How do people survive on wages close to minimum wage?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Graces7 wrote: »

Peace, please. Just peace, Some of this post is....and you are missing the point that like many I ENJOY life. I really do. Fully and wholly and entirely.

Maybe you forget I am nearly 80? and in increasingly challenged health and life is precious in itself.

Peace please.

Are you alright?! I'm glad you enjoy life. I would hate to think that there was anyone out there that wasn't enjoying life. I'm not entirely sure what your age has to do with this conversation or my posts asking you not to judge. One of the closest people to me in my life was 84 when she died and still enjoyed shopping and eating out with me 4 months prior to her passing so I know age isn't a factor in what people find enjoyable, it's personal preference on a lifestyle. Just like another 28 year old would rather stab their eyeballs with a fork than spend a day shopping.

I feel my post was completely on topic but if you feel differently I suggest reporting it

pilly

LexieOnRale wrote:

Getting back on topic, there's a difference between living on a low income that you're earning and a state funded income. If a person is on social welfare they're more protected. If a person had to pay full rent on a home, full ESB, TV licence, full price for dr dentist and medication on a low wage, they're a lot more squeezed than someone who is having their lifestyle subsidised.

LexieOnRale wrote:

Are you alright?! I'm glad you enjoy life. I would hate to think that there was anyone out there that wasn't enjoying life. I'm not entirely sure what your age has to do with this conversation or my posts asking you not to judge. One of the closest people to me in my life was 84 when she died and still enjoyed shopping and eating out with me 4 months prior to her passing so I know age isn't a factor in what people find enjoyable, it's personal preference on a lifestyle. Just like another 28 year old would rather stab their eyeballs with a fork than spend a day shopping.

You completely judged Grace by suggesting she's getting all these free things so life is easier.

Her age absolutely has a lot to do with it. What do you expect her to do? Go out and get a job?

Not all 84 year old people have family to bring them out for a meal.

I agree it's a bit judgemental on the other hand to be judging people who can afford to eat out.

My main point was, getting back to the OP it's not impossible to live a good life on very little.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

pilly wrote: »

You completely judged Grace by suggesting she's getting all these free things so life is easier.

Her age absolutely has a lot to do with it. What do you expect her to do? Go out and get a job?

Not all 84 year old people have family to bring them out for a meal.

I agree it's a bit judgemental on the other hand to be judging people who can afford to eat out.

My main point was, getting back to the OP it's not impossible to live a good life on very little.

I'm not judging anyone, I don't know Grace to be privy to the ins and outs of her financial affairs. I'm merely pointing out that living on min wage (which is what the thread is about lest we forget) is completely different than living on social welfare as those on social welfare are more protected. That's not judging. That's fact.

pilly

LexieOnRale wrote:

I'm not judging anyone, I don't know Grace to be privy to the ins and outs of her financial affairs. I'm merely pointing out that living on min wage (which is what the thread is about lest we forget) is completely different than living on social welfare as those on social welfare are more protected. That's not judging. That's fact.

Both live on very low incomes. No difference.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

pilly wrote: »

Both live on very low incomes. No difference.

But that's the thing. There is.
If you're on a low wage, there's no scheme that'll pay half your mortgage or let you put your child into subsidied crèche, if you're earning a wage you're expected to stand on your own two feet. If you're on social welfare, life is subsidised a little bit, even more when you're elderly and can't change your circumstances (free travel, tv licence, line rental etc)

If you're earning, you pay for that yourself.

pilly

LexieOnRale wrote:

But that's the thing. There is. If you're on a low wage, there's no scheme that'll pay half your mortgage or let you put your child into subsidied crèche, if you're earning a wage you're expected to stand on your own two feet. If you're on social welfare, life is subsidised a little bit, even more when you're elderly and can't change your circumstances (free travel, tv licence, line rental etc)

People on very low incomes are entitled to social housing, also entitled to FIS and the free years childcare. Bull**** to suggest they get no supports.

If someone makes a decision to take on a mortgage then they have to live with that. I would suggest that no-one on minimum wage has taken that decision.

You're trying to bring it into the realm of middle income earners which is a totally different discussion.

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

I gave up rather soon after getting blasted a few times for being in the wrong lane ...

I don't want to appear like I'm targeting you, Grace, but if you are consistently making errors while driving to the extent that you're getting blasted a few times on a single trip, you should probably give up driving sooner rather than later, before you hurt either yourself or others.

Many places deliver these days, and your local community centre can point you at services that can help you get out and about. Plus, you can save the cost of petrol/insurance/maintaining a car.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

LexieOnRale wrote: »

I'm not judging anyone, I don't know Grace to be privy to the ins and outs of her financial affairs. I'm merely pointing out that living on min wage (which is what the thread is about lest we forget) is completely different than living on social welfare as those on social welfare are more protected. That's not judging. That's fact.

I agree with the basic premise here. The thread was about minimum wage. There is a huge difference between someone working all week on a poor income and a pensioner. I can live now on so much less than when I was starting off, had rent/mortgage, a young family, and trying to get my life kick started. A young person working on minimum wage does not get electricity allowance, fuel allowances, phone credits, free transport etc. A younger person also should enjoy some sort of social life.

Graces7

LexieOnRale wrote: »

But that's the thing. There is.
If you're on a low wage, there's no scheme that'll pay half your mortgage or let you put your child into subsidied crèche, if you're earning a wage you're expected to stand on your own two feet. If you're on social welfare, life is subsidised a little bit, even more when you're elderly and can't change your circumstances (free travel, tv licence, line rental etc)

If you're earning, you pay for that yourself.

With respect ( and I mean that sincerely) maybe look at the actual figures here ?

Pension rates and what is actually given.

Set that against minimum wage?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

pilly wrote: »

People on very low incomes are entitled to social housing, also entitled to FIS and the free years childcare. Bull**** to suggest they get no supports.

If someone makes a decision to take on a mortgage then they have to live with that. I would suggest that no-one on minimum wage has taken that decision.

You're trying to bring it into the realm of middle income earners which is a totally different discussion.

If you have children. Do you think a single man on a min wage is entitled to or will get a council house?

Graces7

Candie wrote: »

I don't want to appear like I'm targeting you, Grace, but if you are consistently making errors while driving to the extent that you're getting blasted a few times on a single trip, you should probably give up driving sooner rather than later, before you hurt either yourself or others.

Many places deliver these days, and your local community centre can point you at services that can help you get out and about. Plus, you can save the cost of petrol/insurance/maintaining a car.

This gave me a real chuckle! Thank you! Needed a laugh I really did.. No consistently about it my dear! Just a couple of very rude impatient drivers in a city centre traffic jam

Dear Lord! I have a 50 year NCB my friend and am not ready to hang up my car keys a while yet! roflol ...
Must tell my family this!
They will roar laughing.

Graces7

LexieOnRale wrote: »

If you have children. Do you think a single man on a min wage is entitled to or will get a council house?

Yes. As are single women in the same situation.

Widdershins

pilly wrote: »

Both live on very low incomes. No difference.

I've mentioned the working poor a few times and just want to add that they were on higher wages when they took on their mortgages. It happened to me too so I know what it's like. However I'm not entitled to FIS, and I know of people with families who applied but were a little bit above the threshold, and things like Carers allowance are counted as means now which makes it harder for some to avail of FIS. And expenses like a mortgage aren't taken into account. They're definitely treated differently to people on SW who are renting, and can avail of rent supplement. Not saying those people are in the lap of luxury but they are safer in terms of housing. Being in fear of repossession is just as bad or worse than worrying about the vagaries of the rental market-and the law seems to be in favour of the tenant nowadays anyway.

Not wanting to get personal but I thought Graces7 mentioned she'd sold a house, so she at least had an asset while the ones I'm talking about are in negative equity and trying to hold onto their home and so on. It's too easy to apply ones own circumstances to others and assume what works for me would work for you.

And even if they did lose their home and rent a place, is it no longer the case that you don't get rental allowance if you're working, or there's at least one earner in the house? I know of someone who lost his rental allowance when he took up a fairly low paying job.

So the figures when you factor in rent allowance and fuel or free tv license and back to school allowance bring the people on SW (pension or jobseekers) up above low income workers.

KERSPLAT!

Graces7 wrote: »

This gave me a real chuckle! Thank you! Needed a laugh I really did.. No consistently about it my dear! Just a couple of very rude impatient drivers in a city centre traffic jam

Dear Lord! I have a 50 year NCB my friend and am not ready to hang up my car keys a while yet! roflol ...
Must tell my family this!
They will roar laughing.

Didn't you crash into a ditch yesterday?

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

This gave me a real chuckle! Thank you! Needed a laugh I really did.. No consistently about it my dear! Just a couple of very rude impatient drivers in a city centre traffic jam

Dear Lord! I have a 50 year NCB my friend and am not ready to hang up my car keys a while yet! roflol ...
Must tell my family this!
They will roar laughing.

I'm glad someone finds it funny.

Incidentally it's years since I was beeped. Multiple times in one day suggests the issue isn't with other drivers.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Graces7 wrote: »

Yes. As are single women in the same situation.

How many single men or childless women do you know that's offered a council house? Families with young children will take priority.

Graces7

pilly wrote: »

People on very low incomes are entitled to social housing, also entitled to FIS and the free years childcare. Bull**** to suggest they get no supports.

If someone makes a decision to take on a mortgage then they have to live with that. I would suggest that no-one on minimum wage has taken that decision.

You're trying to bring it into the realm of middle income earners which is a totally different discussion.

Thank you for explaining it so well. And medical cards etc as should be.

neonsofa

Widdershins wrote: »

And even if they did lose their home and rent a place, is it no longer the case that you don't get rental allowance if you're working?

Working over 30 hours (one of or both people in a relationship combined) will automatically disqualify you from rent supplement yep. And if you own a house, even if in the process of selling it or losing it because you cant afford it, you are not eligible for social housing and therefore in most cases not entitled to rent supplement either.

KERSPLAT!

LexieOnRale wrote: »

How many single men or childless women do you know that's offered a council house? Families with young children will take priority.

Watching an RTE special a few weeks ago and women with children are waiting donkey's years for council houses. If you're a man you can forget about it, you may get a house share though.

Graces7

LexieOnRale wrote: »

How many single men or childless women do you know that's offered a council house? Families with young children will take priority.

I know many especially with the increasing problems finding private rented accommodation. AND if they are in private rented accommodation, they will qualify for HAP or Rent allowance.

Lexi : i understand what you are trying to say but that horse will not run. The safety net of social welfare runs across the board as it should and must. There are safeguards for all on low incomes there really are but they are not huge . Low income also applies right across the board..same effect same needs same answers..

MrMicawber of Dickens fame says.

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen, nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.

Applies to us all and to each of us to make sensible choices.

Sunflower 27

Someone on 600e a week with car loan repayment, credit card bills and petrol costs who goes on a bender once a week and eats out several times a week is probably no better off than someone on minimum wage that does not have those expenses.

pilly

LexieOnRale wrote:

If you have children. Do you think a single man on a min wage is entitled to or will get a council house?

You were comparing a family with children LexieOnRale, don't keep changing the goalposts to suit your argument.

Graces7

Candie wrote: »

I'm glad someone finds it funny.

Incidentally it's years since I was beeped. Multiple times in one day suggests the issue isn't with other drivers.

when you are in a hole please stop digging. Yes it is hilarious but sad to read ageism couched in ..... ignorance. sad.

Graces7

neonsofa wrote: »

Working over 30 hours (one of or both people in a relationship combined) will automatically disqualify you from rent supplement yep. And if you own a house, even if in the process of selling it or losing it because you cant afford it, you are not eligible for social housing and therefore in most cases not entitled to rent supplement either.

That is means testing and fair. A house is an asset. Work is an asset.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I know a girl through work, who was working full time with an abusive partner. She came to work one day and I had to send her home because she'd been assaulted the night before. She looked into HAP, and my understanding of it was they'd give her X amount towards her rent (let's say half her rent) so she'd still have (eg) 350 to pay directly to landlord but they took her income into consideration and she'd also pay rent back on the 350 they'd give her.
By the time all her rent was paid to LL and HAP she wasn't getting HAP at all. And she wasn't on a lot of money either. Just over min wage

pilly

Widdershins wrote:

I've mentioned the working poor a few times and just want to add that they were on higher wages when they took on their mortgages. It happened to me too so I know what it's like. However I'm not entitled to FIS, and I know of people with families who applied but were a little bit above the threshold, and things like Carers allowance are counted as means now which makes it harder for some to avail of FIS. And expenses like a mortgage aren't taken into account. They're definitely treated differently to people on SW who are renting, and can avail of rent supplement. Not saying those people are in the lap of luxury but they are safer in terms of housing. Being in fear of repossession is just as bad or worse than worrying about the vagaries of the rental market-and the law seems to be in favour of the tenant nowadays anyway.

Totally agree, these are the people in the worst situation today. I know because I've been there.

It's not the topic under discussion though.

OP was suggesting all his friends should get a degree to live a better life and I'm merely that there are people quite happy to live on very little.

Also if everyone out there goes and gets a degree they simply become worthless.

I hate the judgemental attitudes on both sides. People who are struggling tend to blame others who aren't and visa versa.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Graces7 wrote: »

That is means testing and fair. A house is an asset. Work is an asset.

work on a minimum wage is no more an asset than a pension provided by the state Ks an asset. I'm really struggling to make sense of that point.

Widdershins

neonsofa wrote: »

Working over 30 hours (one of or both people in a relationship combined) will automatically disqualify you from rent supplement yep. And if you own a house, even if in the process of selling it or losing it because you cant afford it, you are not eligible for social housing and therefore in most cases not entitled to rent supplement either.

It's not something I like to think about at all. I would love to see the government formulating more policies designed to ''make work pay''.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

pilly wrote: »

You were comparing a family with children LexieOnRale, don't keep changing the goalposts to suit your argument.

I'm fitting everyone in. People working aren't getting subsidised crèche for kids, people on social welfare are. People with no children aren't getting additional help from SW, people on SW are.

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

when you are in a hole please stop digging. Yes it is hilarious but sad to read ageism couched in ..... ignorance. sad.

I'm the last person to be ageist, Grace. You mentioned something that would ring alarm bells with many, regardless of age.

I hope you're right and you can enjoy many more years of driving and independence.