Christmas bonus dole bonus

Stark

PaulieD wrote: »

Give the chap a break, hes on JSB so he paid his fair share in contributions.

Hence the post blindness regarding JSB and JSA. There's no Christmas bonus on JSB.

PaulieD

Stark wrote: »

Hence the post blindness regarding JSB and JSA. There's no Christmas bonus on JSB.

I wouldnt know, Ive been on either, thankfully. Anyway that wasnt my point.

furiousox wrote: »

l'm only on JSB since April, so l'm a short term sponger.......right?

Stark wrote: »

Newbie sponger is the more appropriate term.

No need to give the chap stick, hes on JSB so he has paid his fair share of contributions.

furiousox

PaulieD wrote: »

Give the chap a break, hes on JSB so he paid his fair share in contributions.

Yup, l left school at 16 with a leaving cert back in the fabulous 80's.
My luck finally ran out as l'm now 43, out of work and signing on for the first time in my life.
That's a good few years prsi so forgive me if l don't consider myself a sponger, 'newbie' or otherwise....

PaulieD

furiousox wrote: »

Yup, l left school at 16 with a leaving cert back in the fabulous 80's.
My luck finally ran out as l'm now 43, out of work and signing on for the first time in my life.
That's a good few years prsi so forgive me if l don't consider myself a sponger, 'newbie' or otherwise....

No need to explain yourself, my man. There are a lot of good people on the dole, through no fault of their own. We should be targeting the 150,000 people who remained on the dole during the good times and those who are in the state a wet day.

Keep the chin up, something will eventually fall your way.:)

furiousox

Stark wrote: »

Newbie sponger is the more appropriate term.

So, are you going to take that back or what?

Scofflaw

furiousox wrote: »

So, are you going to take that back or what?

If you object to it, please report it - but as far as I can see it's a joke.

General reminder: if you object to something another poster has said, don't engage in either tit-for-tat or wrangling, because you'll both wind up banned. The "Report Post" icon is there for a reason, as are the moderators.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Wertz

efb wrote: »

Energy, Food, Sky Sports on da dodgy box, Travel, Accommodation

But still using vouchers? What of other purchases that even the unemployed need to make outside of the essentials?

thebman wrote: »

It doesn't have to be vouchers, it can be a debit card or compatible with that system so as not to cost retailers anything upgrading systems or embarrass those using it.

Then the card only validates in government approved stores and it can't be used outside the country.

I like this idea...sounds more workable than a voucher system. But it still has problems...governments approving stores or other vendors would need to make sure that those retailers and service providers were providing value for money and that they couldn't abuse their positions as being the only places where the jobless could redeem their "credits". Would certain items like cigarettes and booze be off limits for card users?

Then there's the problem covered by this very thread; how does anyone on such a system save small amounts weekly to put toward larger essential purchases or for the likes of christmas, back to school, etc?
People can make all the arguments they like about those who live on welfare not being entitled to spend money on anything other than the basic essentials, but in reality needs arise for things other than the basics every so often...in the complete absence of paying work, where do these people find the cash to put by for those inevitable rainy days?

As much as I can see the merits of such a system, there are a lot of kinks that would need ironed out and tbh there's a lot of other things that need to change before such a system could be workable...

thebman

Wertz wrote: »

But still using vouchers? What of other purchases that even the unemployed need to make outside of the essentials?




I like this idea...sounds more workable than a voucher system. But it still has problems...governments approving stores or other vendors would need to make sure that those retailers and service providers were providing value for money and that they couldn't abuse their positions as being the only places where the jobless could redeem their "credits". Would certain items like cigarettes and booze be off limits for card users?

Then there's the problem covered by this very thread; how does anyone on such a system save small amounts weekly to put toward larger essential purchases or for the likes of christmas, back to school, etc?
People can make all the arguments they like about those who live on welfare not being entitled to spend money on anything other than the basic essentials, but in reality needs arise for things other than the basics every so often...in the complete absence of paying work, where do these people find the cash to put by for those inevitable rainy days?

As much as I can see the merits of such a system, there are a lot of kinks that would need ironed out and tbh there's a lot of other things that need to change before such a system could be workable...

You could just as easily have a system with no restrictions on purchases that allows people to buy anything and excess purchases of luxury items can be flagged on the social welfare system to admin staff where those people are then asked to explain themselves.

Excess luxury purchases would probably be something like buying an LCD TV or something on it. Of course people getting cash in hand on the side would benefit from such a system.

For places that don't accept laser, you could have social cheques (don't need to look different to bank cheques) that show up in the social welfare system when cashed.

This would not make people on the dole think before they spend TBH. Any excess saved should be kept on the card for the following week/month if means tested after a year or so they could review it to see if someone is getting more than they need or not enough.

Basically you need to force everything through a system to police the means tested. IMO if your not means tested you should be handed cash. You paid into the system so its your money your getting out that you are entitled to.

You just want to make it less desirable to stay long term unemployed.

ntlbell

furiousox wrote: »

Yup, l left school at 16 with a leaving cert back in the fabulous 80's.
My luck finally ran out as l'm now 43, out of work and signing on for the first time in my life.
That's a good few years prsi so forgive me if l don't consider myself a sponger, 'newbie' or otherwise....

This attitude irks me.

"I paid my due's i'm just taken back what i'm oue'd" you don't pay into the system to take it back

it's not a pension. it gets spent. on you know, running the country.

Taxipete29

ntlbell wrote: »

This attitude irks me.

"I paid my due's i'm just taken back what i'm oue'd" you don't pay into the system to take it back

it's not a pension. it gets spent. on you know, running the country.

PRSI- Pay Related Social Insurance

The clue is in the name

furiousox

ntlbell wrote: »

This attitude irks me.

"I paid my due's i'm just taken back what i'm oue'd" you don't pay into the system to take it back

it's not a pension. it gets spent. on you know, running the country.

Right, first off really sorry for 'irking' you, l'll try hard not to get laid off again :rolleyes:

Secondly, l don't consider myself 'retired' so l don't view it as a f'ing pension!

l'm spending my days, you know...'looking for a job'

l know there are people out there abusing the system but l ain't one of them yet l've already been labelled a sponger......by a mod!

l never wanted to 'take anything back from the system'
l'd rather be in the f'ing system...contributing!

Go down to the chemists and get yourself a bottle of cop-on!

ntlbell

Taxipete29 wrote: »

PRSI- Pay Related Social Insurance

The clue is in the name

Which pays your stamp, which is worth very little.

I was referring to the actual tax that gets spend on

junkies methadone.

your kids schools

etc etc etc etc

It's not a case of Oh i've worked for x amount of years, i'll sit on my arse now and get back what i'm oued. your not oued it, it's gone.

Taxipete29

ntlbell wrote: »

Which pays your stamp, which is worth very little.

I was referring to the actual tax that gets spend on

junkies methadone.

your kids schools

etc etc etc etc

It's not a case of Oh i've worked for x amount of years, i'll sit on my arse now and get back what i'm oued. your not oued it, it's gone.

Considering he didnt say he was going to sit on his arse your argument fails on all levels

ntlbell

furiousox wrote: »

Right, first off really sorry for 'irking' you, l'll try hard not to get laid off again :rolleyes:

Secondly, l don't consider myself 'retired' so l don't view it as a f'ing pension!

l'm spending my days, you know...'looking for a job'

l know there are people out there abusing the system but l ain't one of them yet l've already been labelled a sponger......by a mod!

l never wanted to 'take anything back from the system'
l'd rather be in the f'ing system...contributing!

Go down to the chemists and get yourself a bottle of cop-on!

the fact you got laid of is not a problem, the fact you think because you contributed to society for x amount of years that soicety oue's you is the issue.

I don't have any sort of problem with you claiming your sw it's the sense of entitlement that's irking.

it's irelvant that you want to take back or not, you couldn't control losing your job but you can control that self indulgent i saved the planet for the last 20years working attitude.

ntlbell

Taxipete29 wrote: »

Considering he didnt say he was going to sit on his arse your argument fails on all levels

I never said he did either.

nice try tho.

furiousox

ntlbell wrote: »

the fact you got laid of is not a problem, the fact you think because you contributed to society for x amount of years that soicety oue's you is the issue.

I don't have any sort of problem with you claiming your sw it's the sense of entitlement that's irking.

it's irelvant that you want to take back or not, you couldn't control losing your job but you can control that self indulgent i saved the planet for the last 20years working attitude.

I don't have any 'saving the planet' attitude, l actually believe l was fortunate to be in work for as long as l was.

The fact is, l am entitled to jobseekers benefit, same as anyone else in my position, thats not self indulgence, thats a legal entitlement.
And fwiw, l don't expect any 'christmas bonus' either.

I can't work out if you're flaming, trolling, or both?
Either way, make sure you get to the chemists for that bottle of cop-on today won't you?

ChillyJilly

Taxipete29 wrote: »

Considering he didnt say he was going to sit on his arse your argument fails on all levels

ntlbell wrote: »

I never said he did either.

nice try tho.

Erm... yea you did

ntlbell wrote: »

It's not a case of Oh i've worked for x amount of years, i'll sit on my arse now and get back what i'm oued. your not oued it, it's gone.

ntlbell

ChillyJilly wrote: »

Erm... yea you did

um no i didn't?

where did i say HE said that?

ntlbell

furiousox wrote: »

Either way, make sure you get to the chemists for that bottle of cop-on today won't you?

Try a bit of class on.

it might help in interviews too.

furiousox

are you back yet?

zero19

Deleted User wrote: »

Without trying to sound ignorant... I really don't understand the rant? The bonus has been cancelled since April...

Complete **** stirring is all it is IMO.

ntlbell

furiousox wrote: »

are you back yet?

I'll get it on my way in the morning.

to WORK.

furiousox

ntlbell wrote: »

I'll get it on my way in the morning.

to WORK.

Don't forget to ask if they "want fries with that?"

we'llallhavetea_old

ntlbell wrote: »

the fact you got laid of is not a problem, the fact you think because you contributed to society for x amount of years that soicety oue's you is the issue.

I don't have any sort of problem with you claiming your sw it's the sense of entitlement that's irking.

it's irelvant that you want to take back or not, you couldn't control losing your job but you can control that self indulgent i saved the planet for the last 20years working attitude.

but he is entitled to it.....

your being ridiculous. i know what you're trying to say, that the tax paid over x amount of years is not solely for a personal supply of sw payments, but you're not very clear or mannerly.

ntlbell

furiousox wrote: »

Don't forget to ask if they "want fries with that?"

hey, don't knock it.

it helps pay people who don't works social payments.

thebman

ntlbell wrote: »

This attitude irks me.

"I paid my due's i'm just taken back what i'm oue'd" you don't pay into the system to take it back

it's not a pension. it gets spent. on you know, running the country.

Its an insurance scheme, he's availing of it as he's paid the required number of payments into it to qualify for it.

If someone crashes their car should they not feel the insurance company owes it to them to cover them as stated in their policy?

The real problem with social welfare is the people who have not paid in yet feel entitled to it. Anyone that has paid into that is recently laid off is looking for work because if your used to working then sitting on your hole drives you insane.

furiousox

ntlbell wrote: »

hey, don't knock it.

it helps pay people who don't works social payments.

Actually....buy two bottles....

furiousox

thebman wrote: »

Anyone that has paid into that is recently laid off is looking for work because if your used to working then sitting on your hole drives you insane.

Yeah, some people can't see that though.

Smug pr1cks l think they're called.......

ntlbell

thebman wrote: »

Its an insurance scheme, he's availing of it as he's paid the required number of payments into it to qualify for it.

If someone crashes their car should they not feel the insurance company owes it to them to cover them as stated in their policy?

The real problem with social welfare is the people who have not paid in yet feel entitled to it. Anyone that has paid into that is recently laid off is looking for work because if your used to working then sitting on your hole drives you insane.

the insurance is the stamp with you get back on top of the jsa while those stamps last. so if you're using the fact you paid x amount for x amount of yeasrs to claim what your due, then yes your due that stamp for how ever long it lasts.

the stamp is a relatively small amount compared to the jsa or any other social welfare payment.

don't work a day or work all your life you're entitled the social. stamp or no stamp.

his entitlement is not in question

ntlbell

furiousox wrote: »

Yeah, some people can't see that though.

Smug pr1cks l think they're called.......

yet you sit there knocking people who work in mc donalds.

maybe it might a be a point of call for you tomorrow if you're that annoyed sitting on your arse.