David Norris - Social welfare shouldn't be spent on alcohol

esforum

fin12 wrote: »

If you have worked previously and payed taxes well then if you then find yourself on the dole after you are getting money that you paid in back so its not everyone else's taxes that are paying your dole, people have payed for their dole money themselves as well.

No one is disputing that or going after these people, they are the ones sending CV's, making calls and getting out the door for interviews.

The people against boozing are stating its against the pyjama brigade who wake up at noon, go to the boozer in pyjamas and then sulk home to watch tv without ever once looking for a job or the second type who actually do get up early and go to bed late, but thats cause they are robbing people and only taking a brake to sign onl

I would love to know the % of people over 30 who have never worked in their lives and also the % of unemployed with multiple criminal convictions. Worth a few minutes on google me thinks

darkpagandeath

esforum wrote: »

No one is disputing that or going after these people, they are the ones sending CV's, making calls and getting out the door for interviews.

The people against boozing are stating its against the pyjama brigade who wake up at noon, go to the boozer in pyjamas and then sulk home to watch tv without ever once looking for a job.

I would love to know the % of people over 30 who have never worked in their lives. Worth a few minutes on google me thinks

Really People are able to live in the pub on €188 pw ?

Does the Norris logic also apply to politicians and civil servants? After all, they get their wages from the taxpayer.

Iwasfrozen

Deleted User wrote: »

It's none of your business. It's not even the business of welfare recipients who also pay tax on the goods they buy.

It's clearly my business because I pay tax but wait what? What's this bit underlined? Hardly useful taxation when the money is given to them from taxation in the first place. If that's you're argument then better to keep the money and let them starve.

Illiberal nanny state busybodies will always try to make some tenuous connections like the above so that they can claim an entitlement to interfere in the lives of others, but it's still none of their business.

It's none of my business when I don't have to pay tax any more. While I do it's my business, deal with it.

darkpagandeath

Deleted User wrote: »

Does the Norris logic also apply to politicians and civil servants? After all, they get their wages from the taxpayer.

And cheap drink in the Dail bar. But minimum price will not effect them. I would guess he would advocate no use of public vehicles to goto the tents at the Galway races ?

gctest50

Deleted User wrote: »

.........
Illiberal nanny state busybodies will always try to make some tenuous connections like the above so that they can claim an entitlement to interfere in the lives of others, but it's still none of their business.

I think just as a few people are really badly affected by alcohol, some are really badly affected by SIMS / "my empire" sort of video games

or before that, fantasies about being king or something, dunno

this kind of "total control", have them terrified post :

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Their money granted to them with conditions that can be revoked and even clawed back when the conditions are in breech.

darkpagandeath

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's clearly my business because I pay tax but wait what? What's this bit underlined? Hardly useful taxation when the money is given to them from taxation in the first place. If that's you're argument then better to keep the money and let them starve.


It's none of my business when I don't have to pay tax any more. While I do it's my business, deal with it.

Smokes and Drink are taxed stupidly high. Lets play a game. How would one replace the money from the real economy if all dole was stopped bear in mind the mass job losses as well due to the money removed.

Iwasfrozen

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Well let me put it this way, Go on dragons den with just an idea and no market see how much money they give out. Banks will not give money out without a market or sound business model sales figures and alike. Same with the Dole office and the grant Imaging telling ones team leader you gave a government grant to a lad saying he's going to sell daisy's.

I am not having a go here but I have to question stuff that's not exactly thought through to bash people on the dole.

Who ever said the idea was workable on dragons den? I certainly didn't for starters Dragon's den only accepts new ideas. I wish you'd stop putting words into my mouth it makes this very tedious.

As with regards to your daisy reference I point you to my last post when I mentioned daisys.
" I haven't been proposing the daisy business. if you were to ask me about that which we've been going back and forth on for an hour I might be able to answer your question."

As with regards to your bank reference I agree. Banks won't give out money without a market or sound business model sales figures and alike. But I don't see how that's relevant to your argument.

darkpagandeath

Dear god I'm out people are blatantly on a wind up :pac::pac::pac:

Iwasfrozen

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Smokes and Drink are taxed stupidly high. Lets play a game. How would one replace the money from the real economy if all dole was stopped bear in mind the mass job losses as well due to the money removed.

A higher percentage of the money the government spends out on dole would continue circulating in the economy rather than being absorbed by taxation if the money were not spent on high taxed products like cigarettes and drink.

gctest50

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

if you were to ask me about that which we've been going back and forth on for an hour I might be able to answer your question..

what have you "been going back and forth on for an hour" about

outline your plan, we'll see is it already there

Iwasfrozen

gctest50 wrote: »

what have you "been going back and forth on for an hour" about

outline your plan, we'll see is it already there

Everything is in thread, you can search for my user name to filter the posts.

Iwasfrozen

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's clearly my business because I pay tax but wait what? What's this bit underlined? Hardly useful taxation when the money is given to them from taxation in the first place. If that's you're argument then better to keep the money and let them starve.


It's none of my business when I don't have to pay tax any more. While I do it's my business, deal with it.

It's not your business.

I haven't worked out if you're a commie or an interfering old-fashioned busybody, but either way you're wrong. Stop interfering with how people spend their money. It's not yours. You'd resent it if people tried to tell you how to spend your money - and you'd be right.

Did you answer about the biccies and Penney's yet?

deseil

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Does the Norris logic also apply to politicians and civil servants? After all, they get their wages from the taxpayer.

Are you for real? They get up and go to work everyday, paying childcare travel costs etc

Iwasfrozen

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not your business.

I haven't worked out if you're a commie or an interfering old-fashioned busybody, but either way you're wrong. Stop interfering with how people spend their money. It's not yours. You'd resent it if people tried to tell you how to spend your money - and you'd be right.

Did you answer about the biccies and Penney's yet?

While I pay tax and the social welfare is paid out of general taxation it is my business.

I wouldn't accept other people telling me how to spend my money because I've earned it. My money is not social welfare.

esforum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Link.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98062440 conveniently forgotten?

gctest50

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

While I pay tax and the social welfare is paid out of general taxation it is my business.....

You have 1 vote at election time, to change stuff - don't forget to vote or you'll be unhappy

Of course the object of your interest have many many votes

deseil

deseil wrote: »

Are you for real? They get up and go to work everyday, paying childcare travel costs etc

Who? Politicians and civil servants?

Are YOU for real?

They earn their living on the back of the taxpayers' money. If we claim that drink is a bad thing then why should those people be allowed spend taxpayers' money on drink?

By the way, we all know the real answer, which is rooted in the fact that we love our drink a lot more than we're willing to let on.

Unless you are some kind of extremist, there is no sane reason to interfere with anyone spending their money on legal products and services.

esforum

Deleted User wrote: »

Once you give it to them it is their money,

Deleted User wrote: »

People should be responsible for themselves

Deleted User wrote: »

not to mention the extremist interfering nanny state nonsense

Make up your mind, either the state via my tax has to bail people out, or they should be responsible for themselves. It sounds like a typical teenager tantrum, "its my room and my life why should I clean up or do what you say, now whats for dinner and wheres my pocket money?"

Iwasfrozen

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

While I pay tax and the social welfare is paid out of general taxation it is my business.

You can say that as often as your political extremism makes you wish, but it is not true.

Stop trying to interfere with how other people spend their money.

Iwasfrozen

gctest50 wrote: »

You have 1 vote at election time, to change stuff - don't forget to vote or you'll be unhappy

Of course the object of your interest have many many votes

Hence why everyone should pay as little tax as legally permissible, preferably not in Ireland.

Deleted User wrote: »

You can say that as often as your political extremism makes you wish, but it is not true.

Stop trying to interfere with how other people spend their money.

Tell it to the department of social protection, they already place restrictions on how dole money is to be spent.

darkpagandeath

esforum wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=98062440 conveniently forgotten?

So it's not the dole check.

esforum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Really People are able to live in the pub on €188 pw ?

Are we back at this again? You asked the same stupid question yesterday.

Yes they can when they have a free house, reduced bills, dont need a car because they have a travel pass, free doctor and free precriptions, sorry 50 cent perscriptions.

If I took your mortgage / rent / bills / travel / tax / prsi / pension / health insurance and work expenses out of the frame how much would you need? By the time you have paid all that, how much are you left with?

And I also stated that criminals sell their stolen wares thus having more cash in their pockets. Read threads, read posts

KomradeBishop

esforum wrote: »

You quote some dodgy references at times, thats just a random blog. Anyone can make a blog. Assuming the blog is accurate, how in the name of god can we expect such a statistic to be? How can you, I or anyone else really point at such a stat and say "yep thats accurate, lot of honest people on the dole that would never tell porkies". Let me ask, do you think criminals that still claim the dole are genuinely looking for work and second, would you accept that its not a completely accurate comparison as only Ireland and the UK have such a permanenent welfare system as you can actually live your entire life without working? Mainland europe either cuts people off after a time period and instead provides direct means of support such as food and clothing or privides a very limited further support (400 per month in Germany). Furthermore, considering admitting your not looking for work would actually remove your entitlements, would you conceded there is an incentive to openly lie? further rubbishing the study.

If you'd spent more than a microsecond reading up on the source, you'd see it's a peer-reviewed journal...

Oh I see, all dole recipients are liars now, right? I guess the Irish dole recipients are unique among Europeans, in their propensity to lie as well? The German ones too?

You're also deliberating sidestepping the point: Those stats weren't even the focus, you're still completely wrong about the availability of jobs - as other stats, like unemployed per job vacancy, shows.

Not. Enough. Jobs. - the stats prove it, and you have no counter to it.

esforum

darkpagandeath wrote: »

So it's not the dole check.

job seekers allowance. If your going to nit pick, use an accurate name and yes it is. Other benefits are also payable in certain circumstances.

Do you actually know our welfare system at all?

darkpagandeath

esforum wrote: »

Are we back at this again? You asked the same stupid question yesterday.

Yes they can when they have a free house, reduced bills, dont need a car because they have a travel pass, free doctor and free precriptions, sorry 50 cent perscriptions.

If I took your mortgage / rent / bills / travel / tax / prsi / pension / health insurance and work expenses out of the frame how much would you need? By the time you have paid all that, how much are you left with?

And I also stated that criminals sell their stolen wares thus having more cash in their pockets. Read threads, read posts

So one has a problem with criminals on the dole gottcha. Maybe call the revenue and the dole office and report the ones you know of ?

darkpagandeath

esforum wrote: »

job seekers allowance. If your going to nit pick, use an accurate name and yes it is. Other benefits are also payable in certain circumstances.

Do you actually know our welfare system at all?

How do heroin addicts get job seekers ? They don't they get disability.

esforum

esforum wrote: »

....either the state via my tax has to bail people out, or they should be responsible for themselves...

I got rid of the ranting bits.

Once the state (or anyone else for that matter) gives someone money it is their money, and as Maureen O'Sullivan pointed out policing how people spend their money is not a good way of dealing with our drink culture. Encouraging them to be responsible for their behaviour, including how they spend their money, is a good idea.

I understand how extremists and Victorian-style interfering nanny state busybodies might think that controlling other people and interfering with their right to spend their money as they see fit will help. But it won't.

And by the way, it's our drink culture, not someone else's. Irish society has a real problem with our love affair with alcohol - and if politicians think we're going to fix it by attacking "skanger" drinking while encouraging "snobby middle class" drinking then they are sadly, sadly mistaken.....


.....and the same goes for you.

Iwasfrozen

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Tell it to the department of social protection, they already place restrictions on how dole money is to be spent.

You never did get around to explaining why you want to stop welfare recipients buying the occasional pack of biscuits and why you want to make them all buy their clothes in charity shops and Penneys, by the way.

KomradeBishop

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

It's clearly my business because I pay tax but wait what? What's this bit underlined? Hardly useful taxation when the money is given to them from taxation in the first place. If that's you're argument then better to keep the money and let them starve.


It's none of my business when I don't have to pay tax any more. While I do it's my business, deal with it.

To take up your own facetiousness from earlier: No, it's your choice to pay tax - and instead of using money to purchase goods (thus incurring VAT), you can use barter - you can just quit your job and not earn any money, nobody is forcing you to pay tax - just like nobody is forced to purchase electricity services, from your example earlier :pac:

More seriously (and obviously, the above is not serious): As you can see, the idea of 'choice' here is illusory, just like the 'choice' of whether or not to purchase electricity services - in both cases, the false 'choice' makes life completely impractical - so applying my argument from earlier, there is equally valid reason for people to demand a say in how their money is spent, by the operators of essential services which can't be avoided (as the payments for these services, which are mandatory/unavoidable, are very much like taxes).

Considering that, the far greater moral concern, is not dole recipients blowing money on alcohol - but issues like excessive salaries, and excessive charges within essential industries - which take a far bigger hit out of our pockets than any drunken dole recipient.