Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Ireland- Minimumwage Land

13

Comments

  • #102
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    That's true we've more children homeless today.

    The tens of thousands of children getting bet and raped senseless daily in 1950s institutions were, in fact, homeless. There are now far less of them and they often are accommodated in hotels and are perfectly safe.


  • #103
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    IF you want all min wage workers to afford a high standard of living, you might get used to your latte costing €18, which of course will put upward pressure on your wages to and indeed everyones.

    Just aswell i dont drink latte then....but as i said whats point expecting people to work jobs that dont offer any significant improvement in lifestyle over the dole??



    Seems a system failure to think people should work for crap pay to provide others with cheap lattes?


  • #104
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    El_Duderino 09 wrote: »
    If people want it, and it's a vote winner and it's the right thing to do for the country then why don't they do it?

    I suspect it's because politicians are beholden to old people who vote most reliably. And old people don't have a clue about the hardships faced by young people in terms of job security, wage growth vs cost of buying a house or having a family.

    I suspect that if a politician actually p dry opposed a massive programme of house building, on the scale that's needed to actually fix the problem, they would be branded loony left.

    They're voters mostly own homes. The problem for FFG is that the babyboomer homeowners have pulled up the ladder and there's a generation of middle class people who can't afford to house themselves. They've made the mistake of pinning themselves to an ageing/dying demographic at the expense of younger voters.


  • #105
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    _blaaz wrote: »
    What are the statistics for people under 30??....its tough going out there for people.my age anyway in terms of pay/job security



    This notion that the countrys booming and its ok to screw over young people with sh1t wages is going to come back to haunt the state....theres a generation there ripe for picking for extremists who will eventually tap into it

    The problem isn't wages, it's the cost of housing.


  • #106
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    _blaaz wrote: »
    Just aswell i dont drink latte then....but as i said whats point expecting people to work jobs that dont offer any significant improvement in lifestyle over the dole??

    That's a false assumption though. The dole is €203 p/w or €880 per month. A 39 hour week at min wage gives you about €1600, almost double the dole.
    _blaaz wrote: »
    Seems a system failure to think people should work for crap pay to provide others with cheap lattes?

    The pay isn't crap though, it's the second highest in Europe.


  • #107
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    cgcsb wrote: »
    The problem isn't wages, it's the cost of housing.

    Exactly, it's the policy of privatising essential public services eg, housing, health care etc.

    These are now products to be sold for the maximum price that the "market" can bear leaving those at the bottom of the financial ladder struggling.


  • #108
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    If a full time worker on the min wage could realistically expect to be housed within the M50 by DCC in a one bed, for say €300 p/m, 4 or 5 weeks after applying then this thread wouldn't exist.


  • #109
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    cgcsb wrote: »
    That's a false assumption though. The dole is €203 p/w or €880 per month. A 39 hour week at min wage gives you about €1600, almost double the dole.



    The pay isn't crap though, it's the second highest in Europe.

    Do you know anyone on min wage that regularly gets a 39 hour week....i dont


  • #110
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    cgcsb wrote: »
    They're voters mostly own homes. The problem for FFG is that the babyboomer homeowners have pulled up the ladder and there's a generation of middle class people who can't afford to house themselves. They've made the mistake of pinning themselves to an ageing/dying demographic at the expense of younger voters.

    This is mind boggling...they should been party of power for next 30 years....instead theyve thrown FF a lifeline


  • #111
    somefeen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,657 ✭✭✭somefeen


    _blaaz wrote: »
    Do you know anyone on min wage that regularly gets a 39 hour week....i dont

    I know an entire warehouse full of lads doing 50 - 60 hours on minimum wage.
    I don't know if that's somehow worse because at min wage you need to take all the hours you legally can to earn something decent.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    _blaaz wrote: »
    Do you know anyone on min wage that regularly gets a 39 hour week....i dont

    I don't have to, I know from the CSO that the proportion of workers on the min wage is 7.6% and the proportion of workers who are underemployed is 4.4%. Given that the are not mutually exclusive groups, one can deduce that the numbers are very small.


  • #113
    LirW
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,825 ✭✭✭LirW


    kneemos wrote: »
    Employees market.

    I don't know if you've been job searching lately, yes there are jobs, plenty of them and honestly a lot of them come with absolute sh1te contracts.
    I've been super lucky to score something quite alright just recently but I interviewed for some really crappy jobs that still are not unskilled by the way.
    And now imagine how it it outside of Dublin. The amount of companies that aren't willing to pay good staff more than a tenner per hour is crazy.


  • #114
    Franz Von Peppercorn II
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,398 ✭✭✭Franz Von Peppercorn II


    Yurt! wrote: »
    A lot of f*ckery goes on around stats with the 'average salary' in Ireland. Of more interest to people and policy makers should be the median salary, which is where most workers will be clustered around.

    https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/opinion-64-of-workers-in-ireland-earn-less-than-the-average-salary-4562071-Apr2019/

    He also did that trick of moving from average wages to median income. Obviously we do need an median salary/wages worked out by the cso though.


  • #115
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,753 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
    _blaaz wrote: »
    I think its like 55% population earn under 28K

    Low wages,crap conditions and poor job security are hallmark of irish economy for large tracts of people under 30....theres a huge age divide,


    Some household gross income data published today.


    https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-gpii/geographicalprofilesofincomeinireland2016/

    Median hh gross income = 45,256 in 2016.

    This is household data.

    This is incomes data, not just labour earnings.


  • #116
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,753 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Yurt! wrote: »
    A lot of f*ckery goes on around stats with the 'average salary' in Ireland. Of more interest to people and policy makers should be the median salary, which is where most workers will be clustered around.

    https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/opinion-64-of-workers-in-ireland-earn-less-than-the-average-salary-4562071-Apr2019/

    Median earnings were 41,829 in 2014.

    See here, but you'll have to do some digging:

    https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=earn_ses_annual&lang=en

    That's for FT workers in the sectors:

    Industry, construction and services (except public administration, defense, compulsory social security)


  • #117
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,753 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Sasha Early Litterbug wrote: »
    Agreed. Also, part time workers skew these statistics downwards. We all interpret these figures relative to full-time employment. A large chunk of workers are part-time through choice.


    Median earnings for FT workers in 2014 was 41,829.


  • #118
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    amcalester wrote: »
    I’m still no closer to understanding what you’re saying.

    You said people should shoot higher than minimum wage.
    I said it's not so easy to move up and gave an example of a 16 year old leaving school early for a minimum wage job.
    Then you cited stats saying some of them weren't working, for reasons best beknownst to yourself.

    *******

    Anyone with any kind of a full time job should be able to fend for themselves without state aid. That's the goal, not giving out that they get too much state aid. Or they are pretending, self entitled or some other apologist Tory shyte.


  • #119
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    cgcsb wrote: »
    The pay isn't crap though, it's the second highest in Europe.

    This means very little when the 'cost of living' index is double 10 other EU countries. The only place higher is a couple of very small unique states (Lux/Swiss) or a few nordic states: Iceland, Norway and Denmark.

    And it's 13th for purchasing power (including the whole continent with russ & ukraine), hence that's why shopping on Amazon.de is more bang per buck.


  • #120
    Yurt2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    Geuze wrote: »
    Median earnings were 41,829 in 2014.

    See here, but you'll have to do some digging:

    https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=earn_ses_annual&lang=en

    That's for FT workers in the sectors:

    Industry, construction and services (except public administration, defense, compulsory social security)

    Still not exactly a national median figure if it excludes a large sector of the workforce and also excludes part time workers.

    The CSO figures released today paint a less rosy picture.

    It's still beyond me why the CSO don't just publish the median on an individual basis. Almost every national stat agency (UK, US, NZ) does so.

    Any calculations I've see by third party economists the figure is in or about 35k. Obviously that deserves an asterisk as it's not the CSO compiling and publishing.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    cgcsb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,756 ✭✭✭cgcsb


    Tate Sticky Pear wrote: »
    This means very little when the 'cost of living' index is double 10 other EU countries. The only place higher is a couple of very small unique states (Lux/Swiss) or a few nordic states: Iceland, Norway and Denmark.

    And it's 13th for purchasing power (including the whole continent with russ & ukraine), hence that's why shopping on Amazon.de is more bang per buck.

    And this is why I say that the cost of housing is the problem, everyone should have access to housing for less than 30% of their income as a minimum.


  • #122
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    Minimum wage jobs are not meant for supporting families etc. They are starter jobs. Don't make enough? Upskill and get a better paid job. That's capitalism and we live in a capitalist country (for now). If you want something better then work for it. That's what's wrong with this country; entitlement and laziness


  • #123
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    leonffrench wrote: »
    Minimum wage jobs are not meant for supporting families etc. They are starter jobs. Don't make enough? Upskill and get a better paid job. That's capitalism and we live in a capitalist country (for now). If you want something better then work for it. That's what's wrong with this country; entitlement and laziness

    I don't know where to start. People with your view have us where we are.


  • #124
    Yurt2
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,381 ✭✭✭Yurt2


    An interesting one is the highest sectoral median income, that being ICT, Scientific & Recreation (?). We're constantly told that STEM qualified people can name their price. So if the median earned income for that sector is 37k gross, well that's not exactly stellar.


  • #125
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,753 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Yurt! wrote: »
    Still not exactly a national median figure if it excludes a large sector of the workforce and also excludes part time workers.

    The CSO figures released today paint a less rosy picture.

    It's still beyond me why the CSO don't just publish the median on an individual basis. Almost every national stat agency (UK, US, NZ) does so.

    Any calculations I've see by third party economists the figure is in or about 35k. Obviously that deserves an asterisk as it's not the CSO compiling and publishing.


    Median annual earnings for all workers in those sectors is 39,562 in 2014.


  • #126
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    Matt Barrett wrote:
    I don't know where to start. People with your view have us where we are.


    Nothing to do with people not working for the things they want/need though.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,753 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Yurt! wrote: »
    An interesting one is the highest sectoral median income, that being ICT, Scientific & Recreation (?). We're constantly told that STEM qualified people can name their price. So if the median earned income for that sector is 37k gross, well that's not exactly stellar.


    Average earnings in 2018 in the sector code J: Information and communication are 61,269


    https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2018/


  • #128
    Geuze
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,753 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Yurt! wrote: »
    An interesting one is the highest sectoral median income, that being ICT, Scientific & Recreation (?). We're constantly told that STEM qualified people can name their price. So if the median earned income for that sector is 37k gross, well that's not exactly stellar.

    I see the point you're making and the discrepancy.

    I don't have the time now to check this.


  • #129
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    leonffrench wrote: »
    That's capitalism and we live in a capitalist country (for now).

    That's exactly what's wrong. It's all about capital, people coming last.

    It should be the other way around, a society designed for people to live not corporations to extract profit.

    There is nothing wrong with profit but not when it leaves people homeless or not able to get timely health care etc.


  • #130
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    leonffrench wrote: »
    Nothing to do with people not working for the things they want/need though.

    You are paying so private concerns can profit. The low income workers are a symptom not the cause.


  • #131
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    Matt Barrett wrote:
    You are paying so private concerns can profit. The low income workers are a symptom not the cause.


    The system is such that anyone can succeed with hard work and climb the ladder all the way up to owning your own corporation. I agree with you that low paid workers are not the problem, but the OP is giving out about minimum wage jobs. Minimum wage jobs can be left behind for a better paid job by working hard. Fairly simple. Capitalism isnt perfect but it's the fairest for the most people. No point in getting minimum wage and not bothering to try and do better by wasting time giving out about said minimum wage jobs.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    d8491prj5boyvg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 508 ✭✭✭d8491prj5boyvg


    LirW wrote: »
    Not always by choice. There are a fair share of fields that do an awful lot of job sharing or solely give out part time work (a lot of people in Aldi for example are on part time contracts) or 0-hour contracts.

    I think there are a lot of people out there in established careers that struggle to understand that there are entire fields that build their businesses around precarious work.

    Fully appreciate that. I think then that a single figure is misleading. What we need to understand the full picture is

    Median full-time salary; proportion in FTE
    Median gross income for zero-hours/part timers. Proportion in PTE

    Some idea on those who opt in to PTE would also paint the full picture.


  • #133
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Fr_Dougal wrote: »
    Scavenging in Lidl for burgers, the mere thought of it!

    They might even have to eat shepherds pie!!


  • #134
    topper75
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,942 ✭✭✭topper75


    Auguste Comte wrote: »
    That's exactly what's wrong. It's all about capital, people coming last.

    It should be the other way around, a society designed for people to live not corporations to extract profit.

    There is nothing wrong with profit but not when it leaves people homeless or not able to get timely health care etc.

    Your view on this does not appear to take scarcity into account.

    People are not scarce.
    The resources that they seek to consume are.
    Hence capitalism and price mechanism.
    The USSR and a few other examples showed us what eventually happens when you shirk the price mechanism and instead seek to centrally control the allocation of resources.


  • #135
    James Brown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    leonffrench wrote: »
    The system is such that anyone can succeed with hard work and climb the ladder all the way up to owning your own corporation. I agree with you that low paid workers are not the problem, but the OP is giving out about minimum wage jobs. Minimum wage jobs can be left behind for a better paid job by working hard. Fairly simple. Capitalism isnt perfect but it's the fairest for the most people. No point in getting minimum wage and not bothering to try and do better by wasting time giving out about said minimum wage jobs.

    What's 'succeed' mean to you? I know many hard workers struggling to make rent. Should I tell them to stop taking it handy?
    It's as fair as the policies over see it. The concept seems sound but people work to remain at the top, as is the nature of it. To remain at the top you need cheap labour and/or people you can make money off.


  • #136
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    leonffrench wrote: »
    Minimum wage jobs are not meant for supporting families etc. They are starter jobs. Don't make enough? Upskill and get a better paid job. That's capitalism and we live in a capitalist country (for now). If you want something better then work for it. That's what's wrong with this country; entitlement and laziness

    Its somewhat difficult to support capitalism,while simultaneously wanting people to work jobs that dont pay enough??


    These 2 cant fit together properly and expect things to end up well long term....people arent stupid and will just opt out


  • #137
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    topper75 wrote: »
    Your view on this does not appear to take scarcity into account.

    People are not scarce.
    The resources that they seek to consume are.
    Hence capitalism and price mechanism.
    The USSR and a few other examples showed us what eventually happens when you shirk the price mechanism and instead seek to centrally control the allocation of resources.

    The reason housing is so scarce is because government has not built any publicly owned housing in a generation.

    They prefer to use the same money it would have cost to rent accommodation for people on the open market. So any people who want to rent privately are competing for a limited stock with their own government.

    The same is true now with house purchases, the state are now buying up houses that should be available to private buyers who are competing with other private buyers, instead they are now going up against their government or massive private corporations that are getting massive tax relief.

    Even the small landlord who might have bought a house or apartment or two for their retirement is getting ****ed over in relation to the institutional property owners.

    For the same amount of money the state could develop a healthy public housing stock for rent to lower paid workers for an affordable rent that would cover the cost of building the house over the lifetime of the property which would take the heat out of the private market leaving young people with options other than struggling to survive while being bled dry by extortionate rents or emigrate.

    There is a ballance between raging communism and unregulated capitalism. I don't think we have the ballance right.


  • #138
    kneemos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,450 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Auguste Comte wrote: »
    The reason housing is so scarce is because government has not built any publicly owned housing in a generation.

    They prefer to use the same money it would have cost to rent accommodation for people on the open market. So any people who want to rent privately are competing for a limited stock with their own government.

    The same is true now with house purchases, the state are now buying up houses that should be available to private buyers who are competing with other private buyers, instead they are now going up against their government or massive private corporations that are getting massive tax relief.

    Even the small landlord who might have bought a house or apartment or two for their retirement is getting ****ed over in relation to the institutional property owners.

    For the same amount of money the state could develop a healthy public housing stock for rent to lower paid workers for an affordable rent that would cover the cost of building the house over the lifetime of the property which would take the heat out of the private market leaving young people with options other than struggling to survive while being bled dry by extortionate rents or emigrate.

    There is a ballance between raging communism and unregulated capitalism. I don't think we have the ballance right.


    The housing shortage is due to a rising population and net migration.
    If it we're just a social housing problem it would be easily cured.


  • #139
    El_Duderino 09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭El_Duderino 09


    cgcsb wrote: »
    They're voters mostly own homes. The problem for FFG is that the babyboomer homeowners have pulled up the ladder and there's a generation of middle class people who can't afford to house themselves. They've made the mistake of pinning themselves to an ageing/dying demographic at the expense of younger voters.

    Yeah I'd largely agree. It's the same in the UK. Tories get the old people who have wealth and want to avoid taxing wealth at all costs.

    The "Pull the ladder up, Jack" attitude is incredible. I listened to a bloke who owns his own house now and was opposing socialist policies to help poor people. He actually said "I grew up in a council estate. The government never did anything for me!"

    Incredible attitude where old people have no idea how much more effective some aspects of government were when they benefitted from it. Plus labour unions were so strong that they actually had genuine career/wage progression.

    Government housing meant the housing market was kept in some kind of order. Now that the old people all own their houses, they don't actually want the government to build houses. More housing supply would reduce relative demand and house prices would drop.

    Then those politicians would have to go back to the old people who's house prices have dropped. For all the talk about everyone supporting the government building houses, I think that old people (who actually vote) would turn on whichever government actually does it.


  • #140
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    Matt Barrett wrote:
    What's 'succeed' mean to you? I know many hard workers struggling to make rent. Should I tell them to stop taking it handy? It's as fair as the policies over see it. The concept seems sound but people work to remain at the top, as is the nature of it. To remain at the top you need cheap labour and/or people you can make money off.

    _blaaz wrote:
    Its somewhat difficult to support capitalism,while simultaneously wanting people to work jobs that dont pay enough??


    I don't want them to work jobs that don't pay enough but it's necessary. It's a free market so people are free to get whatever jobs they are qualified to do. For some people, students or single people living at home for example, minimum wage is enough.

    If it's not enough then you need to get a better paid job by upskilling or gaining experience.

    We need minimum wage jobs for people to start off in to gain experience. People can be upwardly mobile if they put effort and hard work into study and/or working. Making excuses about the system being unfair gets you nowhere.

    I'm not exactly spouting radical ideas here, this is the concept that western civilisation is built on.


  • #141
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    Auguste Comte wrote:
    There is a ballance between raging communism and unregulated capitalism. I don't think we have the ballance right.


    What we have is far from unregulated capitalism. The less government involvement in the market the better. At the moment we have too much which is the cause of the problems you mentioned.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    leonffrench wrote: »
    I don't want them to work jobs that don't pay enough but it's necessary. It's a free market so people are free to get whatever jobs they are qualified to do. For some people, students or single people living at home for example, minimum wage is enough.

    If it's not enough then you need to get a better paid job by upskilling or gaining experience.

    We need minimum wage jobs for people to start off in to gain experience. People can be upwardly mobile if they put effort and hard work into study and/or working. Making excuses about the system being unfair gets you nowhere.

    I'm not exactly spouting radical ideas here, this is the concept that western civilisation is built on.

    Mate people of dublin walkes out in 1913 for rather basic premise of a descent days pay for a descent days work


    Heres you in 2019 preaching a policy that by your admission is a roll back to conditions that caused this.....

    I ask yous once more....why should anyone buy into a system that see people working and being unable to afford a reasonable lifestyle from their wages??....deosnt seem a worthwhile system to me and systems failure that has people preaching this as acceptable


  • #143
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    kneemos wrote: »
    The housing shortage is due to a rising population and net migration.
    If it we're just a social housing problem it would be easily cured.

    No its not. It's the government's most basic job to plan for and provide for changing demographics, they failed.


  • #144
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    _blaaz wrote:
    I ask yous once more....why should anyone buy into a system that see people working and being unable to afford a reasonable lifestyle from their wages??....deosnt seem a worthwhile system to me and systems failure that has people preaching this as acceptable


    As I've said..get a better job if the one you have doesn't pay enough. No one's stopping anyone from doing that unlike in the historical scenario you referenced. Those people had no access to education whereas we have almost unlimited access to it so it's a comparison that cant be made.


  • #145
    kneemos
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,450 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Auguste Comte wrote: »
    No its not. It's the government's most basic job to plan for and provide for changing demographics, they failed.


    They were warned after the bubble bust. However housing and development had become dirty words.
    It would have been political suicide if they had begun spending on more housing.
    The money wasn't there and the public would have had conniptions.


  • #146
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    leonffrench wrote: »
    Those people had no access to education whereas we have almost unlimited access to it so it's a comparison that cant be made.

    So you think people wanting decent days pay for decent days work isnt comparable to situation which has arisen that people cant afford reasonable lifestlye for.min wage


    How is that


  • #147
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    _blaaz wrote:
    So you think people wanting decent days pay for decent days work isnt comparable to situation which has arisen that people cant afford reasonable lifestlye for.min wage


    Very different circumstances as you well know. We can educate ourselves to get better paid jobs and they couldn't.


  • #148
    _blaaz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,646 ✭✭✭_blaaz


    leonffrench wrote: »
    Very different circumstances as you well know. We can educate ourselves to get better paid jobs and they couldn't.

    Surely we shouldnt be allowing jobs which dont pay properly?



    If min wage was e3 an hour would you deem it acceptable,obvioulsy no you wouldnt.....why not just pay proper wages


  • #149
    Auguste Comte
    Registered Users Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭Auguste Comte


    leonffrench wrote: »
    As I've said..get a better job if the one you have doesn't pay enough. No one's stopping anyone from doing that unlike in the historical scenario you referenced. Those people had no access to education whereas we have almost unlimited access to it so it's a comparison that cant be made.

    What about those people for whom a minium wage job is where their ability peaks, should they not be able to have a reasonable life on what they can earn. We all don't have the ability to be Bill Gates or an engineer or a technician.


  • #150
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    _blaaz wrote:
    Surely we shouldnt be allowing jobs which dont pay properly?

    _blaaz wrote:
    If min wage was e3 an hour would you deem it acceptable,obvioulsy no you wouldnt.....why not just pay proper wages

    I genuinely do see where you're coming from. There are people struggling to get by with what they make. But the only person stopping them doing better is themselves.
    Paying everyone handsomely leads to a lack of incentive to do better which untimately leads to a lack of innovation which in turn means less better paid jobs. It's a noble stance to take but it doesn't work very well in practice in the long term.
    Obviously this is just my opinion and you have yours and its good to talk these things through to hear all sides.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    leonffrench
    Registered Users Posts: 212 ✭✭leonffrench


    Auguste Comte wrote:
    What about those people for whom a minium wage job is where their ability peaks, should they not be able to have a reasonable life on what they can earn. We all don't have the ability to be Bill Gates or an engineer or a technician.


    You don't have to be Bill Gates or an engineer or a technician to earn more than minimum wage. A good work ethic goes further than you think.


Advertisement