How do people survive on wages close to minimum wage?

neonsofa

pilly wrote: »

No its not. It's for those returning to work or education. As it should be.

Returning to work or education from social welfare. A lot of those in education possibly availing of btea/vtos and therefore still actually on social welfare.

Hannibal_Smith

LexieOnRale wrote: »

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.

There is assistance for Working parents with kids in a creche. If your kid is under 3 and in a creche for 40 hours a week (I think) you get tax credits or something like that. They can't introduce anything too generous because it opens up the working parents vs stay at home parents can of worms.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

pilly wrote: »

It's also made up to say that a single man on welfare is better off than a single man on minimum wage, as I've proven.

Very easy to throw these sweeping statements out there to defend your stance which actually has little to do with the point of this thread.

But they're in no way comparable. A few years ago I commuted 2 hrs to work, worked all day, 2 hrs home. It cost me approx 150 a week just to get to work. i have two conditions that make me very unwell at times, which means each month I need a consultation with my dr, more if there's complications or I'm particularaly unwell that month. Since last May I've been admitted to hospital at least 7 times. (2 operations) Each night I stay is paid for by me.

I'd probably have been better off not bothering my arse going to work. But that wasn't an option for me.

neonsofa

LexieOnRale wrote: »

But they're in no way comparable. A few years ago I commuted 2 hrs to work, worked all day, 2 hrs home. It cost me approx 150 a week just to get to work. i have two conditions that make me very unwell at times, which means each month I need a consultation with my dr, more if there's complications or I'm particularaly unwell that month. Since last May I've been admitted to hospital at least 7 times. (2 operations) Each night I stay is paid for by me.

I'd probably have been better off not bothering my arse going to work. But that wasn't an option for me.

Also, factoring in if you're sick with a severe cold/chest infection or stomach bug and can't attend work for 2/3 days, you have to go to a doctors to get a cert which costs you the wages for the days out sick (if applicable) and the cost of the gp visit even if you know damn well all he'll say is "drink fluids and rest". This pisses me off so much!

Widdershins

WhiteMemento9 wrote: »

Add in travel expenses and general work expenses (clothes, lunch etc).

Exactly, it actually costs money to work.

La.de.da

People on SW. Aren't some kind of an inferior species. They are people..... People who may have different needs, abilities. Different socio-economic backgrounds.

The judgment is unbelievable. !

neonsofa

La.de.da wrote: »

People on SW. Aren't some kind of an inferior species. They are people..... People who may have different needs, abilities. Different socio-economic backgrounds.

The judgment is unbelievable. !

I didn't see anybody (for the last few pages anyway) judging, just pointing out the differences, which you say yourself in your post exist. Saying this as someone who has relied on social welfare myself in the past and would have to do so again if I lost my job.

BelovedAunt

As usual, Graces7 completely derails the thread. I know you're an OAP who lives alone and boards probably adds an extra social element to your life, but ****ing hell these off topic ramblings are frustrating and pointless to read.

pilly

pilly wrote: »

It's also made up to say that a single man on welfare is better off than a single man on minimum wage, as I've proven.

Very easy to throw these sweeping statements out there to defend your stance which actually has little to do with the point of this thread.

Except you are wrong, a single man on the dole could very well be better off than one on minimum wage and they don't have to actually work.

La.de.da wrote: »

People on SW. Aren't some kind of an inferior species. They are people..... People who may have different needs, abilities. Different socio-economic backgrounds.

The judgment is unbelievable. !

Social welfare is a choice for many though and it shouldn't be provided to those who choose it rather than need it.

steddyeddy

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

Except you are wrong, a single man on the dole could very well be better off than one on minimum wage and they don't have to actually work.



Social welfare is a choice for many though and it shouldn't be provided to those who choose it rather than need it.

Many isn't a figure, it's an opinion.

steddyeddy

BelovedAunt wrote: »

As usual, Graces7 completely derails the thread. I know you're an OAP who lives alone and boards probably adds an extra social element to your life, but ****ing hell these off topic ramblings are frustrating and pointless to read.

I don't agree with her posts but that was a bit of a low blow in fairness.

BelovedAunt

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't agree with her posts but that was a bit of a low blow in fairness.

Not meant as a low blow at all. I'm genuinely glad that board offers her that value in her life, but when she loses the run of herself it's mind-numbing to read.

KERSPLAT!

BelovedAunt wrote: »

As usual, Graces7 completely derails the thread. I know you're an OAP who lives alone and boards probably adds an extra social element to your life, but ****ing hell these off topic ramblings are frustrating and pointless to read.

steddyeddy wrote: »

I don't agree with her posts but that was a bit of a low blow in fairness.

Mod

It was a low blow and I already gave a warning to keep it civil. Strong opinions and debate are welcome, this kind of personal attack is not.

If you have an issue with a post, report it.

Back on topic please.

steddyeddy

You can survive on low income, but if you work hard you shouldn't have to for too long.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Many isn't a figure, it's an opinion.

There is a large percentage of people on the dole who are making zero effort to work that is a fact. I see many of them every single day hanging around taking and spending their day going between the pub and bookies. Then there is another cohort who pop out kids to increase their social welfare income and expect free houses.

Of course your bias blinds you from all this.

There is of course also lots of people who genuinely need the dole having fallen on hard times, lost jobs, have a disability of get injured and can't work etc. But the denying that there is a significant percentage that never worked and never intended on working is head in the sand stuff.

Sunflower 27

steddyeddy wrote: »

You can survive on low income, but if you work hard you shouldn't have to for too long.

Amen.

Pac1Man

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

I see many of them every single day hanging around taking and spending their day going between the pub and bookies.

I bet you're a tiny bit jealous!

steddyeddy

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

There is a large percentage of people on the dole who are making zero effort to work that is a fact. I see many of them every single day hanging around taking and spending their day going between the pub and bookies. Then there is another cohort who pop out kids to increase their social welfare income and expect free houses.

Of course your bias blinds you from all this.

There is of course also lots of people who genuinely need the dole having fallen on hard times, lost jobs, have a disability of get injured and can't work etc. But the denying that there is a significant percentage that never worked and never intended on working is head in the sand stuff.

Well if you give me a figure we can start from there. What percentage?

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well if you give me a figure we can start from there. What percentage?

Of course these numbers won't be made officially available as there isn't half enough investigation into it etc and no one is willing to just reduce/cut the money to people and see how long it will take them to decide they need to work.

The denial is laughable, you are one of the few people I've seen disagree with me particulary in actual people I speak to who would have very similar or even stronger opinions.

Pac1Man wrote: »

I bet you're a tiny bit jealous!

Not in the slightest. I spend plenty of time doing the same during my free time but using my own money while these do it funded by my taxes while I'm working which is the issue.

Sunflower 27

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

Of course these numbers won't be made officially available as there isn't half enough investigation into it etc.



Not in the slightest. I spend plenty of time doing the same during my free time but using my own money while these do it funded by my taxes while I'm working which is the issue.

So this is the real issue. It annoys you people can get by without working. That is going to remain a tough pill for you to swallow.

Bambi985

Honestly I could think of nothing worse than rushing to Tesco/Aldi/Lidl at stupid hours to bulk buy that discounted veg or salad or meat that's about to go off just to save a few quid. I'd rather buy my meat at Waitrose for a higher price but that will last longer and taste better, because otherwise I'm losing valued free time and not enjoying my food. So I guess it depends on your definition of "value".

I spent 65 pounds sterling on an Indian takeaway for a bunch of friends last night and didn't blink at the price. They gave up their time recently to help my bf and myself move house and I'll spend that kind of money on eating out or takeaways very rarely. It was also bloody delicious. I buy myself an overpriced takeaway coffee from the cafe beside work every single working day. Also get the nails and eyebrows done every 2 weeks and spend a fortune on skincare. Because I work hard and can afford to, while still managing to fork away a third of my income into a savings account each month for bigger things like a mortgage and any kids I will eventually have.

If my wage was reduced to minimum I'd be able to afford none of those things and the saving would come to a halt. Would i be miserable? Certainly not. But far more stressed and not living the kind of comfortable life I want to be living. There's a lot to be said for financial security.

Sunflower 27

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

So this is the real issue. It annoys you people can get by without working. That is going to remain a tough pill for you to swallow.

It annoys me they get by on my money while I pay 50% tax to fund their lifestyle (that just tax on salary never mind all the other taxes I pay).

As I said no issue with those who genuinely need it but life long dolers etc are in plentiful supply unfortunately.

Sunflower 27

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

It annoys me they get by on my money while I pay 50% tax to fund their lifestyle (that just tax on salary never mind all the other taxes I pay).

50% tax?

Pac1Man

I don't think anyone suggested earning more is not better than earning less.

Sunflower 27

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

50% tax?

Yes at the higher rate of tax and include USC and PRSI the deduction is approximately 50%, that's not even including the pension levy which increases that figure even further and is just another tax. Add in DIRT, vat, vrt, car tax, etc and the figure starts to climb even more.

eeguy

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

It annoys me they get by on my money while I pay 50% tax to fund their lifestyle (that just tax on salary never mind all the other taxes I pay).

As I said no issue with those who genuinely need it but life long dolers etc are in plentiful supply unfortunately.

There are very few life long dolers when you think about it.

Full employment in Ireland is about 96%, so 4% of the population claiming social.

When you filter out stay at home mothers on JSA, people in between jobs, people who work casually and claim on a daily rate etc, there's not too many who are actually living the life on the social. Welfare fraud in this country is quite low and there's plenty of avenues to report suspected fraud.

steddyeddy

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

Of course these numbers won't be made officially available as there isn't half enough investigation into it etc and no one is willing to just reduce/cut the money to people and see how long it will take them to decide they need to work.

The denial is laughable, you are one of the few people I've seen disagree with me particulary in actual people I speak to who would have very similar or even stronger opinions.



Not in the slightest. I spend plenty of time doing the same during my free time but using my own money while these do it funded by my taxes while I'm working which is the issue.

I'm not saying some people aren't taking the pistachio. Some of course are but I think it's a small number until I see otherwise.

During the boom we had close to full employment. Therefore it's fair to say that most want to work.

steddyeddy

eeguy wrote: »

There are very few life long dolers when you think about it.

Full employment in Ireland is about 96%, so 4% of the population claiming social.

When you filter out stay at home mothers on JSA, people in between jobs, people who work casually and claim on a daily rate etc, there's not too many who are actually living the life on the social. Welfare fraud in this country is quite low and there's plenty of avenues to report suspected fraud.

You beat me to it.

Sunflower 27

Nox001, Your taxes don't only go to people on social welfare.

And you are not paying 50% tax on your entire wage. You are exaggerating.

Glenster

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

Nox001, Your taxes don't only go to people on social welfare.

And you are not paying 50% tax on your entire wage. You are exaggerating.

There are very few life long dolers when you think about it.

I bet you're a tiny bit jealous!

People on boards would do anything to excuse/defend/mitigate scroungers, and the fact that working people fund them.

3 points

The dole is not designed to be a long term option

Taxes paid in the state (including PAYE) fund the 193 quid a week (minimum) people get for doing nothing

Anyone can get a minimum wage job, they're everywhere. so the idea of looking for work is nonsense, people are either looking for work they want, or not looking.