Tánaiste Moany Burton: IW protesters 'seem to have extremely expensive phones'

GarIT

GarIT wrote: »

There are plenty of places for €50 or less per week. The same group of entitled people seem to think that house shares and houses not in Dublin don't exist.

Single rooms in Dublin in house shares are going for a lot more than €50 a week. Moving outside of a major city isn't an option for many and it would be a little counter productive when you consider that most jobs are being created in cities.

GarIT

P_1 wrote: »

Now you are aware that not everybody on social welfare gets rent allowance don't you? In fact I'd wager that a good few see their SW payments disappear on things like mortgages and whatnot.

Fair enough once the rent/mortgage is paid for then €250 a month to take care of the other bills and food is pretty good going but you are making quite a poor argument by suggesting that €250 a month is fine to live on once you discount those pesky things like rent or mortgage...

Giving up any mortgage needs to be a requirement should be a requirement to getting any social welfare payments. If they're not getting rent allowance, that's wrong and they should be getting it, but a reasonable amount, not for a central house with a separate room for each child.

keith16

I have to say I am shocked at how many people are just accepting the water charges.

In principle, nothing wrong with paying for water - I have no objection whatsoever.

I strongly object, when a two-bit organisation such as Irish Water is thrown together, clearly have no idea what they are doing and bring along the high costs and cronyism that Enda promised to remove.

I would attend the protest if I could. I can well afford the charges too - and while many people will now conserve water (a very good thing), I guarantee you that Irish Water will do nothing to improve the infrastructure or quality of water in Ireland.

intellectual dosser

Joan Burton's comments seem to epitomize the Governments attitude of 'If the people appear to have money - lets take it'

the_syco

Laois6556 wrote: »

This country is split, the rich and the poor. The rich think they have it tough and look down on the poor as lazy scroungers. The rich don't realise how easy they have it, the poor are rising together. They wont be putting up with the crap for much longer.

Are they going to get the dole slashed by 50% so they have to pay less tax?

KomradeBishop

VinLieger wrote: »

Nice straw man.

Look the simple fact is there is deffinitely a sense of entitlement among a certain class of people on the dole. I'm not saying everyone on the dole suffers from this but there are people who do. Yes some people then use this to tar everyone on the dole with the same brush but it's no different to people who go around claiming that "business owners" and anyone on the higher tax rate is rolling in it and "rich" and should be taxed to the hilt to pay for everything as it's all their fault......

Nice straw man...

You are also attempting to use that straw-man/false-accusation-of-hypocrisy, to justify the dole-bashing generalizations, which is fallacious reasoning.

Barely There

crusher000 wrote: »

The greatest % of people that are affected by austerity are the people at the bottom of our economy. They feel the burden of taxes the most.

Perhaps you could post up some actual evidence to back up these claims.
It will be interesting to compare this against the data reported on by the Irish Independent in August.

http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/middle-ireland-has-borne-the-brunt-of-our-austerity-years-30478154.html

GarIT

Deleted User wrote: »

Single rooms in Dublin in house shares are going for a lot more than €50 a week. Moving outside of a major city isn't an option for many and it would be a little counter productive when you consider that most jobs are being created in cities.

If you find a job you can commute or then move back in. Dublin is one of the only cities in the world where the average commute time is less than 2 hours. Ireland is so small you could live in Galway and commute to work in Dublin in less time than the average London worker.

folan

GarIT wrote: »

Giving up any mortgage needs to be a requirement should be a requirement to getting any social welfare payments.

what? so if i lose my job, I should have to sell my house on to avail of social welfare until i get a new job?

Idbatterim

I pointed it out earlier and will do so again a couple on 100k, are paying E271 at the marginal rate of tax alone per week and getting nothing for it. That is about the average yearly charge that has been bandied about. So excuse the lack of compassion!

This country is split, the rich and the poor. The rich think they have it tough and look down on the poor as lazy scroungers. The rich don't realise how easy they have it, the poor are rising together. They wont be putting up with the crap for much longer.

Not even .1% that is one in a thousand of the Irish population could be defined as "rich".

ChillMhantain

GarIT wrote: »

If I can live on €250 a month I don't see why anyone else cant either. (Excluding rent, but we do have rent allowance so that's covered)

If you are living on €8/day for everything but rent you need to share your secret with everybody.

folan

GarIT wrote: »

Dublin is one of the only cities in the world where the average commute time is less than 2 hours.

source

_Kaiser_

GarIT wrote: »

]If I can live on €250 a month I don't see why anyone else cant either. (Excluding rent, but we do have rent allowance so that's covered)

That's a bit much now. Good for you that you can manage, but everyone's circumstances are different!

I was made redundant in late 2009 and was out of work for a year. Contrary to what some people think though, your bills (loans, credit cards, utilities etc) don't just disappear with your job and salary and everyone has to be paid SOMETHING every week (can't just say "ah well, I'm unemployed.. you can have it when I get another job!"). It's actually a very stressful existence as you try to give them all just enough to keep them off your back for another month.

Those who want to work (or who have been laid off through no fault of their own) should be supported as much as possible to get work (perhaps a sliding scale of payments as is done elsewhere). Those who haven't worked a day in their lives (officially anyway!) however are a very different case and need to be pushed/prodded to retrain or get work "or else"

In my case it took a year and was a job that was 2 steps back career wise and for less money AND it involved a 1000km/week commute @ €5/600 in diesel/tolls/wear and tear on the car and in the end I had to move back to Dublin as well which I didn't really want to do, but I did it as a way back into the workforce and thankfully it worked out in the longer term, but I would NEVER be so arrogant as to assume that everyone else has the same opportunities and costs that I did.

P_1

GarIT wrote: »

Giving up any mortgage needs to be a requirement should be a requirement to getting any social welfare payments. If they're not getting rent allowance, that's wrong and they should be getting it, but a reasonable amount, not for a central house with a separate room for each child.

And have you given any thought to the financial havok that would cause?

VinLieger

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Nice straw man...

You are also attempting to use that straw-man/false-accusation-of-hypocrisy, to justify the dole-bashing generalizations, which is fallacious reasoning.

Where did i justify it? i'm just saying it happens on both sides

GarIT

folan wrote: »

what? so if i lose my job, I should have to sell my house on to avail of social welfare until i get a new job?

No, you have a house, you can live off the cash from the sale. Owning a house isn't something people should be entitled to. Social welfare should be reserved for those with no assets.

KomradeBishop

GarIT wrote: »

Clearly not. But you should be able to go and buy new luxuries. If you were worried about loosing your job you should have been saving accordingly for that rather than relying on the state to do that for you.

I don't see how people think they are entitled to anything, this luxuries have to be created, people have to work to make them, and everyone should have to work if they wish to receive them.

There should possibly be a grace period, but say after 12 months of unemployment if you are still unemployed and not in education you shouldn't get any more than the essentials. I also support the idea's of scrapping the dole and the government guaranteeing everyone a job on €200 per week, if you want more you need to go and get yourself a better job.

Social welfare payments are also disproportionate, admittedly some families are struggling, but single people on the dole are stinking rich.

Everyone should feel entitled to a decent quality of life - which, if they are to remain physically/emotionally/mentally healthy, must include luxuries.

Denying anyone that, is nothing more than begrudgery. You would even make people work for subsistence wages, as if even then they hadn't 'earned' a decent quality of life.

VinLieger

Idbatterim wrote: »

I pointed it out earlier and will do so again a couple on 100k, are paying E271 at the marginal rate of tax alone per week and getting nothing for it. That is about the average yearly charge that has been bandied about. So excuse the lack of compassion!



Not even .1% that is one in a thousand of the Irish population could be defined as "rich".

Someone with that attitude will blindly assume anyone on the higher rate of tax is rich while being ignorant of the fact that it kicks in at 32,800, the lowest rate in Europe for the highest band

_Kaiser_

GarIT wrote: »

No, you have a house, you can live off the cash from the sale. Owning a house isn't something people should be entitled to. Social welfare should be reserved for those with no assets.

I agree on your point that no-one is automatically entitled to own a house.. but the flaw in your plan there is the assumption that the proceeds will cover what's left on the mortgage

Dublin aside, negative equity is still a big issue!

ChillMhantain

GarIT wrote: »

No, you have a house, you can live off the cash from the sale. Owning a house isn't something people should be entitled to. Social welfare should be reserved for those with no assets.

You are taking the piss now. I don't know anyone would come out with anything after the sale of their house, in fact they would probably still owe money.

KomradeBishop

Idbatterim wrote: »

the lifers and all of the associated costs, house, medical card, god knows what allowances is impacting on the quality of life of the people paying for it! What they deserve is a decent education system and let them take advantage of it and if not, tough luck...



even the people who earned very modest income, paying a fortune in tax, who borrowed 400-500k during the boom to get a house? Who get nothing in return for their contributions and are living pay check to pay check or have had to cut everything down to the bone?

Everyone. Everyone deserves a decent quality of life, no exceptions. They should all feel entitled to it. Your 'dole lifers' nonsense, is nothing other than a totally unbacked assumption: How many of the unemployed, exactly, are 'lifers', and how much are those lifers costing?

Lets see if you can answer that without massive generalizations.

VinLieger

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Everyone should feel entitled to a decent quality of life - which, if they are to remain physically/emotionally/mentally healthy, must include luxuries.

Denying anyone that, is nothing more than begrudgery. You would even make people work for subsistence wages, as if even then they hadn't 'earned' a decent quality of life.

Can you quantify a decent quality of life? What does this mean, should they be able to shop in M&S for the weekly groceries?

KomradeBishop

GarIT wrote: »

Why shouldn't it? I'd say it should why is your argument better than mine? Any reasoning?

I actually think that people not currently paying PAYE shouldn't have a vote on how the country is run.

Yes that's nice, remove voting privileges from people who are poor - feudalistic nonsense.

jimgoose

crusher000 wrote: »

...The greatest % of people that are affected by austerity are the people at the bottom of our economy. They feel the burden of taxes the most...

They do in their collective hole.

GarIT

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

That's a bit much now. Good for you that you can manage, but everyone's circumstances are different!

I was made redundant in late 2009 and was out of work for a year. Contrary to what some people think though, your bills (loans, credit cards, utilities etc) don't just disappear with your job and salary and everyone has to be paid SOMETHING every week (can't just say "ah well, I'm unemployed.. you can have it when I get another job!"). It's actually a very stressful existence as you try to give them all just enough to keep them off your back for another month.

In my case it took a year and was a job that was 2 steps back career wise and for less money AND it involved a 1000km/week commute @ €5/600 in diesel/tolls/wear and tear on the car.

Those who want to work (or who have been laid off through no fault of their own) should be supported as much as possible to get work (perhaps a sliding scale of payments as is done elsewhere). Those who haven't worked a day in their lives (officially anyway!) however are a very different case and need to be pushed/prodded to retrain or get work "or else"

In the end I had to move back to Dublin as well which I didn't really want to do, but I did it as a way back into the workforce and thankfully it worked out in the longer term, but I would NEVER be so arrogant as to assume that everyone else has the same opportunities and costs that I did.

Nobody else incurred your loans or credit card debts. You should have made sure you could pay them off before you got them. Even just borrowing money is bad economics and just wasting money. I've never owed a cent to anybody in my life and I'm better off for it, if my income drops I cut my spending.

Somebody was asking about the €8 per day. Tesco sells meat that has to be eaten that day for less than €1 per meal. I by peanut butter in holland and barret for €8 per kg. bananas are cheap, so is porridge. Onions and peppers are great for adding to dinner and are cheap. Rice can be bought in bulk and is quite cheap. Don't leave lights or the TV on, wear warm clothes instead of using the heating, if you aren't wearing a jacket before you turn the heating on your just doing it wrong. Sorted

In Lonesome Dove

GarIT wrote: »

If you're not earning why should you be given free stuff from anybody. Humanity dictates that we help them survive, but they shouldn't have access to the same rewards that 40 hours of work each week brings.

What kind of rewards should a 40 hour week bring?

How about a proper wage in line with minimum wage perhaps.

Many youngsters are working a full time week and aren't getting much rewards except for the 100 euro or 140 euro (depending on age) for the work that they do.

folan

GarIT wrote: »

No, you have a house, you can live off the cash from the sale. Owning a house isn't something people should be entitled to. Social welfare should be reserved for those with no assets.

have i a mortgage or own the house?

I get it, you are taking the piss.

In Lonesome Dove

In Lonesome Dove wrote: »

This is such a brilliant reply. Thank you.

There is a lot of ignorant assumptions online that unemployed people are the source of the country's woes. That they are all lazy scum who never worked a day in their life's and never intend to. The people with these assumptions are misdirecting their anger at the wrong people. Anger brought about due to work like working more for less and financial stress perhaps.

I remember a piece some months back about the long term unemployed as in unemployed since the boom and it's coming into the 40,000's. But even at that, that's just a figure. How much of those were unemployed for a brief period to be replaced other people briefly unemployed. Perhaps college students coming out fron college and unable to get work straight away.

Back on topic, There's about 450,000 people unemployed. A jump of around 410,000. These 400,000 would have lost work through the crash. The credit in the banks dried up which would have had an impact on the construction sector. Lending from the banks were less which would have had an impact on say for example some small businesses relying on bank credit from time to time. Unable to get credit they would have closed doors. We were a country who became too expensive and a lot of manufacturing companies closed to move to cheaper countries letting go of their workforce. These would have had an impact on the services and hospitality sector. With many countries outside of Ireland also in a downturn, that would have had an impact on the tourism sector. Along with these people losing jobs, we having youngsters coming out from college and courses unable to get work.

You are a bit out...
There's 375k on the live register.
http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/lr/liveregisterseptember2014/#.VDe6mss1jqA
We're below the EU average again I think.

The Muppet

GarIT wrote: »

No, you have a house, you can live off the cash from the sale. Owning a house isn't something people should be entitled to. Social welfare should be reserved for those with no assets.

There's a slight flaw in your thinking , If you have a mortgage you really don't own a House do you? Selling it would (a) leave you with nowhere to live and (b) would be unlikely to raise enough to pay of the remainder of the mortgage never mind funding living expenses . Apart from that its a good idea.

_Kaiser_

GarIT wrote: »

Nobody else incurred your loans or credit card debts. You should have made sure you could pay them off before you got them. Even just borrowing money is bad economics and just wasting money. I've never owed a cent to anybody in my life and I'm better off for it, if my income drops I cut my spending.

I know this is AH but still - :rolleyes:

For the record though, I too got the calls every fortnight offering me "free" money for anything I wanted and pre-approval for nearly half a million on a mortgage.. but I refused because I didn't need it and limited myself to a small car loan so I could cut down on a 3 hour bus/train commute (in Dublin no less!)

While I was working I was comfortably making all those payments but see, when your income unexpectedly drops to a fraction of what it was things change, and in fact the FIRST call I made the next day was to the bank to apprise them of the situation (to restructure, not write-off I might add)

Good for you that you can live debt-free and are happy doing it but there's nothing wrong with debt as long as it's managed responsibly and as long as you remember that the responsibility lies with you to repay it.. even if it takes longer.

In the end any debts I owe will be repaid so you can take your smug condescending nonsense elsewhere please