Social Affordable Housing and Pajama People

Cupatae

Pkiernan wrote: »

Cap dole at 55 euro per week.

Social housing should be set at market rental rates, and non working recipients could work off the rent at minimum wage pay for Community Service work.

To each according to their need.
From each according to their ability.

Funny how Irish lefties forget the second line in that mantra.

It should start at 200 or whatever ever its at these days, but reduce the longer ur on it, say anyone on it over a year it ll be down to 55, why punish the genuine people in need of it..

Cupatae

Idbatterim wrote: »

Have you seen the programmes on the British bottom feeders? They get a pittance compared to here. It's a subject that the media wont touch here, unlike every other country!

Looking forward to blowing the thousands I'll have saved here during the lockdown, which will be half a year away minimums, blowing it in Vegas !

You're still going out of ur way pay taxes to the "crown" as you put it rather than your own, this is the stuff being cheered on in this thread says it all really.

Cupatae

When i hear the "my taxes pay for that!" spiel this is the sort of person i envision.

https://www.facebook.com/TheLiberal.ie/videos/919884291769414/

corner of hells

Cupatae wrote: »

It should start at 200 or whatever ever its at these days, but reduce the longer ur on it, say anyone on it over a year it ll be down to 55, why punish the genuine people in need of it..

There's always going to be a group in society either unable or unwilling to work.
Rather than come up with a plan to reduce their welfare to 55 euros , maybe have a look at why they are not working.
Have a long term plan to break this inability or unwillingness to work and bear in mind this may very well be a generational problem with the individual seeing no reason to work if their parents, grandparents and peer groups aren't working.

If you drastically reduce an individuals income to 55euros and bear in mind social rents are 15% , potentially you're forcing people into poverty creating more problems.

ziggyman17

It is as much to do with the system they are milking as it is about the person... People can work up to 20 hours a week, while still receiving some sort of benefits including Hap to pay for nice apartment and houses that without the help of the tax payer they would not be able to afford.....They know how to milk the system, add in a couple of kids and a father that hides away from his responsibilities and they are having a grand time, this corona period has not affected them one little bit...

Deebles McBeebles

Paulownia wrote: »

So the taxpayer enables her habit and her behaviour and she lives happily in the knowledge that somebody will pick up the tab

Well I don't know the person you mentioned but at first glance I would guess theres a mental health issue going on there. Thats poles apart from people who refuse to work for life for absolutely no reason.

AulWan wrote: »

I could say the same about you, showing up on one of these threads with the same old attitude.

Yep, things are definitely reverting back to normal.

Reverting? No, my attitude on this is constant, as is yours.

Its still not "bashing" though.

Cupatae

corner of hells wrote: »

There's always going to be a group in society either unable or unwilling to work.
Rather than come up with a plan to reduce their welfare to 55 euros , maybe have a look at why they are not working.
Have a long term plan to break this inability or unwillingness to work and bear in mind this may very well be a generational problem with the individual seeing no reason to work if their parents, grandparents and peer groups aren't working.

If you drastically reduce an individuals income to 55euros and bear in mind social rents are 15% , potentially you're forcing people into poverty creating more problems.

Yeah thats the otherside of it, but what are you meant to do if people flat out refuse to work? and blatantly play the system? a line has to be drawn somewhere.

corner of hells

Cupatae wrote: »

Yeah thats the otherside of it, but what are you meant to do if people flat out refuse to work? and blatantly play the system? a line has to be drawn somewhere.

Nothing , you need to address the problem in a broader scale and stop worrying about the individual, you're looking to educate children now with the view of having their grandchildren being educated and working.

aido79

Kyree Cuddly Map wrote: »

I would suspect the way you parent your kids and they parent their kids are vastly different.
Load up on heavy medication at bedtime, have a sleep in the next morning, get yourself up for about 9:30, while your children have been up since 7 feeding themselves watching telly and playing on the iPad santy brought when they were 3, throw a pre made pancake into the microwave at lunch time and feed it to them in front of the telly while you’re all still in your pjs. Feed plenty of treats throughout the day while stuffing your own face with said treats. Throw waffles and chicken nuggets into the oven in the afternoon if you’re feeling productive and if not, take a trip to the chip shop for the second time this week. More treats and chocolate bread for tea, send them to bed in the pjs they were wearing all night, all day and only taken off to put pull up pants on the 5 year old because you can’t be bothered potty training him for night time.

Yeah you're right. That's not parenting..that's making sure the cycle continues.

ThunbergsAreGo

corner of hells wrote: »

There's always going to be a group in society either unable or unwilling to work.
Rather than come up with a plan to reduce their welfare to 55 euros , maybe have a look at why they are not working.
Have a long term plan to break this inability or unwillingness to work and bear in mind this may very well be a generational problem with the individual seeing no reason to work if their parents, grandparents and peer groups aren't working.

If you drastically reduce an individuals income to 55euros and bear in mind social rents are 15% , potentially you're forcing people into poverty creating more problems.

You would hope reducing the money available got doing nothing would be a reason, if not on this generation but in the next. It doesn't even have to be reducing overall welfare just reducing the amount of "cash" received

That or simply take the kids off people that are awful parents, but that has it's own issues.

corks finest

Great heading"Pajama ppl"

Katgurl

Shocked, seriously? You must live an exciting life OP.

I really don't know why people still get bothered about this pyjama wearing habit. Who cares?

pinkyeye

Mortified for OP that they can't even spell pyjamas. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

AulWan

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Reverting? No, my attitude on this is constant, as is yours

Its still not "bashing" though.

I actually meant reverting back to threads bashing social housing tenants and
welfare recipients popping back up again because people are getting bored talking about Covid19.

But seeing as you mention it, thanks for confirming that your attitude hasn't changed. I didn't think it had.

As for mine, I don't jump to conclusions about people based on how they're dressed. I don't understand why anyone would go further then their own home in pyjamas, but I wouldn't assume that makes them a bad parent.

I'm guilty of popping out into my front garden to put a bin in the wheelie bin in my jammies. I've even spoken across the wall to my neighbours and opened my front door and taken deliveries in my jammies. But they're nice jammies from La Senza. I'd hate to think someone is going to judge me as a dirty layabout who lies around all day and not looking after my kids because of that.

corner of hells

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

You would hope reducing the money available got doing nothing would be a reason, if not on this generation but in the next. It doesn't even have to be reducing overall welfare just reducing the amount of "cash" received

That or simply take the kids off people that are awful parents, but that has it's own issues.

That's a huge leap, reduce welfare then if the desirable result isn't achieved, remove kids from the family.
Almost as the default position is ultimately remove the kids.

ThunbergsAreGo

corner of hells wrote: »

That's a huge leap, reduce welfare then if the desirable result isn't achieved, remove kids from the family.
Almost as the default position is ultimately remove the kids.

No that would be a last resort of course, and there are multiple levels between the first and second.

It's just disheartening to see kids lives ruined by neglect.