Thats what I spend on the odd bit of driving, occasional bus, mostly I cycle -alternatively for Dubs, a Rambler 5 Day Adult is €23.00).
• Mobile phone 5eur (20eur monthly deal)
• Food 50eur (to stock my fridge with healthy food for 3 meals a day)
• Personal 40eur (The dole isnt a prison sentence. 40eur would cover the occasion clothes purchase, xbox game, cinema, a nice meal, someone's birthday, a few pints)

SO thats 120eur before you factor in rent and bills.
I would argue that:
A) If they rent within 35km of their family home; or
Were not working when they began the tenancy

Then they should be reduced to 100eur as the maximum dole.
My logic is that you should be living at home, and thus would not need all that 50eur for food.

So I would take 100eur as the basic payment, then add on 30eur for bills if not living at home and a rent allowance payment.

According to the National Youth Council people under the age of 25 account for 20% of the live register. I know this isnt where they wanted to go with that statistic but...

So some rough math on that with many assumptions, there's about a billion euro in savings.
88/188 * (20bn @ 20%) = 1.87bn. Rounding for assumptions to 1bn

The problem is that the 188 is also payable to a 50 year old factory worker in Sligo who just lost his job and have zero prospects of finding a new one. He has no transferable skills, no job opportunities, and though not strictly legal, he will be discriminated against by virtue of his age (too close to retirement).

What's his weekly expenses?
Food for a family of 4? 200eur
Kids 80
Mortgage 225

I'm not even half way there and already well blown the dole!

But if you don't live in Dublin your €25 weekly travel is straight out the window. I'm not sure who's car you do a bit of driving in but it wouldn't pay insurance for most young people never mind buy a car and tax it too.
And there is no public transport either so that's out the window.

puffishoes

Sin City wrote: »

I think it takes a bit more than the reading of a book

It seems you have access to a PC and an Internet connection.

What else do you need?

do you know about FAS's online training? that's free? etc?

do you have any ideas besides wanting more money?

puffishoes

bbam wrote: »

But if you don't live in Dublin your €25 weekly travel is straight out the window. I'm not sure who's car you do a bit of driving in but it wouldn't pay insurance for most young people never mind buy a car and tax it too.
And there is no public transport either so that's out the window.

Why would someone require so much money to travel?

You would only need to travel at certain times in any given period.

you can also use a push bike.

There's life outside of dublin, I've seen it.

Sin City

puffishoes wrote: »

It seems you have access to a PC and an Internet connection.

What else do you need?

do you know about FAS's online training? that's free? etc?

do you have any ideas besides wanting more money?

I have done fas courses and actually have a degree already so I dont think doing a fas course is going to upskill me enough

puffishoes

Sin City wrote: »

I have done fas courses and actually have a degree already so I dont think doing a fas course is going to upskill me enough

Ah, I see. no matter what gets typed, you have a ready made excuse.

so nothing can fix your situation but money?

or do you have any ideas yourself?

Rasheed

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

I'm picking up on your sentence "Now come here I'm not saying to send people out picking up dog ****e for 12 hours a day when they have a qualification."

You want to assign tasks to the unemployed. All of them fairly menial (which is why they're not getting done at present) but those from middle class backgrounds will get nicer jobs.

If I were unemployed I would not want to be paraded around like a criminal on a chain gang, doing menial tasks you would not do yourself, because you feel I need to earn my unemployment assistance, just so you can have that feeling that you wouldnt be having more fun if you were unemployed too.

I'm not even going to get into the examples of where this has been tried in the past.


Your posts reeks of it, whether you consciously realise it or not.

How does my post reek of it?? I don't care if you have a Phd or have just done the junior cert, everyone can be of use to their community, and just because you are not employed is no excuse to sit back and feel sorry for yourself. You are calling the tasks I suggested as menial, I completely disagree with you there. What's wrong with doing a bit of hard work work for the good of your community? What's wrong with helping your neighbour to bring home turf if you are over 'qualified'? I worked my arse off to get where I am in the job I'm in but I'm grateful every day and realise that it could be all gone tomorrow. If it does go, I will continue to work my arse off every day to better myself and my community.

Stabshauptmann

bbam wrote: »

But if you don't live in Dublin your €25 weekly travel is straight out the window

Nope. 25eur in petrol would get me 100km+ outside dublin.

I'm not sure who's car you do a bit of driving in but it wouldn't pay insurance for most young people never mind buy a car and tax it too.

Why would it need to?
I'm not encouraging you to go out and buy a car. If you didnt need one before becoming unemployed, you dont need one now!

And there is no public transport either so that's out the window.

What? 25eur will get you a rambler in dublin, or a lot of petrol if from a more rural area.

But dont just nit pick - elaborate with figures how much dole you think a single, under 25 needs

monkeypants

Rasheed wrote: »

I'm not saying take jobs off painters, that's ridiculous. I'm saying to improve your local community by doing jobs that community groups can't sfford to pay someone to do eg. Painting a community centre, planting flowers outside a church that kind of thing. Making your locality look inviting to outsiders, developing a sense of community and people working together for a common goal. There is also evidence that people can become withdrawn and depressed when out of work, makes sense, I'd be the same myself. So getting out, especially in the summer would give people a sense of usefulness and pride at helping themselves and others. I think it's win win, maybe I'm wrong.

It sounds like a good idea, but you need to be careful with the people who are to be involved. First, if you're making this work a condition of receiving the dole, then the work needs to be supervised and that costs money.

Second, if it is mandatory and all are included, then I wouldn't want to be around someone who has just been given a tool of some description and is looking for an excuse to get out of this scheme. He/she is going to either twat himself or someone else over the head with it or accidentally hit a passing car...more expense. If I was on a scheme with someone like that, I would be looking out of it for my safety.

Third, I'm assuming that there'll be some form of insurance provided for this work, which will cost.

Fourth, are you going to allow the womenfolk to plead the belly? It's rare to see a woman doing time for a crime, so I can't see this happening, there'll always be kids to look after or on the way. So it'll just be the menfolk out working.

Sin City

puffishoes wrote: »

Ah, I see. no matter what gets typed, you have a ready made excuse.

so nothing can fix your situation but money?

or do you have any ideas yourself?

Do I have any ideas to create a jobs boom?

If I did that I would be leading the country

Are you living in reality at all?

dasa29

Stabshauptmann

So some rough math on that with many assumptions, there's about a billion euro in savings.
88/188 * (20bn @ 20%) = 1.87bn. Rounding for assumptions to 1bn

not to blow your assumptions out of the water but while the welfare bill is 20bn, the total spent on the dole is at most only 5 bn.

So the sum should be 88/188*(5bn @ 20%)= 468m.

Stabshauptmann

Rasheed wrote: »

How does my post reek of it??

The suggestion that the unemployed dont know the meaning of a hard days work, and the suggestion that those with third level qualifications should be given better tasks under your system displays a clear opinion you have of the "type" of people who are unemployed.

just because you are not employed is no excuse to sit back and feel sorry for yourself.

Who are you referring to?
I'm arguing a position, that the SW system in this country is flawed and needs a change. The disincentives I have observed I have outlined, and my proposed changes too.

I am neither looking for work, nor do I feel sorry for myself.

You are calling the tasks I suggested as menial, I completely disagree with you there.

Painting walls, pulling weeds, cleaning up dog dirt, sweeping roads, cutting hedges, taxing people. Yes these are menial jobs.

https://www.google.ie/search?sugexp=chrome,mod=2&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=menial

What's wrong with doing a bit of hard work work for the good of your community?

Why should what has been determined as the basic rate needed to survive be denied to people unless they perform menial labour to satisfy the sadistic pleasures of the upper classes? Why is there a need to punish the unemployed for being unemployed?

What's wrong with helping your neighbour to bring home turf if you are over 'qualified'?

Oh, so you do see the unemployed as nothing more than free manual labour to be utilised for your personal benefit. Its your turf, you break your own back bringing it home. If you want help, employ someone to help you. There are lots of unemployed who will gladly work for money.

As I have already articulated, deploying the unemployed as free slave labour will not help them find gainful employment.

I worked my arse off to get where I am in the job I'm in but I'm grateful every day and realise that it could be all gone tomorrow. If it does go, I will continue to work my arse off every day to better myself and my community.

People might have different opinions on how best to better themselves. Its not for you to tell them.

For example. One thing repeatedly mentioned in this thread is maintaining local churches. I didnt want to go too far off topic, but I will not give my time and effort to helping institutions I detest.
I would not see it as bettering myself or my community.


One of my other big arguments is that I do not want to justify the 20bn SW bill by pointing to all the good community work we are getting as a quid pro quo. I want there to be a real effort to tackle unemployment not massage the figures, and if not, then I want a politician to make the bold move of addressing the unsustainable SW bill.

This country needs Jobs, and incentives to find work.
We do not need the people in jobs to feel smug, or look down on the unemployed.

Stabshauptmann

dasa29 wrote: »

Stabshauptmann


not to blow your assumptions out of the water but while the welfare bill is 20bn, the total spent on the dole is at most only 5 bn.

So the sum should be 88/188*(5bn @ 20%)= 468m.

Grand, I took the figure from another post. I did say "So some rough math on that with many assumptions"

Edit, the estimates for the 2012 budget
http://www.budget.gov.ie/budgets/2012/Documents/CER%20-%20Estimates%20Final.pdf

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011
Job Seekers 2,088 3,730 4,094 3,918
Other SW 15,653 16,705 17,249 17,029
Health 15,356 15,470 14,777 13,901
Education 8,465 8,589 8,667 8,678
Justice 2,565 2,514 2,364 2,400
Other 9,256 8,711 7,114 7,145
Total Exp 53,383 55,719 54,265 53,071

Rasheed

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

The suggestion that the unemployed dont know the meaning of a hard days work, and the suggestion that those with third level qualifications should be given better tasks under your system displays a clear opinion you have of the "type" of people who are unemployed.


Who are you referring to?
I'm arguing a position, that the SW system in this country is flawed and needs a change. The disincentives I have observed I have outlined, and my proposed changes too.

I am neither looking for work, nor do I feel sorry for myself.



Painting walls, pulling weeds, cleaning up dog dirt, sweeping roads, cutting hedges, taxing people. Yes these are menial jobs.

https://www.google.ie/search?sugexp=chrome,mod=2&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=menial



Why should what has been determined as the basic rate needed to survive be denied to people unless they perform menial labour to satisfy the sadistic pleasures of the upper classes? Why is there a need to punish the unemployed for being unemployed?


Oh, so you do see the unemployed as nothing more than free manual labour to be utilised for your personal benefit. Its your turf, you break your own back bringing it home. If you want help, employ someone to help you. There are lots of unemployed who will gladly work for money.

As I have already articulated, deploying the unemployed as free slave labour will not help them find gainful employment.



People might have different opinions on how best to better themselves. Its not for you to tell them.

For example. One thing repeatedly mentioned in this thread is maintaining local churches. I didnt want to go too far off topic, but I will not give my time and effort to helping institutions I detest.
I would not see it as bettering myself or my community.


One of my other big arguments is that I do not want to justify the 20bn SW bill by pointing to all the good community work we are getting as a quid pro quo. I want there to be a real effort to tackle unemployment not massage the figures, and if not, then I want a politician to make the bold move of addressing the unsustainable SW bill.

This country needs Jobs, and incentives to find work.
We do not need the people in jobs to feel smug, or look down on the unemployed.

I'm not looking down on anyone, nor did I indicate that in any of my suggestions. I do not any any sadistic pleasure in watching people work. I am merely pointing out that the country in the ****ter and if everyone pulled together, did a small bit of work, it would become a nicer place to live, and give some people a sense of usefulness. It might not suit everybody, fair enough. If people want to sit on their arses day in, day out living off the state, that's a whole other issue that can only be addressed by the person themselves.
I also have stated previously that it doesn't matter what level of education the person had, many people from every situation finds themselves in an unemployment situation, but everybody can make this a nicer place to live, everybody is good at something and can help out a neighbour, not because they have to, but because it's a nice thing to do to give something back to the country that is supporting them.

Markcheese

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

Markcheese wrote: »

Personaly I think everyone on welfare should be doing at least 20/25 hours education , voluntary work or a course...
We should have the cleanest roadsides , beaches , estates , most visited pensioners, public gardens [etc.]...

You are dead right, there is loads of those jobs that need to be done, cleaning graveyards, cutting hedges etc. That should whittle down people who genuinely want to work and those who just lazy.

Go jump in a lake. This is the type of ignorant twattle we get from our out of touch FG ministers.

A) Do you think doing menial labour for a slave wage* would restore the pride into a skilled professional with a young family who lost his job through no fault of his own?

So Pat, you used to be a IT Manager / Lawyer / Mechanical Engineer and now you scoop up my dogs ****. How the mighty have fallen, eh neighbour

I wouldnt ****ing do it.


Go look for work. It takes a lot of time and energy. Yet you want to facilitate this by taking up half someones week with manual labour :rolleyes:


*You propose say halving someone's dole unless they do 25hours work.
Thats 94euro for 25hours work, which is 3.75per hour. The minimum wage is €8.65.

Personaly I do one of those "menial" jobs that you seem to despise ... I don't see what's wrong with giving back to your community if your being helped by your community /society .
In terms of those with skills , find a way use them , architect , engineer , chef or soccer coach. If you need a skill or training then the course should be available and that's your 25 hours ... if you can't be arsed or are too busy to turn up , drop the dole.

Ps I'm guessing from yr last paragraph that you ain't no mathematician ....

Laminations

SW shouldn't be a long term prospect - it is mainly provided as a support while people find new employment or means of supporting themselves. It should only be given indefinitely to people who are not available for work (with specific circumstances). It should not be used to maintain mortgage payments or service personal debt. People in this situation (i.e. long term unemployed) need to realise that they cannot afford a house. In these cases the banks should move to a rent-back scheme so the bank takes ownership of the asset and your weekly payments are vastly reduced and become rent. Yes, it is not nice, but it is dealing with the reality that you have no source of income to pay for the nice things you want. This should only happen after an extended period without work (where you are available to work) even if it is not your fault but economic circumstance (i.e. no jobs to be had), the state should not be paying for private assets - rent supplements are the appropriate way to maintain people in accommodation.

We have a co-dependent relationship with the state, it fluctuates over our lifetime but the state provides services and opportunities for work (not the same as jobs) and we abide by laws, pay tax, are productive members of society and do our civic duties - this is the social contract.

If you are long term unemployed - whether it is dispositional laziness(a minority) or situational misfortune (the majority trying to survive through a recession) the balance in this codependent relationship starts to turn to the state providing for you and maintaining you. The state should just be there to support you and help you provide for yourself. The long term unemployed run the risk of becoming welfare dependent and disillusioned.

To re-balance the relationship I don't think it is too much to ask people to increase their civic responsibilities by means of voluntary work.

As for taking jobs from painters etc. these jobs do not exist - it is not like jobsbridge - the state will not be employing a grass verge maintenance team any time soon. Just as you would help your parents out any way you could because you value that relationship and see it as reciprocating and mutually beneficial (I'm sure you would volunteer to clear your mothers garden rather than warn about the loss of work for the landscaping industry) so too should you view your relationship with the state - especially if they are supporting you in a time of difficulty. Paying in stamps gets you your 2 year window of support and then after that you do something for the state. Helping others or improving your neighbourhood shouldn't be viewed as degrading or embarrassing, it should be seen as you fulfilling your social contract with the state.

BFDCH.

Sin City wrote: »

Can I move me and my family into yours then?

you could until a while ago, I've been waiting for a stranger from the interweb to present me with this opportunity, unfortunately for us both I've sold it at a loss and now live somewhere I can afford.

edit- BTW I have no doubt that you do not want to be, or chose to be on the Dole.

Delancey

I was thinking only the other day we were overdue a Welfare-Receipient Bashing Thread.....

Seriously though , it is alas inevitable that in any society that operates a financial ' safety net ' that there will be those that abuse it - we in Ireland are no different from any other country in that respect.

We need to keep in mind that at the height of the boom there were 100,000 claiming the dole and quite frankly those claims should have been rigorously investigated at the time given the labour shortage being reported.
Fast forward to the present depths of our downturn and over 400,000 are signing on - 300,000 + people did not one day decide to stay in bed and sponge off the state - they lost their jobs and as the OP mentions 200+ job applications resulted in just 2 interviews.
There exists an unemployment crisis and while there is a need for reform it would be wise to bear in mind that the system exists for all - the person working today , paying their taxes and mortgage and bitching on boards.ie about ' spongers ' could well be the person going cap in hand to the dole office tomorrow.

BFDCH.

bbam wrote: »

But if you don't live in Dublin your €25 weekly travel is straight out the window. I'm not sure who's car you do a bit of driving in but it wouldn't pay insurance for most young people never mind buy a car and tax it too.
And there is no public transport either so that's out the window.

so don't travel if you can't afford it, or cyle, you can do a fair distance in 30 mins to an hour on the bike. Fckin hell.

BFDCH.

monkeypants wrote: »

It sounds like a good idea, but you need to be careful with the people who are to be involved. First, if you're making this work a condition of receiving the dole, then the work needs to be supervised and that costs money.

Second, if it is mandatory and all are included, then I wouldn't want to be around someone who has just been given a tool of some description and is looking for an excuse to get out of this scheme. He/she is going to either twat himself or someone else over the head with it or accidentally hit a passing car...more expense. If I was on a scheme with someone like that, I would be looking out of it for my safety.

Third, I'm assuming that there'll be some form of insurance provided for this work, which will cost.

Fourth, are you going to allow the womenfolk to plead the belly? It's rare to see a woman doing time for a crime, so I can't see this happening, there'll always be kids to look after or on the way. So it'll just be the menfolk out working.

You could always incentivise people to do the work, have a lower Dole for people who do not have any interest in getting off it and a higher amount for those interested in doing things to improve the country.

gerryo777

old hippy wrote: »

What you need is switch to a quasi stasi style state, encourage a culture of grassing on suspected cheats, carrying out surveillance etc. Think of all those jobs that could be created as professional informers. I'm pretty sure the mentality for such an undertaking is already there.

If going by the amount of 'fraud' reports received by the Dept of Social Protection last year, then I think your right.
The majority of them were proven to be false.

Anna Nicole

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

The suggestion that the unemployed dont know the meaning of a hard days work, and the suggestion that those with third level qualifications should be given better tasks under your system displays a clear opinion you have of the "type" of people who are unemployed.


Who are you referring to?
I'm arguing a position, that the SW system in this country is flawed and needs a change. The disincentives I have observed I have outlined, and my proposed changes too.

I am neither looking for work, nor do I feel sorry for myself.



Painting walls, pulling weeds, cleaning up dog dirt, sweeping roads, cutting hedges, taxing people. Yes these are menial jobs.

https://www.google.ie/search?sugexp=chrome,mod=2&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=menial



Why should what has been determined as the basic rate needed to survive be denied to people unless they perform menial labour to satisfy the sadistic pleasures of the upper classes? Why is there a need to punish the unemployed for being unemployed?


Oh, so you do see the unemployed as nothing more than free manual labour to be utilised for your personal benefit. Its your turf, you break your own back bringing it home. If you want help, employ someone to help you. There are lots of unemployed who will gladly work for money.

As I have already articulated, deploying the unemployed as free slave labour will not help them find gainful employment.



People might have different opinions on how best to better themselves. Its not for you to tell them.

For example. One thing repeatedly mentioned in this thread is maintaining local churches. I didnt want to go too far off topic, but I will not give my time and effort to helping institutions I detest.
I would not see it as bettering myself or my community.


One of my other big arguments is that I do not want to justify the 20bn SW bill by pointing to all the good community work we are getting as a quid pro quo. I want there to be a real effort to tackle unemployment not massage the figures, and if not, then I want a politician to make the bold move of addressing the unsustainable SW bill.

This country needs Jobs, and incentives to find work.
We do not need the people in jobs to feel smug, or look down on the unemployed.

You are not looking for work, so I'm assuming you don't need to work or don't want to work? Can I ask why?

Laminations

Delancey wrote: »

the person working today , paying their taxes and mortgage and bitching on boards.ie about ' spongers ' could well be the person going cap in hand to the dole office tomorrow.

I don't view welfare recipients as spongers or with their cap in hand. There is a minority that abuse the system - fraud is a separate matter. And there is the majority that need the support because they are between jobs (otherwise known as unemployed). No doubt this majority will return to work and paying into the system. The question I'm asking is how long should welfare pay you the same amount if you are unemployed? Two years I think is enough breathing space, I'd be happy even if it was longer but there needs to be a cut off. This cut off is implemented in other countries where welfare is reduced gradually after a certain time. Instead, the proposal here is that welfare become contingent on some voluntary work after a certain time.

It is not cap in hand. Practically everyone receiving the support has paid into the system, has paid their stamps.and deserve the support - it IS an entitlement. But it should not be an indefinite entitlement, thats the trap of welfare dependency.

PS I realise that the work wouldn't be truly 'voluntary'

murphaph

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

This country needs Jobs, and incentives to find work.
We do not need the people in jobs to feel smug, or look down on the unemployed.

I don't look down on the people here in Germany working for their (much more meagre) benefits. You see them assisting the local council with keeping the parks in order, hedges trimmed etc.

They do it to make sure nobody gets too comfortable on welfare. I respect the people who do it a lot more than the folks who opt-out and are cut off completely and who then proceed to beg for money.