Entitlement Culture killing the will to work in Ireland

chopper6

periodictable wrote: »

There was a woman on ClareFm yesterday and today complaining that she cannot get social housing and that she's been on the list for the last 10 years.Certain areas she won't go to, and what annoyed me was the sense of entitlement to pick what and where she would live. I believe there is alot more to the story, but the County Council said that she had left the accommodation she was in, so too bad lady, go live in a car.
I have no problem with housing people and helping with rent, but you take what's available else try your luck in some other country. People here have no idea how fortunate they are with the social safety net, but with this woman you'd think it was our fault she was in the situation she found herself in. If you can't provide for your kids, don't have any.

The podcast is here http://www.clare.fm/music/Morning%20Focus

Quite revealing interview:
http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

Sabrina McMahon, who says she was forced to sleep in her car with her three children last week, spoke to Niall Boylan on 4FM earlier today and their discussion shed more light on her predicament.
It came after a ‘good samaritan’, who wishes not to be named, came forward and paid for Sabrina, a former dental nurse and carer, and her children to stay in Bewley’s Hotel for the next four weeks.
Niall Boylan: “How old are your kids by the way?”
Sabrina McMahon: “I’ve a five-year-old, Karl, he’s a boy, and then I have a three-year-old, she’s only gone three since January, and I’ve an 18-month-old girl as well.”
Boylan: “God, your hands are full, certainly. Give us a little background if you can, Sabrina, and how you ended up in this situation in the first place. You were originally living in Kildare weren’t you.”
McMahon: “I’m from Dublin all my life and I’ve up to Kildare, if would have been nine and a half years ago now but after, nine, after, it would have been seven years, seven and a half years, my boyfriend had walked out on us, so I decided to come to Dublin just for a Christmas, for the kids.”
Boylan: “Yeah.”
McMahon: “To my father’s, and when we went back up to Athy, junkies had taken over the house. They had smashed up the whole house and totally, totally ruined the house.”
Boylan: “OK, this was the house that you were renting at the time was it? Yeah?
McMahon: “Yeah.”
Boylan: “OK. So were you getting rent allowance then from…”
McMahon: “No, sorry, I wasn’t renting the house, I was supposed to be buying it.”
Boylan: “Right, OK.”
McMahon: “Then seven years later, after me coming back down to Dublin for the Christmas, when I went back up, after the house had been vandalised and everything, I had rang the bank and I told them I wasn’t going to stay there and..”
Boylan: “OK, so who was paying for the house at that time that you were living in it?”
McMahon: “I was. I thought I was paying, like I paid a solicitor, in 2005, 2,900 pound, thinking that I was going to be paying a mortgage. I got a piece of paper off him, I thought that was the deeds of the house and then seven years later, when I phoned back up – after the people had wrecked the house – I was told that the house, I’d never signed any deeds to the house.”
Boylan: “But who was paying for it, for the seven years? I’m just curious, nobody was paying for it for the seven years? And you were fooled into thinking you were eventually going to be allowed to buy it?”
McMahon: “Yeah, yeah, it was me who was paying for it.”
Boylan: “All right, OK, so you were paying a kind of rent every week then obviously, or every month?”
McMahon: “A mortgage it was.”
Boylan: “A mortgage. Right. Ok. And you were working at the time then, were you?”
McMahon: “Yeah, yeah.”
Boylan: “All right, OK. So what happened then, your relationship broke up?”
McMahon: “The relationship. Well it wasn’t that it broke up, he walked out on us.”
Boylan: “Right. OK. And kind of left you high and dry. So you were left in a situation. Now you’d already been on the council list [housing waiting list]. How long have you been on the council list now?”
McMahon: “I’m on the council list over a year now.”
Boylan: “Over a year. OK. And in the interim have they offered to give you a rent allowance to get you to rent somewhere in the meantime?”
McMahon: “They have, and even the council have said themselves that there’s nowhere accepting rent allowance. No landlord will accept rent allowance.”
Boylan: “Yeah, they are landlords who’ll refuse to accept it for whatever reasons. Yeah, they have different reasons for refusing people on rent allowance, I don’t know why they do that. It’s kind of a bit of snobbery I think more than anything else.”
McMahon: “I know, yeah. It’s terrible.”
Boylan: “So you haven’t been able to find somewhere in Dublin though, so it’s not the case the council wouldn’t give you the money. It’s just you haven’t been able to find somewhere to live?”
McMahon: “Haven’t been able to find anywhere to live, no.”
Boylan: “OK, well, you see, because the story kind of makes out in the paper that, you know, you’re being left homeless but it’s just a case of not being able to find somewhere, is it?”
McMahon: “Well, the homeless unit will not, they have told me to go back, the homeless unit in Tallaght have told me to go back to Athy because I lived there two and a half years ago, that was my last permanent address.”
Boylan: “Yeah.”
McMahon: “I’d to go back up there, onto the homeless, up there, try get a house up there, reschool my kids, my three-year-old child, she needs speech therapy, I’ve been waiting a year and a half for that, and she’s due that next month, and they told me I’d have to get all that done back up in Athy. I’m isolated up there…”
Boylan: “Because like everybody else, you have to go onto the list, the council list now is something live seven to eight years, depending I suppose on your circumstance and, like everybody else, you have to go onto that list I suppose.”
McMahon: “Yeah.”
Boylan: “So what are you hoping to get? Are you hoping that the council will kind of bump you up the list a little bit and will give you something in Dublin, in Tallaght is it?”
McMahon: “I don’t know what’s going to happen from here, you know? I haven’t got a clue what’s going to happen.”
Boylan: “But why were you sleeping in the car? When there was an opportunity I suppose, when you had the rent allowance, if you needed to go back to Kildare, you have relations here, your parents are here and your sister I think lives here as well.”
McMahon: “Nobody is allowed let anyone stay in their house. The council has even told me that, that I shouldn’t have been staying in anyone’s house at the start, that if you stay in anyone’s house, they’re going to be charged for rent.”
Boylan: “Oh, right. OK.”
McMahon: “If you have another person staying in the house.”
Boylan: “Oh right because they’re on rent allowance as well at the time, is it?”
McMahon: “Yeah.”
Boylan: “Oh right, OK. So if they have you, you’re technically a lodger, so they should be charging you.”
McMahon: “OK, all right. Well it’s all jumping through loopholes.”

periodictable

chopper6 wrote: »

Quite revealing interview:
http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

I don't know if the people having kids are getting more stupid/less educated or are betting on the state to pay for them. The mortgage thing...what on earth is going on with that??
Makes you want to lock the gates and live abroad for most of the year.

chopper6

periodictable wrote: »

I don't know if the people having kids are getting more stupid/less educated or are betting on the state to pay for them. The mortgage thing...what on earth is going on with that??
Makes you want to lock the gates and live abroad for most of the year.

The technical term is "bullshiiting on stilts"

She half hatched a plan to get herseelf an upgrade through popular sympathy but got her lines wrong and blew her story.

AlekSmart

chopper6 wrote: »

The technical term is "bullshiiting on stilts"

She half hatched a plan to get herseelf an upgrade through popular sympathy but got her lines wrong and blew her story.

True,and in the process blew a gaping hole in the good ship Irish Times's hull.

Kitty Holland's professional journalistic credibility surely needs refreshing now ...not to mention the Irish Times's Editorial processes ?

I'd also have to give some credit to South Dublin and Kildare CC's for the restraint they displayed in the face of the Ms Holland led, cheap-shot vilification effort.

Geuze

Geuze

This Eurostat data may have been posted before, sorry about that.

In 2011, we topped the EU for the number of households with VLWI.

AlekSmart

Geuze wrote: »

This Eurostat data may have been posted before, sorry about that.

In 2011, we topped the EU for the number of households with VLWI.

AH but by 2014 Irish Government Policy meant that trend had been reversed.....(in at least ONE household)

http://www.independent.ie/business/former-taoiseach-brian-cowen-appointed-to-board-of-topaz-30239366.html

Godge

Geuze wrote: »

This Eurostat data may have been posted before, sorry about that.

In 2011, we topped the EU for the number of households with VLWI.

It is an incredible statistic.

NIMAN

Just read that dialogue from the radio show, and that woman sounds like she is full of it.

Story changing by the line. What sort of parent or family member would let their daughter and 3 kids sleep in a car?

Also think she is looking for sympathy big style, fresh in the knowledge that Councils normally back down when they run the risk of getting bad press.

What sort of person doesn't even know if they are paying rent or mortgage or whatever?

AlekSmart

NIMAN wrote: »

What sort of person doesn't even know if they are paying rent or mortgage or whatever?

What sort of Professional Journalist would rush off and make this womans case a cause célebre without so much as a nod at the inconsistencies so readily identified in that Niall Boylan interview.....:rolleyes:

road_high

Geuze wrote: »

Is this to do with the % of houses where people are not working? If so this is a truly frightening stat. It basiclaly means people that are working are propping up the rest of this farce.

Farmer Pudsey

road_high wrote: »

Is this to do with the % of houses where people are not working? If so this is a truly frightening stat. It basiclaly means people that are working are propping up the rest of this farce.

We have two frightening stastics in Ireland the first is the number of households that no one works in. The second is the number of single parent family's which are dependant on the state. We also have the one of highest disability rate world wide.

You ask yourself why

After a while the answer is obivious

Geuze

road_high wrote: »

Is this to do with the % of houses where people are not working? If so this is a truly frightening stat. It basiclaly means people that are working are propping up the rest of this farce.

It is truly frightening, yes.

I only discovered it during last year or two.

It's published by Eurostat, and each country collects the data as part of the SILC survey.

http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/silc/2012/silc_2012.pdf

Now, the CSO tend to focus on three measures of social exclusion:

(1) no. of people at-risk-of-poverty
(2) no. deprived
(3) no. in consistent poverty = being (1) + (2)

But Eurostat also discuss the VLWI measure.

Geuze

Households with very low work intensity

The work intensity for each household is calculated by
dividing the sum of all the months actually worked by the
working age members of the household by the sum of the
workable months in the household — i.e., the number of
months spent in any activity status by the working age
members of the household. A working age person is defined
as a person aged 18-59 years, who is not a dependent child.

A work intensity equal or inferior to 0.20 is considered as
very low.


Here is the raw data:

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=ilc_lvhl11&lang=en

Geuze

Maybe this definition is clearer:

People living in households with a very low work intensity are defined as people of all ages
(from 0-59 years) living in households where the adults (those aged 18-59, but excluding student aged
18-24) worked less than 20% of their total potential during the previous 12 months.

golfwallah

We shouldn't really be surprised at how badly Ireland rates as regards low work intensity when Minister for Social Protection, Joan Burton regards welfare as a stimulus for the economy - as if it hadn't to be paid out of taxes on earned income.

And then we hear she has ambitions to be the next leader of the Labour Party, whose present leader is calling for tax cuts, as if they had been imposed out of the blue by their coalition partners, Fine Gael.

Are these folk nuts or do they think the electorate are nuts?

I truly hope they get their just rewards in the forthcoming elections.

_Kaiser_

Geuze wrote: »

Maybe this definition is clearer:

People living in households with a very low work intensity are defined as people of all ages
(from 0-59 years) living in households where the adults (those aged 18-59, but excluding student aged
18-24) worked less than 20% of their total potential during the previous 12 months.

The problem with those who have chosen welfare as a career choice (I refuse to use the term Long term unemployed as that includes anyone over 12 months which isn't a reliable metric when you factor in the effects of a recession) is that once they're over say 35 - or maybe younger depending on the field - they're effectively unemployable in the majority of cases.

No employer is going to take a risk on someone that age starting from scratch (Jobsbridge aside) when you'll have dozens or more of qualified people with a track record competing for the same job. How do you explain a 15/20 year career gap on a CV? Example: My cousin took redundancy in 2001 and hasn't worked since because he hasn't had to basically. He worked in IT prior to that though and there's no way he'd get back in! *I* wouldn't even hire him to do desktop support and it'd mainly be due to his attitude since he was laid off.

Discriminatory, ageist or whatever other PC term you want to apply? Probably, and you can be sure that won't be the reason given, but reality for such people? Almost definitely!

The only answer really is how to deal with the <25 and the next generation(s) of such people and that's where the effort and money should be spent. The others we'll just have to accept as a "bad debt" I think.

Geuze

The problem of high rates of VLWI households in Ireland is in the news again today.

NESC launch a study on it.

Press release:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/news-events/press-releases/latest/nesc-publishes-report-137-jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

Study:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/publications/publications/nesc-reports/jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

Rightwing

Geuze wrote: »

The problem of high rates of VLWI households in Ireland is in the news again today.

NESC launch a study on it.

Press release:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/news-events/press-releases/latest/nesc-publishes-report-137-jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

Study:

http://www.nesc.ie/en/publications/publications/nesc-reports/jobless-households-an-exploration-of-the-issues/

I don't know which is worse, quangos or the unemployment problem.

They both 'stimulate the economy' anyway I suppose , if nothing else.

realitykeeper

I agree with the OP and it would appear many others do also. Is there a more thanked opening thread anywhere in the forum?

No Pants

realitykeeper wrote: »

I agree with the OP and it would appear many others do also. Is there a more thanked opening thread anywhere in the forum?

Might be one or two somewhere that don't open with anecdotal evidence, sure.

RichardAnd

chopper6 wrote: »

Quite revealing interview:
http://www.broadsheet.ie/tag/sabrina-mcmahon/

I’m not too sure what to make of that interview. The only thing I can say is that the lady in question didn't seem too sure of what she was saying.

One thing that I can take from that is that it does highlight how dependant so many people are on the mechanisms of the state. This is especially true for those with children. I noticed that she mentioned that her child is in need of speech therapy and that she has been waiting for it for some time. I can only assume that she meant that she is waiting for the state to provide her with speech therapy.

I’m not going to turn this into an attack on a single individual because in truth, I feel sorry for her. It just seems to me that the cost of living is so great for those with kids that many are totally dependent on the state to manage.

The lessons I will take from this? Don’t have kids!

murphaph

Huh? She was paying what she thought was a mortgage (to whom??) and it turns out she wasn't the owner? Story stinks, sorry.

Idbatterim

an extract from indo article earlier, "it would only effect higher income households" yeah the ones from 33k or 44k (married) and up. The real fat cats, paying childcare, mortgage or rent, car etc... myself and Tom McDonnell have a serious difference on what is equitable is and isnt! Can I ask why any time I see one of his ilk on the left wing RTE etc, they are never challenged on their bulls*t?

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/nevin-institute-reduce-budget-adjustments-to-800m-but-no-tax-cuts-30381810.html

But NERI also warned that there wasn't any room for tax cuts as this would harm public services.

"Some of the tax cuts that we've heard about is concerning," said Dr Tom McDonnell of the institute.

"For example, changing the threshold on the marginal rate of income tax. That would only affect a small proportion of households, and of course those are the higher income households. Obviously that would be inequitable but it would also not be particularly effective in boosting demand.

"Higher income households are better able to save, so that would be a particularly poor choice of tax cut."
- See more at: http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/nevin-institute-reduce-budget-adjustments-to-800m-but-no-tax-cuts-30381810.html#sthash.6eJVrKck.dpuf

Shelflife

My son (17) got a summer job, last week worked 20 hrs and got €140 gross. He paid 4% usc charge €5.60 and rec a net wage of €134.40.

Later that evening he played tag rugby and was chatting to one of his team mates (a bit older then him) who told him that he gets €100 a week for doing nothing.

So 17yr old tries to earn a few bob and gets taxed , 19yr old sits on his hole all week and gets €100.

Funny I pay plenty of tax myself, but the fact that my son made an effort and gets taxed really annoyed me. esp after he told me of his chat with his team mate.

OldNotWIse

Shelflife wrote: »

My son (17) got a summer job, last week worked 20 hrs and got €140 gross. He paid 4% usc charge €5.60 and rec a net wage of €134.40.

Later that evening he played tag rugby and was chatting to one of his team mates (a bit older then him) who told him that he gets €100 a week for doing nothing.

So 17yr old tries to earn a few bob and gets taxed , 19yr old sits on his hole all week and gets €100.

Funny I pay plenty of tax myself, but the fact that my son made an effort and gets taxed really annoyed me. esp after he told me of his chat with his team mate.

There are two ways of looking at that. Are you annoyed that your son paid tax on his small earnings? Or by the fact that his friend gets money for nothing?

No Pants

Shelflife wrote: »

My son (17) got a summer job, last week worked 20 hrs and got €140 gross. He paid 4% usc charge €5.60 and rec a net wage of €134.40.

According to this, he should not be liable for USC until he earns more than €10,036, so tell him to keep his payslips and make sure to request it back when he returns to being a student.

Idbatterim

the thing is the low paid are taxed virtually nothing, welfare needs to be cut down to subsistence levels after a while and create more jobs and cut marginal rate with the remainder, watch the work reward ratio soar. Its morally beyond a joke. I have a mate, who got his accommodation paid for and saved enough to go to euro 2012 while still going out at least once per week and living a decent lifestyle... I also agree with the welfare cuts for the under 25's, it was blunt and maybe someone who contributed to the system were shafted, but leaving school at 18 and being able to claim over E200 per week at one stage, while living at home, is beyond madness. Its at the level where if you dont have much drive or family dont have a work ethic, how I see people of that disposition can just end up on it as a way of life, as the government encourage them and say that its a choice for you to make, without looking at the massive implications it has on that individual, society and our finances...

You know what, the more you think about it, them more you would wonder, who really are the have and have nots! Have medical card, free house, few hundred euro a week, no income taxes, got knows what else they get v the supposed "haves" work related expenses, income taxes, rule themselves out of a host of freebies to earn **** money when you factor in the cost of living here and how generous the welfare system is...

OldNotWIse

Idbatterim wrote: »

the thing is the low paid are taxed virtually nothing, welfare needs to be cut down to subsistence levels after a while and create more jobs and cut marginal rate with the remainder, watch the work reward ratio soar. Its morally beyond a joke. I have a mate, who got his accommodation paid for and saved enough to go to euro 2012 while still going out at least once per week and living a decent lifestyle... I also agree with the welfare cuts for the under 25's, it was blunt and maybe someone who contributed to the system were shafted, but leaving school at 18 and being able to claim over E200 per week at one stage, while living at home, is beyond madness. Its at the level where if you dont have much drive or family dont have a work ethic, how I see people of that disposition can just end up on it as a way of life, as the government encourage them and say that its a choice for you to make, without looking at the massive implications it has on that individual, society and our finances...

You know what, the more you think about it, them more you would wonder, who really are the have and have nots! Have medical card, free house, few hundred euro a week, no income taxes, got knows what else they get v the supposed "haves" work related expenses, income taxes, rule themselves out of a host of freebies to earn **** money when you factor in the cost of living here and how generous the welfare system is...

This

comongethappy

OldNotWIse wrote: »

This

Well it can't be done anyway so its moot.

The parents income is taken into consideration when applying for JSA, the youth would probably receive a fraction of the €100 maximum he could qualify for.

Even then its subject to assessment from the DSP, that the youth is seeking work or training.