one in 7

hyperborean · 19-05-2013 10:13AM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Surely we should all be given the money so seeing as it doesn't cost much.

Would you rather 43,000 homeless destitutes?

If there are nearly 500,000 out of employment, what chance have these wasters of getting employment if the cord was cut?

hyperborean · 19-05-2013 10:15AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

that is assuming they are not costing additionally to their dole

health care , court services , probation services , AGS , social workers , social housing ect ect

all this whole not contributing a red cent - your statement is a red herring

Really, and employing nurses, admin workers, builders to provide basic services doesn't contribute to the the economy?

I am not sticking up for these wasters but you have to look at the bigger picture,

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:17AM

hyperborean wrote: »

Would you rather 43,000 homeless destitutes?

If there are nearly 500,000 out of employment, what chance have these wasters of getting employment if the cord was cut?

but that is the issue , they should NEVER have been let use the SW to fund a jobless life style , SW have a lot to answer for on this one
did no one notice that they were sitting on their hole ?
for all their lives ?

what some people forget is there ARE people who choose this lifestyle
might not be the full 43,000 , but i would GUESS its the higher percentage

assuming the sindo figures are correct , the figure is for people FIT AND ABLE for work , and must be LOOKING for work , but for some reason , have NEVER been able to find a job

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:19AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

that is assuming they are not costing additionally to their dole

health care , court services , probation services , AGS , social workers , social housing ect ect

all this whole not contributing a red cent - your statement is a red herring

All those services are provided for every one.
I've used three out of those six you named in the last few years.

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:20AM

hyperborean wrote: »

Really, and employing nurses, admin workers, builders to provide basic services doesn't contribute to the the economy?

I am not sticking up for these wasters but you have to look at the bigger picture,

i do see the bigger picture , people who pay taxes and contribute to the state also use those services ,
we are talking about people who have NEVER paid into the system.
people who have paid in have the moral right to use these services.

BIG difference - just think about that one word , NEVER

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:22AM

mattjack wrote: »

All those services are provided for every one.
I've used three out of those six you named in the last few years.

Sorry mattjack , but im going to go out on a limb and presume you have at SOME STAGE in your adult life have worked and paid into the system

if you have , then you are PERFECTLY entitled to use the above services

my beef is with people who have NEVER paid in , never worked , ya know who im talking about

hyperborean · 19-05-2013 10:23AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

but that is the issue , they should NEVER have been let use the SW to fund a jobless life style , SW have a lot to answer for on this one
did no one notice that they were sitting on their hole ?
for all their lives ?

what some people forget is there ARE people who choose this lifestyle
might not be the full 43,000 , but i would GUESS its the higher percentage

assuming the sindo figures are correct , the figure is for people FIT AND ABLE for work , and must be LOOKING for work , but for some reason , have NEVER been able to find a job

Your very naive if you think the resources needed to get employment (or forcibly employ)for these 43,000 people added to the money they get going straight back into the economy is viable?

Do you think other people have not looked at the costs and outlay? You really think you are that smart? lol

hyperborean · 19-05-2013 10:24AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

i do see the bigger picture , people who pay taxes and contribute to the state also use those services ,
we are talking about people who have NEVER paid into the system.
people who have paid in have the moral right to use these services.

BIG difference - just think about that one word , NEVER

Moral right? what do you know about morals? your putting forward a case for putting 43,000 people into absolute poverty and you preach morals?

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:26AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

but that is the issue , they should NEVER have been let use the SW to fund a jobless life style , SW have a lot to answer for on this one
did no one notice that they were sitting on their hole ?
for all their lives ?

what some people forget is there ARE people who choose this lifestyle
might not be the full 43,000 , but i would GUESS its the higher percentage

assuming the sindo figures are correct , the figure is for people FIT AND ABLE for work , and must be LOOKING for work , but for some reason , have NEVER been able to find a job

Look beyond people who choose this lifestyle , look at why they choose it.
Targeting groups creates more and more dis-enfranchisement.Look at their education , housing , health , availability of suitable work.

We.re post industrial now , meaning large low skilled labour intensive employment is no longer there , no construction , no shipping , mines etc

Our traditional countries of choice for emigration are suffering economically or have immigration to them more difficult.

returnNull · 19-05-2013 10:27AM

kneemos wrote: »

You're one fired up dj.

His OP needs more BASS!

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:28AM

Almaviva wrote: »

A suggestion dj - do a months voluntary work with the St V de Paul and report back on your views of the long term unemployed.

but not all long term unemployed have never worked , your assuming again,

i know PLENTY of people that would be considered long term , but they have also worked for decades

so , nice try tugging on the heart strings , but you are missing the point of the OP.

Its about people whom have NEVER worked , not long term unemployed , they can and are two different things.

Capt'n Midnight · 19-05-2013 10:30AM

Did we need another thread on the long term unemployable ?

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:31AM

hyperborean wrote: »

Your very naive if you think the resources needed to get employment (or forcibly employ)for these 43,000 people added to the money they get going straight back into the economy is viable?

Do you think other people have not looked at the costs and outlay? You really think you are that smart? lol

sorry , but you are missing the point , they should have never been allowed to get to this point in the first place
they should have been picked up the the system from he start

i never said once they should be forcibly employed or anything like it

but no one should be allowed to choose doing nothing while the state pays for it

loving your suggestions to remedy this problem :rolleyes:

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:33AM

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Did we need another thread on the long term unemployable ?

its not about long term unemployed at all , they were NEVER employed,
they never contributed , never helped out the people.

dont mix up the two , or the real debate will be lost in bull****

Taxburden carrier · 19-05-2013 10:35AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

sorry , but you are missing the point , they should have never been allowed to get to this point in the first place
they should have been picked up the the system from he start

i never said once they should be forcibly employed or anything like it

but no one should be allowed to choose doing nothing while the state pays for it

loving your suggestions to remedy this problem :rolleyes:

Absolutely. If you chose not to contribute to a society you should not expect to benefit from it.

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:36AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

Sorry mattjack , but im going to go out on a limb and presume you have at SOME STAGE in your adult life have worked and paid into the system

if you have , then you are PERFECTLY entitled to use the above services

my beef is with people who have NEVER paid in , never worked , ya know who im talking about

Indeed , but your talking about undermining whole tenets of social structure.
Regardless of who you are , all first world countries will strive to deliver a suitable standard education , housing , welfare , healthcare and the opportunity to work.Right now you're targeting a group of individuals who may be very vulnerable .

If you don't deliver some of these or even one of these or even partially deliver any of them you create an inequality for some that ripples off through their life .

So a poorly educated child , develops into young man with little or no chance
of decent employment creates who realises he may never work becomes dependent on welfare .

wolfpawnat · 19-05-2013 10:36AM

Yeah, there are some that have never worked a day, I am ashamed to say I know of a few. They are usually the ones doing better than those trying to better themselves and do well in life. Every go to sign on? You can see the shame in many people's faces, my own included at being stuck in this situation. Then you have those that turned 18, left school and signed on all on the one day! Another area there is severe abuse is the OPFP. People going on it at 16 and never once bothering to attempt to better themselves, they are happy with their money in hand and don't care about going anywhere in life.

It's a vicious catch 22. We have to look after those who want to work but cannot get work, but it means you allow for these sorts to exist too.

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:37AM

hyperborean wrote: »

Moral right? what do you know about morals? your putting forward a case for putting 43,000 people into absolute poverty and you preach morals?

where did i say i wanted them put into poverty ?
i said nothing of the sort , i have said ( repeatably ) they could do social work in return for their dole

sitting doing NOTHING from day ONE is not an option

i know plenty about morals - and i do know that never working while putting your hand out from the state is morally wrong whole others in real need go with out

so get off your high horse buddy and justify these guys for me
with out sucking in the long term unemployed or the people on illness benefit , as these people have nothing to to with the debate.

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:39AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

sorry , but you are missing the point , they should have never been allowed to get to this point in the first place
they should have been picked up the the system from he start

i never said once they should be forcibly employed or anything like it

but no one should be allowed to choose doing nothing while the state pays for it

loving your suggestions to remedy this problem :rolleyes:

Subtle change of opinion there , OP.

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:40AM

Taxburden carrier wrote: »

Absolutely. If you chose not to contribute to a society you should not expect to benefit from it.

Look at what's causing them to choose this , remedy it if you can and resolve the problem for further generations.

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:41AM

mattjack wrote: »

Indeed , but your talking about undermining whole tenets of social structure.
Regardless of who you are , all first world countries will strive to deliver a suitable standard education , housing , welfare , healthcare and the opportunity to work.Right now you're targeting a group of individuals who may be very vulnerable .

If you don't deliver some of these or even one of these or even partially deliver any of them you create an inequality for some that ripples off through their life .

So a poorly educated child , develops into young man with little or no chance
of decent employment creates who realises he may never work becomes dependent on welfare .

again assumptions , do you truly believe that the majority of these 43,000 have these issues ?

anyway that is a red herring , i come from a socially deprived area , and the majority of my peers worked or have jobs , i also know people with learning difficulty's who have jobs or did work , i know guys in wheel chairs after bike accidents who have jobs or at some stage did work

so im sorry , boo hoo , i come form bla bla area and my daddy did not love me is a poor reason for NEVER having a job

Social welfare professionals are the people we are talking about here

you are confusing the two

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:42AM

mattjack wrote: »

Subtle change of opinion there , OP.

how ? point out please

Almaviva · 19-05-2013 10:43AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

sitting doing NOTHING from day ONE is not an option

They dont choose that lifestyle, they are forced into that corner - and you and the majority of the working population are more at fault for their unfortunate situation. Its up to you to help them help.

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:49AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

again assumptions ,

Absolutely no assumptions , read a bit social policy history.

do you truly believe that the majority of these 43,000 have these issues ?

No idea.

anyway that is a red herring , i come from a socially deprived area , and the majority of my peers worked or have jobs , i also know people with learning difficulty's who have jobs or did work , i know guys in wheel chairs after bike accidents who have jobs or at some stage did work

South inner city Dublin here , yes to everything else.

so im sorry , boo hoo , i come form bla bla area and my daddy did not love me is a poor reason for NEVER having a job

Shite.

Social welfare professionals are the people we are talking about here

you are confusing the two

Not at all.

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:54AM

Almaviva wrote: »

They dont choose that lifestyle, they are forced into that corner - and you and the majority of the working population are more at fault for their unfortunate situation. Its up to you to help them help.

do you actually believe that ?

someone is forced into never bettering themselves by getting basic training and schooling ?

so you have had a poor start in life , does that mean you are entitled to sit and do nothing for the rest of your adult life ? sitting feeling sorry for yourself ?

na , sorry but that's bull****,

i know PLENTY of hard luck cases who have had at least one fu2king job in their lives ,

just think about it for one minute - these 43,000 HAVE NEVER HAD A JOB
never paid into the system

i see these people around me EVERYDAY , there is nothing wrong with them , they are just lazy fuc2ers milking the system.

and to qualify that statesmen , i am living in a county housing estate that is ranked in the top 3% of the MOST deprived areas in the COUNTRY,
the estate is FULL of these people

mattjack · 19-05-2013 10:54AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

how ? point out please

In you first post you suggest all 43000 need a kick up the hole call them scum and cut their welfare etc ,

then you make a good point .... we should never have allowed them to get to this situation , by stopping it before it starts.

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 10:56AM

mattjack wrote: »

[/B]

Not at all.

whooooo - great retort there mattjack , keep up the good work :rolleyes:

Czarcasm · 19-05-2013 11:01AM

dj you keep saying "You know who we're talking about here", etc. But DO YOU know who you're talking about? Have you ever talked to them or were you too busy looking down your nose at them and dismissing them all as scum? An inflammatory rag like the Sindo is written with extremists like you in mind. You buy into that crap hook, line and sinker.

People like you are just as bad as the people you despise- you both expect "the government" to do something about the problem, so neither of you have to consider the option of getting your hands dirty and meeting in the middle somewhere and thrash out the issues and come up with viable long term solutions amongst yourselves.

You'll be waiting tbh, the government hasn't hands to wipe their collective arses, much less do they actually care, just as long as they can last till the next election and pass the buck to the next crowd of incompetents (already people are frothing at the mouth to put fianna failure back in government because they think FG/LAB will give a shìt about being "punished").

How about you approach these people yourself and find out exactly why they have no motivation to contribute to a society that dismisses them as scum? It's not fcuking rocket science to figure out where the attitude stems from, that's for sure.

Or, I suppose you could preach from your high horse about what the rest of us aren't doing to solve the problem. Mind that horse though, they're prone to knee jerk reactions when they read a puff piece with fisher price analysis of statistics in an inflammatory rag that also couldn't care less about anything but peddling it's crap to mindless numbnuts.

I sometimes wonder WOULD it be a good thing if there was no such thing as anonymity on the Internet. It'd cut out half this nonsense if people actually had to stand behind their ill informed opinions.

dj jarvis · 19-05-2013 11:05AM

mattjack wrote: »

In you first post you suggest all 43000 need a kick up the hole call them scum and cut their welfare etc ,

then you make a good point .... we should never have allowed them to get to this situation , by stopping it before it starts.

and how are they conflicting each other ?
they should have never been allowed to get to this point ,
but that does not exclude them ( some of anyway ) for being lazy dole scroungers , the two are not mutually exclusive.

if someone can come up with a GOOD reason why i and others should pay for some people who have NEVER worked , i would like to hear it

and please in this answer , exclude people who have worked , students , people with learning problems of a physical illness that prevents them from working, remember to qualify you must be fit and able to work,

so AH , please enlighten me on this lovely Sunday morning.

mattjack · 19-05-2013 11:05AM

dj jarvis wrote: »

do you actually believe that ?

someone is forced into never bettering themselves by getting basic training and schooling ?

so you have had a poor start in life , does that mean you are entitled to sit and do nothing for the rest of your adult life ? sitting feeling sorry for yourself ?

na , sorry but that's bull****,

i know PLENTY of hard luck cases who have had at least one fu2king job in their lives ,

just think about it for one minute - these 43,000 HAVE NEVER HAD A JOB
never paid into the system

i see these people around me EVERYDAY , there is nothing wrong with them , they are just lazy fuc2ers milking the system.

and to qualify that statesmen , i am living in a county housing estate that is ranked in the top 3% of the MOST deprived areas in the COUNTRY,
the estate is FULL of these people

Do you not think something drives you to improve yourself , you quite possibly have an excellent family structure stretching back to grandparents .

Your parents may have actually seen the benefit of instilling the benefit of education in you from four years of age.You may have had a good diet and health , your housing was probally secure .... bills paid , heating available , food on the table.
You were encouraged to participate in sports and different activities from a young age.

Can you see the pillars I'm talking about ..... education , welfare , housing and health ?

No addictions , no mental , no physical abuse ... in fact little or no trauma at all.

Don't look at these 43000 in the moment now , look back at what and not where they came from.

one in 7

Comments