The 350 a week was a catastrophic and costly mistake

RocketRaccoon · 21-05-2020 01:28PM

Cobalt17 wrote: »

I don’t think it’s jealousy. My dad had to sign up for the payment, he finds it reprehensible that people are taking advantage of the crisis, as do many.

We seem to dismiss welfare fraud in this country as a “justifiable” crime.

I am one of those people who don't agree with someone taking advantage of the system. But this payment has ensured a lot of people have gotten through this before going back to work.

The absolute nonsense of people wanting to stay on this payment rather than go back to work is just that, nonsense. The payment won't last forever, everyone knows that and the majority of people will go back to work as soon as they can.

Cobalt17 · 21-05-2020 01:30PM

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

I am one of those people who don't agree with someone taking advantage of the system. But this payment has ensured a lot of people have gotten through this before going back to work.

The absolute nonsense of people wanting to stay on this payment rather than go back to work is just that, nonsense. The payment won't last forever, everyone knows that and the majority of people will go back to work as soon as they can.

I think the issue is that people who were on less than 350 per week will wait as long as possible before returning to work.

21-05-2020 01:31PM

Cobalt17 wrote: »

I think the issue is that people who were on less than 350 per week will wait as long as possible before returning to work.

If people refuse to return to work, then they’re no longer entitled to the emergency payment.

Sean.3516 · 21-05-2020 01:34PM

[quote="Augeo;113505194" And if thy were on less beforehand then the difference probably was of great help to them over the last 2 or so months.[/quote]
Why? Why do people need more than they needed before? Expenses haven’t increased. They’ve decreased if anything on account of the fact people in lockdown aren’t driving half as much. People aren’t engaging in recreational activities. The absolute cost of living has gone down as a result of the lockdown.

21-05-2020 01:36PM

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Why? Why do people need more than they needed before? Expenses haven’t increased. They’ve decreased if anything on account of the fact people in lockdown aren’t driving half as much.

You don't think folk on small incomes would find extra money of great help when they are confined to home and uncertain of when they might get back to work?

More cash is generally welcome to most people.

Cobalt17 · 21-05-2020 01:39PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If people refuse to return to work, then they’re no longer entitled to the emergency payment.

How do you enforce this? What’s stopping people from simply turning down their part time job for another few weeks?

A friend of mine applied for a portering job around 2014. They called him about an hour before the interview and asked if he wanted come in early. Long story short, they told him during the interview that the majority of the applicants that they had confirmed for interviews had been no shows. But they didn’t mind, they had an email confirming the interview, which they could show to the case officer and allow them to claim the dole in peace for another year or so.

Bottom line is human nature will stop people going back to part time jobs for lower pay, regardless if it’s immoral or not.

ACitizenErased · 21-05-2020 01:49PM

Why is there so much malice about students earning more than usual? A large proportion of students pay their own fees (myself included) and have accommodation costs etc.

GSBellew · 21-05-2020 01:52PM

Cobalt17 wrote: »

How do you enforce this? What’s stopping people from simply turning down their part time job for another few weeks?

A friend of mine applied for a portering job around 2014. They called him about an hour before the interview and asked if he wanted come in early. Long story short, they told him during the interview that the majority of the applicants that they had confirmed for interviews had been no shows. But they didn’t mind, they had an email confirming the interview, which they could show to the case officer and allow them to claim the dole in peace for another year or so.

Bottom line is human nature will stop people going back to part time jobs for lower pay, regardless if it’s immoral or not.

Its simple, the DEASP sends the last registered employer a letter, asking a simple question, "Do you have suitable work available for Joe Bloggs?"

There is a yes / no box to tick.

This is nothing new.

GSBellew · 21-05-2020 01:56PM

is_that_so wrote: »

That sounds unlikely as it's taxable income, not welfare.

The Pandemic Unemployment Payment is a welfare payment.

Its is also taxable income, but is paid via the DEASP but thats besides the point.

You may be confusing it with the Temporary Wage Subsidy Scheme.

Cal4567 · 21-05-2020 01:59PM

Moving away from some posters malice, look at this way.

When you are at the lower end of the employment chain and the wages that this brings in, the vast majority of your income if not all of it, is pumped back into the economy, whether it is through rent, food, heating, clothes, take aways, the pub, the cinema, a present for your Ma.

Even if you are able still to save 20 quid a week, that is taken by Christmas/birthdays. Believe me, the vast majority are not able to stash it all away for a rainy day. Those of us who lost almost everything due to the crash, will know what I mean.

21-05-2020 02:02PM

Kind of impossible to pull plug on this,when so.many sectors of economy still shut down?

Like,its not as if,people are skipping work for this,nearly everywhere,still closed down

Fred Cryton · 21-05-2020 02:10PM

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It’s an emergency stimulus package designed to give money directly to the citizenry. To assuage any potential issues with civil disobedience or otherwise due to worry or desperation.

Really, couple of questions - if it's a stimulus package, how come no-one in government said it was a stimulus package and how come no-one presented it as such. Why wasn't i given tax cuts instead as a stimulus package? Why would only that segment of the population benefit from such a stimulus package. Answer - because it was never intended as a stimulus package. It as a "stay at home for now" package supposed to be very short term.

Your second sentence sounds like a threat. If the people you worry about are such lovely people why would they engage in civil disobedience if they got 200 instead of 350.

LuasSimon · 21-05-2020 02:13PM

Part time workers definitely should be on JSA when the 12 weeks are up .
Even to bring the 350 down to 300 for a further 6 weeks would make a significant reduction in cost and still give people a good bit more than the standard dole .

LuasSimon · 21-05-2020 02:16PM

SmokyMo wrote: »

Funny how people here are mad recipients and not the politicians who created the framework to operate in.

Also I find it pretty hard to understand why would anyone be angry at people getting a merely 100e extra than they should. It is literally peanuts in today's world.

100 euro might be peanuts for you but for a lot of people 100 euro would buy a lot of groceries or cloth a child for a few months .

LuckyLloyd · 21-05-2020 02:21PM

Fred Cryton wrote: »

Really, couple of questions - if it's a stimulus package, how come no-one in government said it was a stimulus package and how come no-one presented it as such. Why wasn't i given tax cuts instead as a stimulus package? Why would only that segment of the population benefit from such a stimulus package. Answer - because it was never intended as a stimulus package. It as a "stay at home for now" package supposed to be very short term.

Your second sentence sounds like a threat. If the people you worry about are such lovely people why would they engage in civil disobedience if they got 200 instead of 350.

That’s it Fred, tax is theft. The only valid policies are tax cuts and ‘trickle down’ economics. And being poor or in a situation where a month with no pay challenges your ability to feed yourself or pay your bills is an issue of personal responsibility. Gotcha.

Boggles · 21-05-2020 02:24PM

Pauliedragon wrote: »

Apparantly there's people already on the dole who applied and got it according to someone on the radio down here in cork. Dole plus covid payment 550 a week thank you very much. If that's true this system needs to be seriously looked at.

Yeah, I'd be pretty sure that is complete and utter bullshít.

krissovo · 21-05-2020 02:29PM

LuasSimon wrote: »

100 euro might be peanuts for you but for a lot of people 100 euro would buy a lot of groceries or cloth a child for a few months .

Did you read the post? This make no sense for a response.

21-05-2020 02:32PM

Cobalt17 wrote: »

How do you enforce this? What’s stopping people from simply turning down their part time job for another few weeks?

A friend of mine applied for a portering job around 2014. They called him about an hour before the interview and asked if he wanted come in early. Long story short, they told him during the interview that the majority of the applicants that they had confirmed for interviews had been no shows. But they didn’t mind, they had an email confirming the interview, which they could show to the case officer and allow them to claim the dole in peace for another year or so.

Bottom line is human nature will stop people going back to part time jobs for lower pay, regardless if it’s immoral or not.

By liaising with the employers. All employers who’s employees availed of the emergency payment to declare whether employees failed to return to work.

Pauliedragon · 21-05-2020 02:35PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

According to 'someone on the radio down in Cork'

Therefore must be true.

I didn't say it was true I said if it's true. Are us culchies down here lying?

RINO87 · 21-05-2020 02:41PM

Surely as places open back up, and people are offered their part time jobs back it would be very short sighted of them not to go back.

Jobs may be scare in the coming months and employers will very quickly see who they will want to keep by looking at those that chose to go back to work and not take the 350 - (which will end soon anyway).

The 350 was a good idea, for loads of reasons already mentioned. Keeps some sort of money in the economy, helped people to stay somewhat out of arrears. Austerity the last time was a joke.

As for those giving out about students - these will be the ones who will be paying higher tax as a consequence of this payment for the longest amount of time.

Pauliedragon · 21-05-2020 02:42PM

Boggles wrote: »

Yeah, I'd be pretty sure that is complete and utter bullshít.

Maybe. I never said it was gospel. I'm on the 350. I had to give a reason why I was out of work. The fella at the off license next door didn't lose his income due to the virus he quit and is getting the payment which is not how it works. You have to be out of work as a direct result of the virus. The off licenses are still open he has no reason to not be at work.

Boggles · 21-05-2020 02:43PM

Pauliedragon wrote: »

I didn't say it was true I said if it's true. Are us culchies down here lying?

AFAIK you had to supply your PPS number, it is the one thing the department has exclusive access to with their database, no need to cross reference with any other database or department.

It would have been flagged immediately if someone was claiming other benefits.

Boggles · 21-05-2020 02:44PM

Pauliedragon wrote: »

Maybe. I never said it was gospel. I'm on the 350. I had to give a reason why I was out of work. The fella at the off license next door didn't lose his income due to the virus he quit and is getting the payment which is not how it works. You have to be out of work as a direct result of the virus. The off licenses are still open he has no reason to not be at work.

Yeah, but that isn't even remotely the same thing, is it?

Pauliedragon · 21-05-2020 02:51PM

Boggles wrote: »

Yeah, but that isn't even remotely the same thing, is it?

It's welfare fraud. You are only entitled to covid 19 payments if you lost your job due to the virus. Nobody working in an off license lost their job due to the virus outside of having an underlying condition which this guy doesn't have. He's a perfectly fit 24 year old.

splinter65 · 21-05-2020 02:51PM

GocRh wrote: »

Revenue process covid payments and collect PAYE taxes.
PAYE reporting is now fully online and in real time with the rollout of PAYE modernisation in January.

Revenue literally have all the information they need.

Nope. Revenue didn’t process covid payments . SW did.

splinter65 · 21-05-2020 02:54PM

mariaalice wrote: »

Loads of unemployed hospitality staff who are laid off who will be given temporary contracts might work.

So...a girl working in a hotel bar usually could just walk into SW and sit down at a computer and start processing SW claims?!? She wouldn’t need any training or anything like that I suppose.

Sean.3516 · 21-05-2020 03:13PM

Augeo wrote: »

You don't think folk on small incomes would find extra money of great help when they are confined to home and uncertain of when they might get back to work?

More cash is generally welcome to most people.

I don’t deny that they’ll welcome the extra money. The question was about need.

j@utis · 21-05-2020 03:21PM

Good times. We can cry and complain about it after the next budget is announced.

SmokyMo · 21-05-2020 03:21PM

LuasSimon wrote: »

100 euro might be peanuts for you but for a lot of people 100 euro would buy a lot of groceries or cloth a child for a few months .

So why is it a problem if someone for whom 100e is a lot of money gets it?

This thread is full of salty people mad at the peasants receiving crumbs.

suicide_circus · 21-05-2020 03:23PM

j@utis wrote: »

Good times. We can cry and complain about it after the next budget is announced.

nothing to worry about next budget, sure wont the economy be stimulated to fook with the 350 per week?

The 350 a week was a catastrophic and costly mistake

Comments