Why do people criticise advice that is usually wink-nod, hush-hush

veryangryman

For example, I'm thinking of the exxaagerated response to Leo's well meaning advice

"Ask your parents help to put down your deposit if you can"

It's practical advice that I for one have heard since i was in my teens (i'm 37 now). Not announced on any major forum, but in personal conversations.

Something seems to get lost in pieces of advice like this when they are broadcast to the masses. It would make you think "Screw them, let them figure it out for themselves".

The way people dilute the point of the messages given in good faith is extremely disappointing. Partly blame the media for needing something to talk about other than Love Island.

Riskymove

sadly it is part of debate at present - nit picking, whataboutery, twisting words, etc.

Gregor Samsa

Some people expect the government to solve every problem. When someone from the government suggests that maybe sometimes people can solve their own problems, they get pretty bent out of shape.

Of course some of them pretty bent out of shape when the government does try to solve problems too. Or when they realise that solving such problems usually involves spending money raised by tax payers.

MrMusician18

veryangryman wrote: »

For example, I'm thinking of the exxaagerated response to Leo's well meaning advice

"Ask your parents help to put down your deposit if you can"

It's practical advice that I for one have heard since i was in my teens (i'm 37 now). Not announced on any major forum, but in personal conversations.

Something seems to get lost in pieces of advice like this when they are broadcast to the masses. It would make you think "Screw them, let them figure it out for themselves".

The way people dilute the point of the messages given in good faith is extremely disappointing. Partly blame the media for needing something to talk about other than Love Island.

People are critical of such advice from public figures because while it may be practical in the current economic environment, it shouldn't be a policy. When it is offered as a solution by a public figure it tends to point to that kind of thinking, at a minimum, informing policy.

So while it may be practical for people to ask their parents for a leg up to get their first house, it should be government policy that people should be able to afford a house without such support.

rireland

Not only that but I know loads of lads who have parents to give them money.

zanador

I can't afford my own house let alone saving for one for my son. And I do work very hard but also get social welfare support. So not sure should I hate myself or love myself?

jam_mac_jam

Maybe people get frustrated that government policy to keep house prices high means their children cannot afford to buy a house and then they are told they shold be funding it instead of government implementation of policies that will have a more reasonable price for housing.

jam_mac_jam

My parents worked very hard for their money they should be able to enjoy it not have to give it to me.

odyssey06

phutyle wrote: »

Some people expect the government to solve every problem. When someone from the government suggests that maybe sometimes people can solve their own problems, they get pretty bent out of shape.
Of course some of them pretty bent out of shape when the government does try to solve problems too. Or when they realise that solving such problems usually involves spending money raised by tax payers.

The housing market has been pretty bent out of shape through 20 years of mis-management from successive governments. It's dysfunctional.
Just as the health service is. And An Garda Siochana. And the insurance sector.

There is a limit to what people can do as individuals to defend themselves \ react to the problems created.

People take out health insurance- they shouldn't have to.
They get monitored house alarms - they shouldn't have to.
They pay over the odds for car insurance relative to other EU countries - they shouldn't have to.
They ask parents for help with deposits - they shouldn't have to.

Asking parents for help with deposits isn't a solution, it's a symptom of a deeper problem. And if everyone asks their parents for help with deposits, nothing would change, because all house prices would have to go up as more money chases not enough houses.

So that's why people respond as they do.

jam_mac_jam

phutyle wrote: »

Some people expect the government to solve every problem. When someone from the government suggests that maybe sometimes people can solve their own problems, they get pretty bent out of shape.

Of course some of them pretty bent out of shape when the government does try to solve problems too. Or when they realise that solving such problems usually involves spending money raised by tax payers.

No they expect the government not to cause the problem or make an exciting problem worse

FunLover18

I think it's the assumption that everyone has parents who are in a position to offer that kind of help. This just isn't an option for some people. It's like when you pieces by usually middle-class yuppies on "how I saved for a mortgage" and it's basically a just "I lived with my parents for five years and they gave me 50% of the deposit". I know the word is going to get a lot of flack but Leo's advice and these sorts of pieces usually come from a position of privilege and it's a privilege a lot of people don't have.

goose2005

FunLover18 wrote: »

I think it's the assumption that everyone has parents who are in a position to offer that kind of help. This just isn't an option for some people. It's like when you pieces by usually middle-class yuppies on "how I saved for a mortgage" and it's basically a just "I lived with my parents for five years and they gave me 50% of the deposit". I know the word is going to get a lot of flack but Leo's advice and these sorts of pieces usually come from a position of privilege and it's a privilege a lot of people don't have.

A lot of government policies come with that assumption - everyone has well-off parents with whom they can live well into their 20s if they have to, get digouts and loans and cash gifts from. Like the lower Jobseekers for 18-25-year-olds.

suicide_circus

i think Leo is a charlatan but look what he said;

"Ask your parents help to put down your deposit if you can"

if you can.

he made that very clear unambiguous caveat because he knows not every parent is in a position to do so

FunLover18

suicide_circus wrote: »

i think Leo is a charlatan but look what he said;

"Ask your parents help to put down your deposit if you can"

if you can.

he made that very clear unambiguous caveat because he knows not every parent is in a position to do so

Sorry, I thought he said "let them eat cake" but he actually said "let those who have cake to eat, eat cake". If I knew how to do the Pacman emoji on my phone I would.

It's not really what you'd expect or want to hear from the leader of a country.

suicide_circus

FunLover18 wrote: »

Sorry, I thought he said "let them eat cake" but he actually said "let those who have cake to eat, eat cake". If I knew how to do the Pacman emoji on my phone I would.

It's not really what you'd expect or want to hear from the leader of a country.

whats the good of having cake if you dont eat it?

do people want their cake and eat it too?

the proof of the pudding is after all, in the eating.

Birneybau

Not all of our parents are doctors. It's pure elitist stuff from an elitist party with their middle class voters all sown up.

See also, Eoghan Murphy and his 'exciting' co living. His father was a Senior Council on the Mahon Tribunal, his accountant grandfather embezzled 2.5 million punts fro the likes of Gay Byrne and Hugh Leonard.

I'll tell you now, Eoghan Murphy will never have a share a house.

suicide_circus

Birneybau wrote: »

Not all of our parents are doctors. It's pure elitist stuff from an elitist party with their middle class voters all sown up.

See also, Eoghan Murphy and his 'exciting' co living. His father was a Senior Council on the Mahon Tribunal, his accountant grandfather embezzled 2.5 million punts fro the likes of Gay Byrne and Hugh Leonard.

I'll tell you now, Eoghan Murphy will never have a share a house.

would you give over, people dont need to be "doctors" to help their children financially

endacl

FunLover18 wrote: »

If I knew how to do the Pacman emoji on my phone I would.

Easy.

: pac :

No spaces = :pac:

Franz Von Peppercorn II

FunLover18 wrote: »

I think it's the assumption that everyone has parents who are in a position to offer that kind of help. This just isn't an option for some people. It's like when you pieces by usually middle-class yuppies on "how I saved for a mortgage" and it's basically a just "I lived with my parents for five years and they gave me 50% of the deposit". I know the word is going to get a lot of flack but Leo's advice and these sorts of pieces usually come from a position of privilege and it's a privilege a lot of people don't have.

Yes and it’s an assumption that allows Leo and people from that class to not worry about the average punter. My parents were middle class dual income teachers (in a time when most households were single earning) but they didnt have the money for a deposit for 3 kids.

As for the richer parents themselves, why should they feel pressured to hand over money to their snivelling adult brats?

xiba vajo

endacl wrote: »

Easy.

: pac :

No spaces = :pac:

: rolleyes :

Church on Tuesday

veryangryman wrote: »

For example, I'm thinking of the exxaagerated response to Leo's well meaning advice

"Ask your parents help to put down your deposit if you can"

It's practical advice that I for one have heard since i was in my teens (i'm 37 now). Not announced on any major forum, but in personal conversations.

Something seems to get lost in pieces of advice like this when they are broadcast to the masses. It would make you think "Screw them, let them figure it out for themselves".

The way people dilute the point of the messages given in good faith is extremely disappointing. Partly blame the media for needing something to talk about other than Love Island.

If I asked my parents to do that I'd soon be told where to go.

Blueshirts really do live in cloud cuckoo land.

wiggle16

It's because what he says makes it clear he is only talking to one particular stratum of society. Young adults, ideally with no younger siblings, whose parents are in a position to assist them financially in this way.

It makes it clear that he is not addressing people who do not have that privilege and therefore, in Leo's world, needn't bother aspiring to owning their own home.

That's why it leaves a bad taste in your mouth. Besides, the people who have parents who are in a position to help them out in this way and are willing to don't need to be told to ask them - so it's redundant.

ArnoldJRimmer

Birneybau wrote: »

Not all of our parents are doctors. It's pure elitist stuff from an elitist party with their middle class voters all sown up.

See also, Eoghan Murphy and his 'exciting' co living. His father was a Senior Council on the Mahon Tribunal, his accountant grandfather embezzled 2.5 million punts fro the likes of Gay Byrne and Hugh Leonard.

I'll tell you now, Eoghan Murphy will never have a share a house.

Neither asking your parents for financial help or co-living are mandatory, but could be an option for some since it seems to work in other countries. Given the sh!tholes I've had to live in before, I didn't think co-living was the worst idea, at least its apartments that were designed for that purpose, not some dump that has been split into damp squalid bedsits with as many people crammed in as possible

Not singling you out personally, but I just can't understand why people have to get so worked up about stuff like this. Ignore it, and get on with your lives

odyssey06

ArnoldJRimmer wrote: »

Not singling you out personally, but I just can't understand why people have to get so worked up about stuff like this. Ignore it, and get on with your lives

Theres a dozen posts already on the thread with all the reasons why. Engage with them.
Get on with your lives. The people coming out with this useless advice have the power to and are the people who are supposed to come up with, real solutioms for the different citizens. Instead of pathetic so called advice applicable to a minority.

And you still dont get it? Why does it bother you? I dont understand.

andekwarhola

It's actually a very fair point.

I think when you go down the road of despising people's points by default because of who they are, you're not a thinking person anymore.

odyssey06

andekwarhola wrote: »

It's actually a very fair point.
I think when you go down the road of despising people's points by default because of who they are, you're not a thinking person anymore.

Rubbish. Its like being fouled in a match and the ref not blowing the whistle but saying run faster so next time you dont get hit.
A thinking person? Where do you get this crap.

We want action not useless advice and for people to carry out the duties of their highly paid roles.

andekwarhola

odyssey06 wrote: »

Where do you get this crap.

From like this vast inchoate thing called an opinion that's different to yours.

ArnoldJRimmer

odyssey06 wrote: »

Theres a dozen posts already on the thread with all the reasons why. Engage with them.
Get on with your lives. The people coming out with this useless advice have the power to and are the people who are supposed to come up with, real solutioms for the different citizens. Instead of pathetic so called advice applicable to a minority.

And you still dont get it? Why does it bother you? I dont understand.

You're having a laugh if you think that a politician past, present or future is ever going to do this. Or at least make a meaningful change without making themselves extremely unpopular with some section of the electorate. So its always a watered down version of everything that goes through

I just can't see the benefit of getting worked up by the words of a politician unless its an actual policy that going to affect people. No one is going to be forced to live in one of these places, so whats the problem with offering it as a suggestion? Or just switching off the eejit? The reaction from the public was as if he announced that the workhouses were being re-opened

odyssey06

ArnoldJRimmer wrote: »

You're having a laugh if you think that a politician past, present or future is ever going to do this. Or at least make a meaningful change without making themselves extremely unpopular with some section of the electorate. So its always a watered down version of everything that goes through
I just can't see the benefit of getting worked up by the words of a politician unless its an actual policy that going to affect people. No one is going to be forced to live in one of these places, so whats the problem with offering it as a suggestion? Or just switching off the eejit? The reaction from the public was as if he announced that the workhouses were being re-opened

What are the benefits to you reacting to people reacting to what a politician says, does or does not do?

These words are in lieu of an actual policy.
Thats why people get worked up.
If we can be legitimately annoyed when politicians come up with a policy, I dont see any logical reason why we cant react when they dont come up with policies to deal with known issues.

Words in politics matter also. Very often if you dont react when they fly a kite for a policy in a speech they will go ahead with it.

If you think coliving is a good idea start a thread for it. But if you think its a good idea people can challenge it. But your other comments are so cynical about politicians I cannot reconcile them with you positively reacting to coliving idea.

The idea underlying this thread is more insidious... that citizens should lap up whatever is said and have no right to question it or react to it. Ultimately its an anti democratic argument.

ArnoldJRimmer

odyssey06 wrote: »

What are the benefits to you reacting to people reacting to what a politician says, does or does not do?

These words are in lieu of an actual policy.
Thats why people get worked up.
If we can be legitimately annoyed when politicians come up with a policy, I dont see any logical reason why we cant react when they dont come up with policies to deal with known issues.

Words in politics matter also. Very often if you dont react when they fly a kite for a policy in a speech they will go ahead with it.

If you think coliving is a good idea start a thread for it. But if you think its a good idea people can challenge it. But your other comments are so cynical about politicians I cannot reconcile them with you positively reacting to coliving idea.

The idea underlying this thread is more insidious... that citizens should lap up whatever is said and have no right to question it or react to it. Ultimately its an anti democratic argument.

Ok, the bolded bit is like something from Inception, but my posts have been generally in line with what this thread is about, and more an observation than anything. The Co-living suggestion was another example similar to what is in the OP. And I wouldn't consider 'its not the worst idea' to be a positive reaction, I was saying that it works in other countries and comparing it to the truly awful places I lived in previously

People of course have the right to question everything a politician does, but guess what, thats what elections are for. You vote them in and out based on their performance. The right to protest, also a great way of getting attention and making the government aware that a large section of people are not happy and ask for change. Losing your sh!t over a voluntary alternative living suggestion during a housing crisis seems a bit over the top to me.

ILoveYourVibes

rireland wrote: »

Not only that but I know loads of lads who have parents to give them money.

As Do I. But I also know we probably don't have to worry about those people they will be fine.

But I also know that is not the case for many people in this country. And those are the ones we need to worry about.