Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How would you rate the quality of life in Ireland?

12346

Comments

  • #152
    murpho999
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 28,787 ✭✭✭✭murpho999


    threeball wrote: »
    One of the best countries in the world in which to live but could be even better if we could just weed out the corruption which is rife.

    The d1ckhead is king in Ireland. The more you are willing to step on someone the more successful you will be. We have absolutely no rules to punish someone for screwing someone else over.
    The cream can never rise to the top as there's always lads taking backhanders to promote the sh1ttiest candidate/product etc. and then we spend a fortune on "consultants" again to recommend another way of doing things when it falls apart. Only problem is the next "consultants" are on the take also just from someone else.

    For some reason we love to laud the stoker but the guy is honest and hardworking gets nailed to the cross.

    This sounds more like a comment on 'The Journal.ie'.

    Just general Ireland bashing and not a shred of evidence to back it up.

    Nothing stopping cream rising to the top here and can you give an example of a sh1t product being sold due to backhanders?


  • #153
    Herb Powell
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,097 ✭✭✭Herb Powell


    threeball wrote: »
    Corruption in this country is low level but widespread. Its so low level it doesn't even register but still has a huge influence on the way the market operates. Lads taking a couple of hundred here and there to recommend one thing over another where the merits are secondary considerations.

    Yeah, corruption exists.

    We are still by far one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Most other places have it worse. A few of these being countries within Europe.

    It's a feature of humanity, and we're relatively very lucky.


  • #154
    threeball
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,966 ✭✭✭threeball


    murpho999 wrote: »
    This sounds more like a comment on 'The Journal.ie'.

    Just general Ireland bashing and not a shred of evidence to back it up.

    Nothing stopping cream rising to the top here and can you give an example of a sh1t product being sold due to backhanders?

    I could but boards would probably get sued.


  • #155
    threeball
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,966 ✭✭✭threeball


    murpho999 wrote: »
    This sounds more like a comment on 'The Journal.ie'.

    Just general Ireland bashing and not a shred of evidence to back it up.

    Nothing stopping cream rising to the top here and can you give an example of a sh1t product being sold due to backhanders?

    So saying Ireland is one of the best countries in the world to live in but pointing out a serious flaw in the fabric of how we work is Ireland bashing? GTFO


  • #156
    Gonzo
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 17,582 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gonzo


    Health service: if you can afford private then things are ok, if your on the public then god help you. Our health service is a basket case.

    Education: mostly very good but could do with more funding.

    Weather: bland and boring most of the time, January and July are often separated by only a degree or 2, mainly daylight that changes. Rarely do we see snow and rarely does the temperature go above 20C. Mild, wet and windy most of the year.

    Work: very difficult for a college graduate to make a living with all these internships going around. Many have to work between 9 months and 2 years for free with their allowances used up on tolls/transport and work lunches. Ive heard of people doing double and triple internships. With jobbridge now abolished, hopefully this will be a much improved situation with interns getting paid a living wage for their work. If you have several years experience then work life is definitely better.

    Work/life balance: not great especially those working in Dublin from Meath, Kildare, Carlow and Wicklow, many are looking at 4 hours+ stuck in traffic on a daily basis then another 8/10 hours in the workplace. Working from home and shift work should become more freely available. Half of the work day is spent sitting in a car, is not productive for anyone.

    Public transport: good in the south of Dublin, mostly crap everywhere else, especially outside Dublin. People shouldn't have to rely on their cars and spent hours getting to and from work everyday.

    Road network: Motorway network is decent but all other roads are in poorish conditions, some secondary roads especially need to be realigned and widened. Our road signs are a mess, many of them poorly aligned. Irish language should be a different color to english.

    Housing: insane prices. Rent is just off the charts altogether.

    Amenities/infrastructure: depends where you live, mostly good in large urban areas. Many small towns and villages have none especially for younger people with teenagers roaming around the streets with nothing to do.

    Broadband: Great in urban areas, very poor just outside our towns and cities and non existent in most countryside areas/hinterlands. Thankfully some of these deprived areas will get decent broadband over the next few years but it's not enough to cover everyone.

    Safety:rural crime is rising, particularly towards the elderly. Dublin City is a scary place to walk at night especially if your on your own.

    Social welfare: Decent enough but many people who work on internships or low paid work get a raw deal.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,046 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Question the source without providing a better one? Great contribution to the discussion.

    From Numbeo

    About Health Care Indices At This Website
    This section is based on surveys from visitors of this website. Questions for this surveys are similar to many similar scientific and government surveys.


    Why would you challenge someone to provide a better source than feelings?


  • #158
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    From Numbeo

    About Health Care Indices At This Website
    This section is based on surveys from visitors of this website. Questions for this surveys are similar to many similar scientific and government surveys.


    Why would you challenge someone to provide a better source than feelings?

    It's also important to note, that even if your questions are "perfect", if the sampling methodology is wrong your results are garbage. Their sampling is random. It therefore cannot be representative unless by complete random chance.

    Fail.


  • #159
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    Deleted User wrote: »
    From Numbeo

    About Health Care Indices At This Website
    This section is based on surveys from visitors of this website. Questions for this surveys are similar to many similar scientific and government surveys.


    Why would you challenge someone to provide a better source than feelings?

    It's also important to note, that even if your questions are "perfect", if the sampling methodology is wrong your results are garbage. Their sampling is random. It therefore cannot be representative unless by complete random chance.

    Fail.
    And your better source is? 
    As far as I can see it's either this or a WHO study from 16 years ago (which puts us at 19th).


  • #160
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    And your better source is? 
    As far as I can see it's either this or a WHO study from 16 years ago (which puts us at 19th).

    A severely flawed source is not a source at all. That. Is. The. Point. You. Fail. To. Grasp.

    As far as I can tell, there is no reliable source. So I won't attempt to make a fool of myself by posting unreliable "studies".


  • #161
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    And your better source is? 
    As far as I can see it's either this or a WHO study from 16 years ago (which puts us at 19th).

    A severely flawed source is not a source at all.

    As far as I can tell, there is no reliable source. So I won't attempt to make a fool of myself by posting unreliable "studies".
    So the point stands about Ireland's health system, the best available sources and subjective experience tells us that we are way behind the western European average.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    So the point stands about Ireland's health system, the best available sources and subjective experience tells us that we are way behind the western European average.

    It. Is. Not. A. Source. At. All.

    This reminds me of a saying I like.

    Intelligence is awareness of ignorance.
    Stupidity is ignorance of ignorance.


  • #163
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    So the point stands about Ireland's health system, the best available sources and subjective experience tells us that we are way behind the western European average.

    It. Is. Not. A. Source. At. All.

    This reminds me of a saying I like.

    Intelligence is awareness of ignorance.
    Stupidity is ignorance of ignorance.
    What's wrong with the WHO study aside from being old? As you have agreed yourself it is the best source available to us. Just because you don't like the outcome doesn't mean you have to shout it down


  • #164
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    What's wrong with the WHO study aside from being old? As you have agreed yourself it is the best source available to us. Just because you don't like the outcome doesn't mean you have to shout it down

    I. Was. Referring. To. The. Source. We. Were. Discussing. All. Along.

    Do keep up.


  • #165
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    What's wrong with the WHO study aside from being old? As you have agreed yourself it is the best source available to us. Just because you don't like the outcome doesn't mean you have to shout it down

    I. Was. Referring. To. The. Source. We. Were. Discussing. All. Along.

    Do keep up.
    I brought up the WHO 7 posts ago and we are the only two to have posted since.


  • #166
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    I brought up the WHO 7 posts ago and we are the only two to have posted since.

    Dig up.

    Oh, and the WHO report puts us in the top 10%.

    Oh dear.


  • #167
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    I brought up the WHO 7 posts ago and we are the only two to have posted since.

    Dig up.
    Post 162. May I suggest that you read my posts more carefully instead of rushing in full of emotion, it will make for a much richer discussion. I'm sure our little back and forth wasn't much fun for the other readers on this thread :thumbup:

    I was comparing us to first world countries, read literally every post I've made so far


  • #168
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Post 162. May I suggest that you read my posts more carefully instead of rushing in full of emotion, it will make for a much richer discussion. I'm sure our little back and forth wasn't much fun for the other readers on this thread :thumbup:
    I was comparing us to first world countries, read literally every post I've made so far

    Sorry, but the vast majority of our rather one sided conversation was about your, ahem, "source". You only referred to the WHO when your back was against the wall. And as I pointed out the WHO report puts us in the top 10%.

    Keep digging. You'll get there.

    As for your ninja edit. Read every post I've made so far. Cheers.


  • #169
    donkeykong5
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,259 ✭✭✭donkeykong5


    For any person not married and working 9 to 5 job and earning a good salary. It's a **** hole.


  • #170
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    Post 162. May I suggest that you read my posts more carefully instead of rushing in full of emotion, it will make for a much richer discussion. I'm sure our little back and forth wasn't much fun for the other readers on this thread :thumbup:
    I was comparing us to first world countries, read literally every post I've made so far

    Sorry, but the vast majority of our rather one sided conversation was about your, ahem, "source". You only referred to the WHO when your back was against the wall. And as I pointed out the WHO report puts us in the top 10%.

    Keep digging. You'll get there.
    The original link had us at 29th in Europe, the WHO report has us at 16th. Granted there is a difference but my point still stands, we are below average in Western Europe.
    My ninja edit was responding to your ninja edit.


  • #171
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    The original link had us at 29th in Europe, the WHO report has us at 16th. Granted there is a difference but my point still stands, we are below average in Western Europe.
    My ninja edit was responding to your ninja edit.

    Let me break things down for you. Nice and simple. I'm going to do this from memory, so correct my mistakes.

    1) The first post I saw of yours attempted to refute the notion that Ireland was in the top twenty of OECD nations (or something like that). You provided your source, which was that website.

    2) I looked into the website and mocked the source. You took offence to this, and asked for a better one.

    3) I looked and saw no recent RELIABLE source. I concluded that you didn't have a clue and thus attempted to explain why this was, providing a link for you to learn a bit about the methodology.

    4) As if impervious to knowledge, you came back and insisted that since it was the best source available (you mention WHO here), we must make do with both.

    5) I again point out that the source is so unreliable it is unusable.

    6) For some bizarre reason you then get all confused and think I'm referring to the WHO report. Truly bizarre. You then change your tune to say that you always meant that Ireland fared poorly against other advanced nations.


    You are all over the shop. Educate yourself on the topic of surveys before you throw links around again.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    The original link had us at 29th in Europe, the WHO report has us at 16th. Granted there is a difference but my point still stands, we are below average in Western Europe.
    My ninja edit was responding to your ninja edit.

    Let me break things down for you. Nice and simple. I'm going to do this from memory, so correct my mistakes.

    1) The first post I saw of yours attempted to refute the notion that Ireland was in the top twenty of OECD nations (or something like that). You provided your source, which was that website.

    2) I looked into the website and mocked the source. You took offence to this, and asked for a better one.

    3) I looked and saw no recent RELIABLE source. I concluded that you didn't have a clue and thus attempted to explain why this was, providing a link for you to learn a bit about the methodology.

    4) As if impervious to knowledge, you came back and insisted that since it was the best source available (you mention OECD here too), we must make do with both.

    5) I again point out that the source is so unreliable it is unusable.

    6) For some bizarre reason you then get all confused and think I'm referring to the OECD report. Truly bizarre. You then change your tune to say that you always meant that Ireland fared poorly against other advanced nations.


    You are all over the shop. Educate yourself on the topic of surveys before you throw links around again.
    Nope, you have that completely backwards, I brought up the WHO when you questioned the original source as the only other one available. I never mentioned the OECD report. Again I suggest you read my posts carefully before rushing in. :thumbup::D


  • #173
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    Nope, you have that completely backwards, I brought up the WHO when you questioned the original source as the only other one available. I never mentioned the OECD report. Again I suggest you read my posts carefully before rushing in. :thumbup:

    The WHO report then. I got the acronym wrong. Is that all I got wrong in that post? Because you come out of that looking a bit clueless and confused...


  • #174
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    Nope, you have that completely backwards, I brought up the WHO when you questioned the original source as the only other one available. I never mentioned the OECD report. Again I suggest you read my posts carefully before rushing in. :thumbup:

    The WHO report then. I got the acronym wrong. Is that all I got wrong in that post? Because you come out of that looking a bit clueless and confused...
    No there is an important difference, both the OECD and the WHO have been brought up over the last few pages. I never linked to the OECD but only to the WHO. These are two different studies, measuring different things with different results.


  • #175
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    No there is an important difference, both the OECD and the WHO have been brought up over the last few pages. I never linked to the OECD but only to the WHO. These are two different studies, measuring different things with different results.

    I meant the WHO report towards the end. Would it be easier for you to follow my step by step guide if I fixed it?


  • #176
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    I fixed it. Sorry for causing so much confusion for you. I'll try be more careful when constructing step by step guides for you to follow basic concepts.


  • #177
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Saipanne wrote: »
    snotboogie wrote: »
    No there is an important difference, both the OECD and the WHO have been brought up over the last few pages. I never linked to the OECD but only to the WHO. These are two different studies, measuring different things with different results.

    I meant the WHO report towards the end. Would it be easier for you to follow my step by step guide if I fixed it?
    I can follow your guide just fine, it just happens to be wrong.


  • #178
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,392 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Please stop. Just stop.


  • #179
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    I can follow your guide just fine, it just happens to be wrong.

    Where? I just used the wrong acronym. I fixed it.

    Is this like you defending your sh1tty Numbeo source?


  • #180
    snotboogie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,810 ✭✭✭snotboogie


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    Please stop. Just stop.
    I tried to on the last page! I think we need to call it a day and our friend can go back and figure out the difference between the OECD and the WHO :D


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Saipanne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    snotboogie wrote: »
    I tried to on the last page! I think we need to call it a day and our friend can go back and figure out the difference between the OECD and the WHO :D

    No, let's talk about your complete ignorance of how surveys work.


Advertisement