What % of pple on the dole deserve to be on it?

The_Brood · 22-01-2018 09:11PM #1

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate? 90%? 60? 30?

And how many do you think are just having a good time on your heard earned money, enjoying state-sponsored theft of tax money as you slave away at your job, sometimes unable to even get a proper night's sleep? Gaming the system in any way that they can that will allow them to stay on the dole?

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

Jim Bob Scratcher · 22-01-2018 09:13PM

First dole thread of the new year :pac:

colm_mcm · 22-01-2018 09:13PM

I’d say around 25%

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 22-01-2018 09:15PM

Are there apples on the dole?

Victor · 22-01-2018 09:18PM

The_Brood wrote: »

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate?

You can't get unemployment-related payments if you can't work, so your initial idea is rather off.

boombang · 22-01-2018 09:19PM

The_Brood wrote: »

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....

Let me guess, you've read all the other threads on this issue?

Only messing. I think this is an important topic. I dislike walking past youths at my local "training" centre smoking joints at 9 in the morning as I go to work.

I don't believe in labour market activation. The gap between working and being on the dole should be more than enough activation.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 22-01-2018 09:21PM

What percentage of the 3% long term unemployed? 60,000 people in total. Maybe 95%+.

But it all depends on your definition of deserves and if the dole is something anybody deserves to be on.

22-01-2018 09:21PM

I used to work in a related area and the majority of ppl I dealt with were either fit for work but didn't suit them to - eg single mothers where they'd never earn enough to make up for housing benefits and cover childcare costs- or were unfit for work due to a fondness for drink

6 or 7 from ten would have been in the above categories.

This was at the height of the boom. The demographics changed as things got worse and youd see more ppl who'd always worked and had come on hard times, but at best there were still four from ten or so who had come from a background of getting everything on a plate and settling for the life that was in it.

NB I don't say it was a good life or that they were happy!

Chrongen · 22-01-2018 09:21PM

The_Brood wrote: »

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate? 90%? 60? 30?

And how many do you think are just having a good time on your heard earned money, enjoying state-sponsored theft of tax money as you slave away at your job, sometimes unable to even get a proper night's sleep? Gaming the system in any way that they can that will allow them to stay on the dole?

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

You don't get the fcuking dole if you are disabled.

MilesMorales1 · 22-01-2018 09:23PM

A Dole thread on AH? How original.

B.A._Baracus · 22-01-2018 09:23PM

93.65464.2%

Sorry that I couldn't be more specific.

Wanderer78 · 22-01-2018 09:36PM

thankfully we ve fully solved all the issues that cause unemployment, its time to hunt them all off the dole and live our utopian dream:rolleyes:

RobbingBandit · 22-01-2018 09:38PM

We including children's allowance here too OP

WELL ARE WE.

splinter65 · 22-01-2018 09:43PM

The_Brood wrote: »

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate? 90%? 60? 30?

And how many do you think are just having a good time on your heard earned money, enjoying state-sponsored theft of tax money as you slave away at your job, sometimes unable to even get a proper night's sleep? Gaming the system in any way that they can that will allow them to stay on the dole?

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

People with severe mental/physical disabilities don’t get the dole. Go back and check your facts.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1 · 22-01-2018 09:45PM

And, nobody 'deserves' to be on the dole.

retro:electro · 22-01-2018 09:47PM

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

A Dole thread on AH? How original.

These kinds of comments aren't very original either to be fair

Irishsneachta · 22-01-2018 09:47PM

You don't even know what you're talking about when you say people with severe disability be on the dole. At least research before you whinge. Are you on the dole or sick yourself? Seem to have a lot of time on your hands.

qwerty ui op · 22-01-2018 09:48PM

The_Brood wrote: »

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

I'm not o.k with it but I can tell you, that i'll never, not in a million years even look in that general direction, until such time as we know:

who are the rich ?

and

what are they doing with their money?
there should be a 5-10 minute segment on this every night on the news.

the_pen_turner · 22-01-2018 10:05PM

10% max

spindex · 22-01-2018 10:10PM

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

93.65464.2%

Sorry that I couldn't be more specific.

You were doing well until you put in the second decimal point.

Zaph · 22-01-2018 10:16PM

The_Brood wrote: »

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

So what you're saying is that someone who has access to this information is freely sharing it with you, and others no doubt, has no problem breaching the Data Protection Act? I'd be interested to know what other information this person is sharing, and with whom.

MilesMorales1 · 22-01-2018 10:23PM

The_Brood wrote: »

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate? 90%? 60? 30?

And how many do you think are just having a good time on your heard earned money, enjoying state-sponsored theft of tax money as you slave away at your job, sometimes unable to even get a proper night's sleep? Gaming the system in any way that they can that will allow them to stay on the dole?

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

So you have someone leaking personal confidential information to you? That a pretty serious claim to make, if it was a real thing and not something you've invented.

Grab All Association · 22-01-2018 10:25PM

I shall now call AGS, DSP and the DPC. Boards.ie will have no problem I imagine giving your information to AGS when requested to track you down and find out who is leaking data on DSP clients to you.

I suggest you wear pants at all times otherwise you’ll be arrested in your underwear.

RiderOnTheStorm · 22-01-2018 10:32PM

If I remember rightly, during height of the boom, unemployment was at about 2%. This was supposed to be the lowest it could go, as it represented those that could not work. They were calling it "effectively zero" .

Wanderer78 · 22-01-2018 10:34PM

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

If I remember rightly, during height of the boom, unemployment was at about 2%. This was supposed to be the lowest it could go, as it represented those that could not work. They were calling it "effectively zero" .

id take those figures with a pinch of salt, all highly subjective and easily manipulated

22-01-2018 10:35PM

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

If I remember rightly, during height of the boom, unemployment was at about 2%. This was supposed to be the lowest it could go, as it represented those that could not work. They were calling it "effectively zero" .

It was around 4% and they didn't include a raft of cohorts including the drinkers, those on courses, those unable to work, etc etc etc

The rest of ye- summarised information is not under data protection as a rule would ye lie down ffs

RiderOnTheStorm · 22-01-2018 10:40PM

Wanderer78 wrote:

id take those figures with a pinch of salt, all highly subjective and easily manipulated

Yea, and unemployed does not equate to dole, but thought the figure interesting...

Victor · 22-01-2018 11:03PM

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

If I remember rightly, during height of the boom, unemployment was at about 2%. This was supposed to be the lowest it could go, as it represented those that could not work. They were calling it "effectively zero" .

No. "Unemployed" are people in the workforce who want to work and are looking for work. The 2-4% represents people who are typically short-term between jobs or are structurally unemployed (their skills are for a job that no longer exists).

For statistical purposes, those who can't work are not recorded as "unemployed". Neither are those outside the workforce, e.g. people caring for family, the idle rich, etc.

The "live register" is a different measurement.

Odhinn · 22-01-2018 11:06PM

The_Brood wrote: »

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate? 90%? 60? 30?

And how many do you think are just having a good time on your heard earned money, enjoying state-sponsored theft of tax money as you slave away at your job, sometimes unable to even get a proper night's sleep? Gaming the system in any way that they can that will allow them to stay on the dole?

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

42.3%. That's allowing for the Sky Sports In Every Room factor.

jimbobalob309 · 22-01-2018 11:10PM

about tree fiddy

corner of hells · 22-01-2018 11:15PM

Odhinn wrote: »

The_Brood wrote: »

In your rough estimate, how many people who are on the dole deserve to be getting such social benefits, either due to severe physical or mental disability or whatever criteria you hold to be legitimate? 90%? 60? 30?

And how many do you think are just having a good time on your heard earned money, enjoying state-sponsored theft of tax money as you slave away at your job, sometimes unable to even get a proper night's sleep? Gaming the system in any way that they can that will allow them to stay on the dole?

Because as someone who knows someone who has access to information quite relevant to the question....let me tell you that it's worse than you can expect. Much worse.

I am first in line to argue that those in the former category deserve every bit of help, don't get me wrong...but how are people, politicians, just anyone ok with how remarkably large the latter group is?

42.3%. That's allowing for the Sky Sports In Every Room factor.

I'm writing all this down.
They haven't gone away.... ahh feck ,wrong thread.

What % of pple on the dole deserve to be on it?

Comments