People who can work but don't .......

C B

..should not expect to eat!

This was one of the statements in the political compass castor posted recently. I'm interested in hearing peoples opinions on the statement.

Dev/ Cloud,
maybe a poll would be worthwhile.

Shiminay

I dunno - everyone should be granted basic human rights, but people who can work and don't should not be given full dole or support.

---

All the best!
Dav
@B^)
So Bob Hoskins was about to roll a spliff when in walks Dana with her 3 foot Bong
[honey i] violated [the kids]
When the Beefy King arrives, I shall be paying homage with Puunack The Receiver in a haze of green curry.

bonkey

While in general I agree that those who can work but dont are leeching off the system, and should not be given the free ride they get at the moment, I'm not sure that its all that simple a problem to resolve.

How to we distinguish between those who are non-working and who want employment but cant find it, and those who simply do not wish to work? What about the job locations - should people be forced to move to where the work is (if necessary)?

Should we have some civic work which is mandatory for anyone seeking unemployment benefit? What about parents - are both required to work, or only one?

The problem with any solution is always the "border cases". In general, I tend to find that society has taken the softer approach to try and make sure the border cases get given the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately this tends to lead to a system open to more abuse.

jc

GreenHell

People who don't work but can work hmmm a difficult one since as Kharn said everyone has a basic right to life.

But at the sametime why should the taxpayer have to pay for people who can work but don't. I think the system has far to many gaps in it and if you can work but don't you should be shafted off the dole and put in a position where you have to provide for yourself.

gandalf

I think the idea that people on the dole should do voluntary work is a good idea. Many years ago when I was on the dole for a few months I worked voluntarly for the local credit union, not very exciting but it kept me in a routine and when I eventually got a job I was already tuned into a working frame of mine.

If you perfectly fit to work in an area where there are jobs available and you choose not to work then you should not recieve the full dole, its unfair to the people who want a job and can't get one and its unfair to the working taxpayer.

Gandalf.

TwoShedsJackson

I'd favour something like Bonkey suggested - civic work projects e.g. road building and other public works for the physically able, administrative work or functions for those not physically able.

Having said that, the dole payment would have to be at least doubled to something approaching what's needed to live on nowadays.

Shinji

I've met people who were perfectly capable of working but didn't, saying that they had a right to choose whether they worked or not and that forcing them to work would be an assault on their civil rights. These weren't random dole scrounger types, these were intelligent people who had decided to be anti-society and to milk the system. They were, quite frankly, scum.

Ireland has employment saturation - if you want a job, you can get it. This is true of much of the developed world; there is plenty of work for everyone. The dole should exist as a safety net for people to lean on when they're between jobs or in education and cannot afford to support themselves, nothing more.

Bob the Unlucky Octopus

Agreed Rob- intelligent people "rebelling" against globalization are a pet hate of mine. The same intelligent folk who buy the products generating profits that drives the market to globalize further...but I digress.

Bonkey- there's an easy way to distinguish between the two groups you highlight. People who have declared no fixed employment and visit a job agency of some description are actively seeking work. When you read national unemployment figures for any country those are the percentage of the workforce actively seeking a job. The voluntarily unemployed should either cop on and get a job, or be deprived of their welfare. Employment welfare should be the province for the industries not the office-place necessarily. Industrial layoffs are generally speaking, far more difficult to deal with because the work is often specialized (factory assembly work being the classical example), and difficult to take into other jobs. Whereas financiers, lawyers and psycologists have a wide range of job opportunities freely available all the time in the developed world.

It's all down to how far you're willing to waste money on people who don't contribute towards society. The social contract obliges contribution to the state in order for you to expect anything in return. Redistribution of wealth should direct such finances towards educating those who have no job skills, to allow them to earn the right to accrue state benefits if they should need to at any stage. Rather than feeding the leeches, we could give them a way to earn a living- that's a way out of poverty and/or the dole. Giving them handouts doesn't improve their long-term situation- but broadscale investment in welfare is a vote-soaker- especially for those "intelligentsia" who can't be assed to work because they think they're protesting against an evil regime. I honestly have no problem with a nation making a unilateral decision to deport such idiots who should really know better...just send them all to a self-sufficient commune and let them see what it's like having to stay alive on the small scale without the blanket of protection offered by the state.

Bob the Unlucky Octopus
=Veritas Veritas Veritas=

path

http://thumped.com/thepath

then go to the 'sugar riot' index.

an anti-work fanzine from two and a half years ago.

regards

Lucy_la_morte

People who can work, but don't.. I dunno.. Depends on their past working background and their status. Draco's current girlfriend has a good case I suppose, but what about people who have worked for say 20 years, basically paying for the dole. If they lost their job and could easily get a low paid job, they shouldn't be expected to go for the low paid job. My mother worked for a magasine for the last 9 years, up until January then the magasine went bust and she was out of a job. She has much fashion photography experience and shouldn't have too much of a problem getting a job, but she's waiting out for something really special. She's a single mother, with 3 kids and no job. Does she not deserve benefits?

---

It's just a tail, but I'm sort of attached to it.

Lucy la morte.

JustHalf

XTerminator, you're getting dangerously close to some sort of community spirit there!

I was thinking of something similar for politicians actually... having to do work for the community before being able to run for office; and this paying a fixed amount for their expenses (to run for office) - removing the undue influence of corporations (which shouldn't really have influence over the laws of the country).

But I'm getting off topic. The dole should be increased. Student grants should be increased. They need to show some acceptance of the rising costs of accomodation. The community work scheme is a good idea in theory, and should be raised in government. Only problem is, it will be unpopular with lazy people (me, but I've never been entitled to the dole, so I don't count ), who don't want to work but scrounge off the government. These people are entitled to a vote, and I don't see many politicians trying to put forward something unpopular.

Monitor hurting head. Must stop.

Gladiator

every body that can work in ireland does work in ireland now,
thats not to say that all of them are off the dole,
sometimes i am sickened by the way this country treats scum,
Houseing as an example, i know an area were all the cropo house are pained every year, have wall and gates to stop people someing in, but the people in this estate go on the rob in all the estates around them, but keep their estate in great order, their own private park and everything,

i know another guy who got a 3 floor 5 bed room cropo house near dublin centre
moved back into his flat and rents the house out, takes in at lease 2 grand a month renting the house out, a corpo house that tax payers built for the needy and ppor of dublin.

ConUladh

I agreed with that statement but it is very general

Draco's girlfriend shouldn't have to be landed in a situation where you're better off unemployed, that's a f_uck-up in the system, further education should be encouraged (within reason of course)

I like the Civic work idea, effectively makes you an employee of the state which I think is quite reasonable

JustHalf, fortunately the numbers that would be against such an idea is at an all-time low

gandalf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by JustHalf:
......These people are entitled to a vote, and I don't see many politicians trying to put forward something unpopular.</font>

Well I reakon that they may be entitled to vote but given the fact they can't be bothered to work I doubt they would make the effort to go to the ballot box. On the other hand a scheme like that would be popular with the group of people who are voting i.e. the middle classes.

Regarding Student grants for mature students I think it is pathetic that Dracos girlfriend has to go on the dole for 6 months to get funded, I thought this so-called government were trying to encourage people to "upskill". I know I want to go and do a technology course to enhance my skills but I just cannot afford to do it by myself.

Gandalf.

bugler

How intelligent can a person who is attempting to live off welfareand has no intention of working be? You hardly get a King's ransom each week. If you are happy to do nothing and take a pittance (in real monetary terms) then you won't have a good quality of life(in materialistic terms at least), and IMO are a bit dim.I doubt many educated or intelligent people will/can take this option, unless they have some sort of family income or something.In this case, exceptions should be made, if you have a wealthy father who is bankrolling your lazy lifestyle then you should not get xx pounds a week off the state.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gladiator:
every body that can work in ireland does work in ireland now,</font>

Where did this come from? There are still large numbers of "vuluntarily unemployed" in Ireland.

jc

DadaKopf

Ah come on, people don't have to work if they don't want to. Nobody's disputing that are they? The debate is whether any state or people want to support people who make this decision.

1] It's an ideological difference: socialist versus libertarian (and probably Communist)
2] It depends on whether you're a charitable person or not.
3] It's very culture specific

Ireland has a tradition of social responsibility and those who choose not to work can expect a minimum of state support and services - I personally think that's fair enough.

Most people actually forget to mention that most people want to work. Work earns money, and "money can be exchanged for goods and services" so it takes either a severely lazy, mentally deficient or brave person to stay out of work.

PS: In Singapore, if you don't work, you dont get any social services - it's literally sink or swim. It works for them but, though I admire their government because it suits them and they aren't bowing to international pressure, being European, I'd prefer some level of social benefit. Their kind of social benefit includes banning chewing-gum and endorsing voluntary sterilisation for people below a certain IQ with cash incentives.

It's different, that's for sure.

Hobbes

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DadaKopf:

PS: In Singapore, if you don't work, you dont get any social services</font>

Same in China. However Singapore I don't think it would be possible to live on dole there. It's just too expensive.

A friend explained "Dole" to a Chinese national and her reply was "Oh that's why Europeans are lazy".

Repli

I think it is up to themselves whether they want to work or not. We have no right to question that particular person's ethics.

Look at it this way: you spend most your life working (18-66) and most people don't like going to work and they hate their job.
So why spend your whole life doing something you don't want to do?

I know people who choose not to work don't live as good a lifestyle as the working class folk.. but that is their choice, not ours.

---

What is now was once only imagined.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by DadaKopf:
1] It's an ideological difference: socialist versus libertarian (and probably Communist)
2] It depends on whether you're a charitable person or not.
</font>

I disagree wioth both these sentiments.

No mainstream ideology supports the notion that people who could be bothered contributing to society are entitled to anything.

Socialism and Communism involve society and community. There is no allowance in either of those for "opting out" of the giving, and only doing the taking. Libertarianism - the pusruit of liberty - could arguably allow for this, except that it involves people impeaching others freedoms and liberties - you have to work harder to fund me, because I choose not to work.

Nope.

Also, it is not about charity. I will be charitable to those who *cannot* work, to those who *need* help. I begrudge paying a cent/penny to anyone who could cater for themselves, but who simply choses not to.

People like this are making me work for their living. I have a severe problem with this. I work for my living. I will work for my family's living. I do not wish to have someone elses burden added on to mine, simply because they feel that they should have the freedom to allow me to pay for them.

It is not charitable for me to decide that I will no longer contribute usefully to society, and instead will live off it because I choose to. In the same vein, supporting such an ethos is not charity - it is gullibility.

Society has put up with these gits for too long. If we coul drewrite the rulebook into a workable situation, think of the millions we would save - money which we could put into education or health, rather than feeding some useless gimps who dont want to work and want us to pay them for it.

Compare and contrast with the immigrants and refugees - they WANT to work and are being prevented from doing so. People are complaining about the influx of people who are willing to contribute to society - calling them leeches. At the same time, we turn a blind eye to the leeches which are draining our society every day of the week.

jc

Draco

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Repli:
I think it is up to themselves whether they want to work or not. We have no right to question that particular person's ethics.
</font>

Fine. But it's another thing altogether when they are living off the state. They are leeching resources that can be used else where.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Repli:
I think it is up to themselves whether they want to work or not. We have no right to question that particular person's ethics.

Look at it this way: you spend most your life working (18-66) and most people don't like going to work and they hate their job.
So why spend your whole life doing something you don't want to do?
</font>

I dont question someone's right not to work. I question the right they have to expect to be funded for this.

As for spending most of my life working and hating it. I dont - I like my job. Even if I didnt, I would begrudge having to work 1 extra day in my life to help finance some fscker who decided that working was a mugs game.

If 1% of my salary goes on paying unemployment benefits thru tgaxation, that equates to about 6 months of my working life. If half of that is going to fund these people who "choose" not to work, then I want it back. I begrudge them 3 months of my life. There are other people in this world who could benefit vastly more from those three months of my time, but I dont have that choice.

I see these people as stealing my time, my money, and ultimately part of my life. A part I do not wish to give to them

jc

TwoShedsJackson

So some people 'opt out of the system' by refusing to work, then expect that same system to subsidise them? Fu<k them, I say, if someone opts out, they should go altogether and do whatever it is they want to do to survive.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">and endorsing voluntary sterilisation for people below a certain IQ with cash incentives.
</font>

Is that an official policy in Singapore? If so, any links or places where one could find out more information?

DadaKopf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">What bonkey said:
Socialism and Communism involve society and community. There is no allowance in either of those for "opting out" of the giving, and only doing the taking</font>

It depends how strong your brand of socialism is, I suppose. Of course it's about society as a whole but self-realisation or self-actualisation is a central tenet to most socialist thinkers from John Rawls to G A Cohen to Marx - it's a value judgement to say that sitting on your ar$e isn't a form of self-actualisation.

Castor: I'm not sure of links but I can tell you that it was very much part of government policy when I was living there. The idea was that low earners aren't as intelligent as higher earners and for the good of all society, wouldnt be better to breed only clever, high earners? So, the government offered cash incentives for certain qualifying people (male and female) who chose to be steralized. It was at a time when Lee Quan Yew (People's Action Party) was the elected leader (for 25 years) in a strange kind of democratic dictatorship.

There's plenty of books about it I think.

[This message has been edited by DadaKopf (edited 10-07-2001).]

Bard

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Gladiator:
every body that can work in ireland does work in ireland now,
</font>

Complete and utter b0llocks. Why don't you research FACTS before posting this tripe and claiming that it's true?

I CAN work. I DON'T work right now. The reason? I was made redundant recently (along with practically all of my working colleagues) from a successful e-commerce company that felt the pinch all too well from the slump in the IT/Internet/e-commerce sector and a total crash in sales. I just decided not to post about it at the time because, to be honest, the last thing my employer needed then was that kind of publicity because they haven't "gone under" and are trying to keep the company going as best they can...

Now I realise I don't quite fit perfectly into the category of those that 'can work and choose not to work' as I'm actively seeking employment, but despite my experience, strong portfolio, skills, etc., it's DAMN difficult to find a job in the Web Development sector in Ireland right now, and that's a fact.

Companies are laying people off left, right and centre, and as a recruitment officer said to me today - it's the reverse situation of what we had - say - 6 months ago... back then companies were screaming out for IT graduates, experienced web developers, project managers, etc. to work for them... now it's these people (including myself) who are screaming out for the jobs...

I'm glad of the Social Welfare benefit. Anyone who grumbles at me that THEIR tax pounds are going to "pay for scroungers like me" can basically go fuck themselves ... I PAID for this over quite a number of years of tiring work, with a sh|tload of overtime and I f3ckin' deserve the damn money (FFS!)... I feel absolutely no shame in collecting the dole for the time I'm unemployed (which has already been too long for my liking)...

As regards how much it is... well that depends- depends on how much tax you paid, how long you've been paying it for, and a number of other factors... Personally, I'm receiving over £85 per week on Social Welfare, and I don't think that's really too bad at all... then again... I haven't had to pay rent yet since being made redundant and that's £200 per month. (I'm damn lucky it's not higher..!)

I don't intend to be unemployed for long... and I don't think that anyone really should - those that spend many years living off social welfare when they are perfectly able to go out and earn their pay are nothing more than scroungers and don't really deserve what they're getting... however, the state can't allow it's people to starve, - and that is what the tax and social welfare systems are there for - to look after the interests of the people of the state.

Anyway... that's enough of my rant.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by JustHalf:

Monitor hurting head. Must stop.

</font>

Try putting it on the desk instead

--

Sorry if I went a little off-topic btw... it's a sore point with me at the moment...

Chill, y'all!

---

Bard

---

First motorbike in the bible ???? ---- a Triumph --- 'Yea verily Moses struck down the ammanites and all the land heard the roar of his triumph !!!'

[This message has been edited by Bard (edited 10-07-2001).]

The Corinthian

I’ve used and abused the Dole in my time. I’ve also paid back what I got several times over in taxes. So I’d speak from both perspectives.

A few years ago, if you were lucky, you would graduate from college and get yourself a £12k p.a. job. It’s true. Honest. It’s hardly surprising that given (at the time) you got about £60 cash per week, most of your rent, plus free medical and butter vouchers to wipe your ar5e with. If you translated that to a job it was about £9k p.a. All you had to do was turn up to sign on and to pick up your rent cheque once every four weeks. The rest of the time you could do nixers. Certainly made more sense.

Things are different now. Cost of living has meant that the maths behind the dole are not as attractive as they once were. Most unemployed appear to fall into two categories today. The institutionalised and professional.

The former can’t really be blamed, they actually don’t know any other way. Their parents have always been unemployed as have their, 35 year old, grandparents. They are generally the ones patronised by the liberal middle classes, who use them as the reason to introduce free college fees, even when they qualified for them already. Natural habitat is a chipper after the pub on a Monday night getting a ‘batter burger’. And the State has never really done anything to encourage anything different.

The latter are generally the same ones who are so fond of anti-capitalism marches. The World owes them a living - as the old expression goes; ‘a Socialist is one who has nothing and wants to share it with everyone’. For most this is a phase they grow out of (when they realise the benefits of their middle class heritage), some duck and dive indefinitely believing themselves to striking a blow against the system by subscribing to it. After all, someone’s got to pay for all those body piercings.

The issue of “people who can work but don't” is ultimately a trade off between humanitarian and utilitarian outlooks. Taken to one extreme, we should probably give them more Dole in keeping with the current level of cost of living. The other extreme would be conscription and a good, bloody war to clean up the gene pool.

The older I get the more I seem to agree with the latter - “Service Guarantees Citizenship” does have a nice ring about it...

---

"Just because I'm evil doesn't mean I'm not nice." - Charlie Fulton

[This message has been edited by The Corinthian (edited 10-07-2001).]

androphobic

Draco, just out of interest, how much is your girlfriend's grant worth to her (in monetary terms )?

smoke.me.a.kipper

Bard, i agree 100% with you. you worked, and now your outta work through no fault of your own and your seeking work. your damn well entitled to some welfare.

it's the wankers shinji was talking about that really piss me off.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">these were intelligent people who had decided to be anti-society and to milk the system.</font>

shame on them.

[This message has been edited by smoke-me-a-kipper (edited 10-07-2001).]

R. Daneel Olivaw

Fact is that people who pull this "Choose Life" crap probably had things pretty easy when they were growing up. Heck, I had things pretty easy, but I realise the value of money I think.

The reason I have no pity for welfare-leechers (NOT those who are layed off, etc., as that is the very reason welfare exists, as a buffer to help people exactly for the reasons already mentioned, but being on welfare is not a job); they somehow think they are special, that the rules do not apply to them. Exactly where does it say that life owes anyone dick all? Where does it say that you can breaks in life and live it easy for nothing? NOWHERE.

Like Denis Leary said, life sucks, get a ****ing hard-hat.

Bard

As far as the value of money goes, - working in a security company, as I did before, as an MPO (Money Processing Operative), with literally millions of pounds passing through my hands weekly, I lost a lot of understanding of the value of, and a lot of respect for money...

"Sh|t happens, sink or swim", as someone once said...

I intend to swim !

[Edit]: ... not in sh|t, of course

---

Bard

---

"I have a plan... and it's as hot... AS MY PANTS!!!" - Lord Flashheart.

[This message has been edited by Bard (edited 10-07-2001).]

gandalf

Bard no one was refering to people like you who are actively looking for gainful employment. They were refering to the wasters who don't bother. Good Luck mate in finding a job I know aload of people who have lost jobs in the last 6 months. The company my sister works for is on the brink at the moment as they let go another batch last week, talk about a big change since this time last year.

Gandalf.

Karl Hungus

I feel that I am in a rather similar situation to Draco's girlfriend...

I, personaly, am on the dole, and I have been for some weeks now... Possibly Months at this stage...
WHY???

I can't find the kind of work I am looking for. That simple.
I want to go to college, but there is no part time work during the summer anywhere near me, that I would work at...

Now, I would have absolutely NO problem getting some work in a factory, the problem is, there is always some yearly contract, therefor, I wouldn't be able to go to college...

So, I am currently looking for part time work that I could just bog off from after a couple of months... But I wouldn't work somewhere like Mac Donalds...

Does this mean I am a moocher?

Shinji

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Does this mean I am a moocher?</font>

Mmm, to a large degree, yes. I've heard plenty of folk recently tell me that they're on the dole because they're waiting for the "right thing to come along" - which is one thing if you're someone with a bucketload of experience in a given sector like Bard, but another thing if you're someone who's just finished their leaving cert and is waiting for a company director to swoon on their doorstep and offer them a web design job or something.

If you consistently set your sights too high you will never be employed. Do the MacDonalds thing. Work hard, get money. Hate it. Come out of it a better person, with the knowledge that you will work your ass off in college or do whatever it takes not to have to work in an environment like that again, if you dislike it that much - I worked for six months stacking shelves in a supermarket, and to this day, that experience motivates me, simply because I would hate to have to be back in that kind of position ever again.

I'd still do it in preference to drawing dole though, I have to say.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

jd

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bob the Unlucky Octopus:
Agreed Rob- intelligent people "rebelling" against globalization are a pet hate of mine. Bob the Unlucky Octopus
=Veritas Veritas Veritas=</font>

I kinda know what your saying, but I don't think we have reached "the end of history" yet. Surely we should be able to debate globalisation without being labelled as a retrograde commie or a ne0-thatcherite-but I'll come back to it..
as they say "in vino veritas" and I've half a bottle left
jd

R. Daneel Olivaw

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by daveirl:
You couldn't be more wrong. Three Weeks ago I finished my Leaving and headed out to get a job. It wasn't easy but I faound a job after about 4 or 5 days of looking but 1 week into the job I like 1/2 of the factory was laid off. Since then I've spent a load of time looking for new jobs and to be honest the Celtic Tiger is over.

All my friends are having the same problems between 5 of us we have applied to 160 places without success.</font>

I would say that the Celtic Tiger was more of a train ride based on the inevitable worldwide increase in technology consumption; many companies were made based on an economically natural increase, not on expertise in the field.

The leaving cert is just that; a certificate to show that you have completed a second-level education. It in no way every guaranteed you a job, whether easy or hard to get.

I would say to you to PLEASE PLEASE try and get into college and get graduate training of some sort, unless I have read your post wrongly and presumed that you weren't already.

The main problem I see with the absence of an ever increasing economy as appeared to be in recent years is that banks will be tighter and not as likely to give loans to students which are much needed for basic living if you are not living near a college or university.

The leaving cert qualifies you in nothing basically. And like Axl rose said "You get nothing for nothing if that's what you do, turn around ***** I've got a use for you". Maybe it's stupid to quote a rock song but it basically makes sense.

Xterminator

I think this is a very simple to actually.
There are people who couldn't be bothered to work but accept handouts instead.
I know it is very hard to make ends meet on the dole, so often these people have their nixers, or some are into crime etc.
To prevent this if we had a work fare scheme where unemployed people of god health "worked" in their local communitys doing tasks such as painting away the graffiti, decorating old peoples homes, picking up rubbish, and performing community benefiting tasks, in return for receiving a benefit payment from the community. If they had a specialist skill such as plumber, builder or electrician, this could also be utilised.
Ideally 1 day a week the people on this scheme would be given access to a room where they could search for work newspapers , the net etc., create cv's, use the phone/fax printing services etc, all provided free.

1. This would eliminate the people who have a job and sign on anyway.
2. The people would be contributing to their community in a meaningful way. IE. its not a handout anymore. you earn it!
3. If the people received an offer of work, even from a so called "low paid" job, it would almost certainly pay more than the unemployment benefit. Then they would have the choice of working for xpounds a week in their community or x plus y pounds in a business. They will choose to work for the more money unless the offer is ridiculous.

[This message has been edited by Xterminator (edited 10-07-2001).]

Draco

Currently my girlfriend is on the dole. She could find work easily, but she's not looking as she wants to goto college and the only way she can afford to go is if she qualifies for the grant. To qualify for the grant as a mature student she has to be unemployed for 6 months. So while she is scrounging off the state, she does have a good reason. She really would prefer to be working.

Hobbes

Erm, have you seen how much you get on the Dole? And you expect to eat with just that?

I thought the State already threw you into a FAS program after so many months and if you didn't go where they told you to they stopped your money. Is this not the same thing?

Xterminator

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by daveirl:
You couldn't be more wrong. Three Weeks ago I finished my Leaving and headed out to get a job. It wasn't easy but I faound a job after about 4 or 5 days of looking but 1 week into the job I like 1/2 of the factory was laid off. Since then I've spent a load of time looking for new jobs and to be honest the Celtic Tiger is over.

All my friends are having the same problems between 5 of us we have applied to 160 places without success.</font>

Just a point man,

When I finished school, I didnt have any job contacts, going to college was not a financial option so I joined a fast food resturant. The work was hard, the pay was ****e, and i worked every fri and sat night for a long time!
I have studied at night to gain qualifications, and managed to get a job in the industry I choose (computers). I have worked for what I get.
Don't tell me you and your mates cant get jobs. Every fast food place i pass has a sign in the window. They cant't seem to attract English speaking applicants. Do you think your leaving cert entitiles you to skip the 1st rung of the ladder?

C B

Wow, I'm pretty shocked really on two fronts.

1) most people actually agreed with the statement,
2) the quality of the posts.

I posted this yesterday morning just before I left for a few meetings and I genuinely expected to come back to a handful of good posts amoungst a sh|tload of flamey crap.

A related question, in light of this discussion, would be should welfare be based on labour participation? This is IMHO one of the main reasons for welfare abuse and poor levels of welfare in Ireland compared with scandanavian countries which employ a citizenship model of welfare support.

Here we allow people to slip through the net and reach a scenario in which welfare fraud is acceptable, by presenting it as an alternative to menial low paid jobs. If welfare, including minimum income garuntees, universal education and healthcare, was a right of citizens rather than the unemployed we would probably see a much lower level of welfare fraud. If this was tied to the civic participation/ community work discussed earlier it would be even better.

---

P.S. To all those who feel that taking the dole is better than working in MacDonalds the simple answer is yes you are scoungers.

[This message has been edited by C B (edited 11-07-2001).]

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by C B:
2) the quality of the posts.
</font>

Cant be having that.

*Cough*FsckYouYaKnobDanglinHoorinSmeltMonger*Cough*

Thats better. We now return you to your scheduled programming.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
A related question, in light of this discussion, would be should welfare be based on labour participation? This is IMHO one of the main reasons for welfare abuse and poor levels of welfare in Ireland compared with scandanavian countries which employ a citizenship model of welfare support.
</font>

I'm not fully familiar with the Scandanavian model, but in general, I think a "citizenship model" is a good idea.

Now, obviously there are situations which need to be dealt with - the injured, the incapable, the child-minding parents etc.

But the Scandi's have covered all of these areas. For example, IIRC, being what we term a "non-working parent" over there is considered a job, which is funded (somewhat) by the government.

It may sound terrible, but the biggest problem I see with trying to implement something like that in Ireland is the effort some people will go to to cheat/scrounge off the system, combined with the poor administration of the system.

A complete overhaul of the social welfare system would be in order, and it would possibly end up costing Joe Q Public more money than before. However, we would get better health care, better social services, and a better society out of it at the end of the day. Doesnt sound too bad to me.

Interestingly, Norway was just listed as the best place to live in the world by the annual UN survey. Coincidence? I think not.

Oh - and as for the McDonalds question. Its very simple...you dont have a job, there is a job available, you choose not to take it because its "beneath you" or some such reasoning. In other words, you are unwilling to accept work which is available. So yes, you are scrounging.

I think anyone looking for a job can expect to spend a reasonable amount of time (3-6 months max) looking for the fight job - especially if they have experience or formal qualifications. After that...I think you have to swallow your pride, and get on with it. You dont have to stop looking for that right job, but there is nothing demeaning about accepting paid employment.

jc



[This message has been edited by bonkey (edited 11-07-2001).]

Karl Hungus

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Shinji:
Mmm, to a large degree, yes. I've heard plenty of folk recently tell me that they're on the dole because they're waiting for the "right thing to come along" - which is one thing if you're someone with a bucketload of experience in a given sector like Bard, but another thing if you're someone who's just finished their leaving cert and is waiting for a company director to swoon on their doorstep and offer them a web design job or something.

If you consistently set your sights too high you will never be employed. Do the MacDonalds thing. Work hard, get money. Hate it. Come out of it a better person, with the knowledge that you will work your ass off in college or do whatever it takes not to have to work in an environment like that again, if you dislike it that much - I worked for six months stacking shelves in a supermarket, and to this day, that experience motivates me, simply because I would hate to have to be back in that kind of position ever again.

I'd still do it in preference to drawing dole though, I have to say.</font>

I think you misunderstand me there... The jobs that I easily get, like factory jobs, require a contract... And I said I wanted to go to college... Not sure if you read correctly what I said...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Victor

OK, I admit I might get flamed for some of this, I would like to point out that I am not trying to flame or personally attack anyone in this post.

---

quote:

Originally posted by Draco:
Currently my girlfriend is on the dole ... To qualify for the grant as a mature student she has to be unemployed for 6 months

The dole: £85/week x 6 months = £2,210.
Work: £5/hr x 40hr/week x 6 months = £5,200 before tax, she will pay sod all tax / PRSI on that amount (hey she'd even get 2 years tax credits). College fees (in public colleges) can be used to get a tax credit if any tax is paid.
So assuming the fees are less than £2,990., not only is she a scrounger, but also she doesn't have the maths ability to join secondary school never mind a third level college. And the work experience would stand by her for college / work interviews.

---

Separately I do accept college grants are too small. The fees are also too small. We produce too many undereducated college graduates. I think that the students should be getting the £85/week (they have expenses, books, travel) and the unemployed should be getting £20/week - not the other way around.

---

College is draining the number of candidates for some jobs (this can be a good thing) - either those jobs are automated, done by immigrant or those industries close.

---

dot.coms were merely a good way of providing a large number of unemployable people / ideas with too much money that ended up being wasted on expensive cars, holidays and overpriced houses. 1% asset, 99% waffle.

---

Too many freaks, not enough circuses.

[This message has been edited by Victor (edited 11-07-2001).]

gandalf

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by daveirl:
I wish I was joking but I have a rejection letter from Mc Donalds. Maybe it's just Cork that's **** at the mo' for jobs. Hopefully things will get better soon.</font>

Yikes I wouldn't advertise that mate !!!

But seriously I presume your on the dole. Try and find even some voluntary work for a couple of days a week that way when you do go for interviews etc you can show them that your a get up and go type of person and you will stand a better chance of being employed. I know for a fact if I was interviewing someone (I've done it in the past) I would look more favourably on someone that is trying to gain experience than someone who is not doing anything.

Gandalf.

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Victor:
The dole: £85/week x 6 months = £2,210.
Work: £5/hr x 40hr/week x 6 months = £5,200 before tax, she will pay sod all tax / PRSI on that amount (hey she'd even get 2 years tax credits). College fees (in public colleges) can be used to get a tax credit if any tax is paid.
So assuming the fees are less than £2,990., not only is she a scrounger, but also she doesn't have the maths ability to join secondary school never mind a third level college. And the work experience would stand by her for college / work interviews.
</font>

Err, excuse me?

First of all, your mathematics assume that the cost of living while working is exactly the same as the cost of living while unemployed. This is patently untrue, and is a major consideration whenever economists are looking at unemployed vs. low wages.

Secondly, you seem to be completely ignoring the "mature student grant" part, other than assuming that it comes to less than a grand total of £2990....which is to cover fees and living grant. I'm not sure what the amount of subsidy from it is, but I believe its higher than that.

Furthermore, you are assuming that her college career will be one year in duration, or else your maths are even more flawed.

Ergo, while your mathematics may be competent, your grasp of economics is obviously inferior to hers, so I would be very careful about insulting her ability to work out "simple problems". Every problem is simple if you choose to ignore many of the pertinent facts.

This does not, by the way, mean that she is not scrounging off the system, as the mature student grant system was put in place to help the unemployted get further education in order to obtain the necessary skills/qualifications to become employable.

Choosing to become/remain unemployed because you "want" to go to college as a mature student is still scrounging off the system.

This, of course, assumes that you agree with the system. Personally, I think that everyone should get the same level of subsidies for their first 3rd level qualification, regardless of age, ability, and financial situation.

But, while the system remains the way it is, the choosing to become unemployed so the government will pay you to do what you would like to do (i.e. 3rd level education) is scrounging off the sytem.

If you believe it isnt, will you also accept that someone has the right to choose not to work for a few years and live off the dole because they want to do what they would like to do....whatever it may be? Surely thats the same?

jc

Draco

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Victor:
The dole: £85/week x 6 months = £2,210.
Work: £5/hr x 40hr/week x 6 months = £5,200 before tax, she will pay sod all tax / PRSI on that amount (hey she'd even get 2 years tax credits). College fees (in public colleges) can be used to get a tax credit if any tax is paid.
So assuming the fees are less than £2,990., not only is she a scrounger, but also she doesn't have the maths ability to join secondary school never mind a third level college. And the work experience would stand by her for college / work interviews. </font>

Fees are paid for, but since the courses she is looking at are 3/4 years long, £5K would barely pay her RENT never mind food, books and other sundry expenses for the 3 years. Yes she could take a part time job while in college, but I'm dead set against her doing that as I've seen too many people **** up college 'cause they had to work to support themselves through college. And I'll point out now that she has been working for the last 7 years so she has plenty work experience already.

Draco

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bonkey:

Choosing to become/remain unemployed because you "want" to go to college as a mature student is still scrounging off the system.</font>

Well her logic is that she can be a PA for the rest of her life and earn a pittance (and give the government a pittance in tax) or go get a qualification, get a decent job and the the government get lots of tax off her. Essentially they are giving her a loan at the moment at she'll repay via the hight tax she'll be paying.

ConUladh

How much is the Mature Student Grant?

I though it was fairly close to the dole which is why people do it, am I wrong?

bonkey

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Draco:
Essentially they are giving her a loan at the moment at she'll repay via the high tax she'll be paying.</font>

If that was the case, then the government would encourage anyone in a low-paying job to go out, get a degree and earn more, thus adding to the economy. They dont - at least not financially.

Mature student grants were not intended for the purpose which your GF is putting them to. If they were, then they wouldnt require 6 months unemployment. The fact that they do shows that, to me, it is an abuse of the system - albeit a far lesser one than people who just take and dont give back.

You also have no proof that she WILL earn more money, and remain gainfully employed long enough to pay back several years of grants through additional taxes. I'm not saying she isnt good enough, I'm saying that you cannot be sure.

So, youre using it as a risk-free loan....if she "wins", then govt come out of it better off. If she "loses", the govt take the hit, and not her? If you believe this is the case, then go to the bank and get a loan from them on the same logic.

Her argument of being a PA all her life is also flawed. There are no end of people in full-time employment who are doing degrees by night, or Open University, or who are doing some form of furtgher study/qualification. This is generally funded by the individual, and in many cases is not just to have an "artsy" degree, but rather to progress their career. It may take longer, or it may require giving up your social life for the best part of a few years, but it is possible and many people do it.

As for part-time jobs while in full-time college....the reason people screw up college due to this is usually because they sacrifice their college career rather than their social life in order to fit into a 24 hour day. Blaming their part-time job is a bit disingenuous.

Now, before you take this personally (or as an attack on your GF), the abuse of the system in this case is to a far lesser degree then the "can work, wont work" crew who just want a free ride. It is, still, an abuse of the system for the reasons presented above.

Everyone abuses the system. Some people do nixers to avoid taxes. Some people get "mileage" or "car" allowances to get extra salary without paying tax. Most people cheat the system in one way or another - maybe not to do with tax, but there are laws we all ignore when it suits us. Small abuses we generally turn a blind eye on. Arguably, what your GF is doing falls into this category, so dont take my point of view too personally

jc



[This message has been edited by bonkey (edited 12-07-2001).]