Cancelled Sky Sports because I felt guilty

mackg · 17-08-2011 10:08AM

Lollipops23 wrote: »

what if they don't drink or smoke? that's a pretty big saving right there. also, most of the people I know on SW do both of those. Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed?

Maybe the gov should calculate the cost of the bare minimum of food to survive on and that should be the SW each week, no more or less....:rolleyes:

why would they consider giving less than the bare minimum needed to survive, population control? :P

stovelid · 17-08-2011 10:10AM

If you can make the bills balance at the end of the week by sacrificing other things, more power to you.

The dole is a payment to support you when you're looking for work (a little something back for the thousands and thousands of your taxes that have been spunked down the drain) not a public display of sackcloth and ashes for some of the mongs on here.

I've made the point many many times before, but we'd be a good distance to solving our economic woes if every soap box type on here signed an affidavit to only ever accept the hair shirt dole that they are so fond of preaching about here if they ever become unemployed during the remainder of their lives.

Abi · 17-08-2011 10:12AM

stevenmu wrote: »

Tbh if somebody on the dole has enough money for sky sports than, then the dole is too high.

Or not using it wisely.

This is a disguised dole row anyway. But Fwiw, the dole only gives enough rope to hang yourself.

Toby Take a Bow · 17-08-2011 10:12AM

stevenmu wrote: »

Tbh if somebody on the dole has enough money for sky sports than, then the dole is too high.

So if one person can afford the Sky Sports package, that means the dole for all people is too high?

Really?

jimbobaloobob · 17-08-2011 10:17AM

During problematic times in spain with governments etc the government is known to provide free sports channels to easy the mood of its people and to prevent revolt.

maybe this has a similar effect here..

mackg · 17-08-2011 10:19AM

Oh look we're having anargument about the dole again.

OP you win come on up and collect your prize.

Buddinplant · 17-08-2011 10:20AM

as a fellow doley, i have to say if you can afford it, then go ahead. if you were earning a wage then no one would say a word, so it should be the same for us.

i got rid of my tv, cause i couldnt afford to pay for a tv license solo and housemate was effing off soon so no point. The look of shock and disbelief i still get from people when they realise the telly is no longer a focal point of my life. ( my news and current affairs opinions are now solely dependent on this site :pac:)

Lollipops23 · 17-08-2011 10:32AM

mackg wrote: »

why would they consider giving less than the bare minimum needed to survive, population control? :P

Going by some of the posts here you'd be forgiven for thinking some people wouldn't mind if doleys starved!:pac:

Esoteric_ · 17-08-2011 10:48AM

If you're on JSB, then go for it. Your taxes have paid for it and it's not means tested. If you're on JSA, your means test should be re-done if you're able to afford Sky Sports tbh.

This thing really p!sses me off tbh. Not people being able to afford luxuries on their dole, that's great and hell if I saved more of my wages I could do the same too, but the stupidity of the social welfare payments. My partner is on 100 a week because he's only a babby (20), and cannot make ends meet. He recently moved county to go home because he can't afford to continue living up here in Dublin. On the other hand, my best guy friend. He has ADHD so gets disability allowance. He has absolutely no intention of getting a job (has said so himself) and gets just under 200 per week, which he spends on alcohol, junk food and cigarettes - ALL of it. His partner is also on disability because of her height (she's tiny!) and she pays her mother a certain amount in rent, spends a certain amount and saves the rest, to the point where she has several thousand in the bank in the last year alone.

I'm sorry but one person on a means tested allowance not being able to afford food and another on a means tested allowance (albeit disability) being able to p!ss his up against a wall is ridiculous.

du Maurier · 17-08-2011 10:52AM

Heh, "Doleys". Sounds cute. The Doleys here. The Doleys over there. Was it only in this thread it became the Doleys? I subscribe to this - we should keep the name.

mackg · 17-08-2011 11:07AM

LyndaMcL wrote: »

. He has absolutely no intention of getting a job (has said so himself) and gets just under 200 per week, which he spends on alcohol, junk food and cigarettes - ALL of it. His partner is also on disability because of her height (she's tiny!) and she pays her mother a certain amount in rent, spends a certain QUOTE]

how tiny is she? Is she a proper <insert PC term for midget>

stevenmu · 17-08-2011 11:43AM

Lollipops23 wrote: »

what if they don't drink or smoke? that's a pretty big saving right there. also, most of the people I know on SW do both of those. Are you saying they shouldn't be allowed?

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed, but the dole shouldn't support them doing it.

Toby Take A Bow" wrote:

So if one person can afford the Sky Sports package, that means the dole for all people is too high?

Really?

No, but it's clearly too high for that person. Obviously other people will have different needs, they may have kids to support or medical expenses etc, but if someone can afford Sky Sports then I would argue that they in particular are recieving too much.

Drinking, smoking and Sky Sports are all luxuries, pretty expensive ones, and IMO the dole should not be high enough to allow for them.

Don't forget that the dole comes from a limited pool of money. Every euro spent on the dole is a euro that can't then be spent keeping hospitals open, treating or vaccinating against disease, building schools, or even giving people tax cuts so that they can spend more money and create more jobs.

prinz · 17-08-2011 11:57AM

stevenmu wrote: »

Don't forget that the dole comes from a limited pool of money. Every euro spent on the dole is a euro that can't then be spent keeping hospitals open, treating or vaccinating against disease, building schools, or even giving people tax cuts so that they can spend more money and create more jobs.

+1. There's a reason spending on Social Welfare has gone through the roof, while spending in other areas has stagnated or fallen fairly dramatically over the last few years. Social Welfare is turning into a massive black hole.

Toby Take a Bow · 17-08-2011 12:25PM

stevenmu wrote: »

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed, but the dole shouldn't support them doing it.

No, but it's clearly too high for that person. Obviously other people will have different needs, they may have kids to support or medical expenses etc, but if someone can afford Sky Sports then I would argue that they in particular are recieving too much.

Well, as someone said previously, if he's on JSB it's his return on taxes he's spent. If/when he's still on the dole in 9 months/1 year, he'll be means-tested and this will all iron itself out (I know, in an ideal world).

When you're first on the dole, especially if it's back-dated, you may think that you've been given this fantastic gift of free money (this wasn't the case with myself, but some of my friends definitely saw it this way). After around a month, the reality quickly sets in. I know of few people who are happy on the dole, and fewer still (read: zero) who can comfortably live on the dole.

maxxie · 17-08-2011 12:27PM

Godot. wrote: »

I'm, sadly, on benefits at the moment. Subscribed to Sky a few weeks ago. Shortly after the bloke installed it, I felt guilty as hell. Felt like such a scrounger because the country is in financial ruins, yet at the same time blessed for winning the lottery of life because people like me (although I'm trying hard to find work) are getting privileges like Sky Sports & Movies for doing nothing all day. Couldn't cancel because of the 12 month contract obviously, but downgraded to the bare minimum package.

Did I do the right thing and no unemployed people should be getting such expensive Sky packages, or was I just being a soft sh!te? If you think the latter don't be shy, I'm a big boy.

What we got here is a crusader! :rolleyes:

Tayla · 17-08-2011 12:34PM

mackg wrote: »

how tiny is she? Is she a proper <insert PC term for midget>

I think the PC term is woman baby.

Logical Fallacy · 17-08-2011 12:40PM

prinz wrote: »

+1. There's a reason spending on Social Welfare has gone through the roof, while spending in other areas has stagnated or fallen fairly dramatically over the last few years. Social Welfare is turning into a massive black hole.

And why is it turning into a massive black hole?

Try real hard and we can get 2 + 2 to make 4 here folks.

Esoteric_ · 17-08-2011 12:45PM

mackg wrote: »

LyndaMcL wrote: »

. He has absolutely no intention of getting a job (has said so himself) and gets just under 200 per week, which he spends on alcohol, junk food and cigarettes - ALL of it. His partner is also on disability because of her height (she's tiny!) and she pays her mother a certain amount in rent, spends a certain QUOTE]

how tiny is she? Is she a proper <insert PC term for midget>

Lol. She's about 4'5 or 4'6

prinz · 17-08-2011 12:49PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

And why is it turning into a massive black hole? Try real hard and we can get 2 + 2 to make 4 here folks.

Because it's not run properly and far too generous to some people.

Logical Fallacy · 17-08-2011 12:49PM

prinz wrote: »

Because it's not run properly and far too generous to some people.

You've got a 1, one more point and you can make a 2.

I know you have it in you.

7sr2z3fely84g5 · 17-08-2011 12:51PM

i think the system is bit lax,i look at alot of young twenty something couples who have the state to pay for their rent,fuel,health and children,seems quiet comfy lifestyle if you can get it.

prinz · 17-08-2011 12:56PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

You've got a 1, one more point and you can make a 2. I know you have it in you.

If you've got something to add come out and say it..

Esoteric_ · 17-08-2011 12:57PM

Brooks White Skier wrote: »

i think the system is bit lax,i look at alot of young twenty something couples who have the state to pay for their rent,fuel,health and children,seems quiet comfy lifestyle if you can get it.

And look at all the 30 and 40 something women dragging their kids into McDonald's each day, courtesy of the state, having not worked in 10+ years. Don't blame it all on us younger people. I'm 22 and part of a couple. I work, was on the dole once for a few months between jobs, but have been working since I was 15, no kids, no intention of kids, paying taxes for scroungers, just like plenty of other 20-somethings.

prinz · 17-08-2011 12:59PM

Brooks White Skier wrote: »

i think the system is bit lax,i look at alot of young twenty something couples who have the state to pay for their rent,fuel,health and children,seems quiet comfy lifestyle if you can get it.

This. It's turning into a joke. My mrs and I would be better off if I jacked in my job tomorrow.

Esoteric_ · 17-08-2011 01:01PM

I'd also be better off financially if I jacked in my job, but no way am I gonna do that. I would rather work for less money, it's not like I have a family to support. If I had a child and it worked out as more financially beneficial to claim the dole though, I'd do it so I can see why others do too.

Logical Fallacy · 17-08-2011 01:03PM

prinz wrote: »

If you've got something to add come out and say it..

Very little job creation at the moment.

It's fairly obvious. So we have three main elements, the fact that the Social Welfare itself is a joke and very poorly run, the fact that some people do get great benefit through it which means they are unlikely to want to get a job and the fact that a massive increase in unemployment over the last couple of years hasn't really been met with the job creation required to deal with the increase.

dark crystal · 17-08-2011 01:09PM

LyndaMcL wrote: »

And look at all the 30 and 40 something women dragging their kids into McDonald's each day, courtesy of the state, having not worked in 10+ years. .

Did you interview each and every one of them about their personal circumstances?

Logical Fallacy · 17-08-2011 01:11PM

stevenmu wrote: »

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed, but the dole shouldn't support them doing it.

No, but it's clearly too high for that person. Obviously other people will have different needs, they may have kids to support or medical expenses etc, but if someone can afford Sky Sports then I would argue that they in particular are recieving too much.

Drinking, smoking and Sky Sports are all luxuries, pretty expensive ones, and IMO the dole should not be high enough to allow for them.

Don't forget that the dole comes from a limited pool of money. Every euro spent on the dole is a euro that can't then be spent keeping hospitals open, treating or vaccinating against disease, building schools, or even giving people tax cuts so that they can spend more money and create more jobs.

When people start on the dole though the may have their own savings as well, a couple of grand squared away in the bank...so they feel like they can afford things like Sky Sports and the like. By the time 6 months rolls around they may be very much regretting their decision.

Esoteric_ · 17-08-2011 01:16PM

dark crystal wrote: »

Did you interview each and every one of them about their personal circumstances?

Did I? No. Should the social welfare office? Yes.

I'm mentioning things I've seen in my area, things people in my area see every day. You know the 'notorious' families in your area, you know the dole scroungers in your area, it's all known because of gossip. I don't need to interview them about their personal circumstances, but the dole office sure do.

Gummy Panda · 17-08-2011 01:25PM

How much does the dole take up of the social welfare budget?

Cancelled Sky Sports because I felt guilty

Comments