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

The basic rate of social welfare needs to be cut

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    ntlbell
    Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    Rantan wrote: »
    Very relavent point here and one I can relate with - since I got my notice 4 weeks ago I have applied for loads of jobs, not fussy, most involve 30 - 40 % paycut. I have been told by a few agencies that I am overqualified for many of these jobs, and that might actually stand against me!

    sounds like she might be given you some advice there that you don't seem to want to take.

    someone who's clever enough will and get that job.

    mull it over. the answer is in your post.


  • Options
    #63
    Rantan
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭Rantan


    ntlbell wrote: »
    isn't that the risk you take when taking out such a huge loan?

    maybe if people looked at how they're going to re-pay should they lose their job or have reduced income into consideration before buying

    or you know...god forbid...rent...

    buying a home is not some sort of right.

    Yes, I suppose I agree with that, but in todays economy there is no such thing as absolute job security, so essentially you saying is: only get a mortgage if you can be guaranteed constant employment?
    If we had a similar system as the French with regards to long term renting it wouldnlt be a bad idea I think, works well for them, apparently.


  • Options
    #64
    ntlbell
    Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    Rantan wrote: »
    Yes, I suppose I agree with that, but in todays economy there is no such thing as absolute job security, so essentially you saying is: only get a mortgage if you can be guaranteed constant employment?
    If we had a similar system as the French with regards to long term renting it wouldnlt be a bad idea I think, works well for them, apparently.

    No, that's not what I'm suggesting.

    It's about reducing the risk, rather than blindly ignoring it.

    for example,

    an avg income couple earning a combined salary of 70k

    if we take it that at some point (because of kids, possible drop in wages, one losing thier job etc)

    to _reduce_ the risk, you only use the purchasing power of 1 wage.

    stress test it against future interest hikes etc

    during the re-payment period you can use the second salary while it's present to over pay the monthly repayments reducing the over capital and interest paid.

    If one loses their job or leaves to have kids, you can comfortably afford to re-pay on one.

    the answer people will come back with is

    "what could you buy on 35k"

    and that's a very valid point. if this is the case, you can't afford to buy comfortably right now so you rent and save.

    no one forces anyone to buy.

    many countries people rent all their lives.

    it's a privilege not a right


  • Options
    #65
    Rantan
    Registered Users Posts: 612 ✭✭✭Rantan


    ntlbell wrote: »
    sounds like she might be given you some advice there that you don't seem to want to take.

    someone who's clever enough will and get that job.

    mull it over. the answer is in your post.


    its got nothing to do with clever enough, but thanks for the insult, you seem to throw them about easily.

    I have lots of experience in one specific area, I have been forced to apply for lower positions in industries I have no experience. I am finding employers would rather take on someone with less experience but from within that industry rather than someone with lots of experience in a different industry, makes sense. I take advice readily from people who know what they are talking about.


  • Options
    #66
    ntlbell
    Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    Rantan wrote: »
    its got nothing to do with clever enough, but thanks for the insult, you seem to throw them about easily.

    I have lots of experience in one specific area, I have been forced to apply for lower positions in industries I have no experience. I am finding employers would rather take on someone with less experience but from within that industry rather than someone with lots of experience in a different industry, makes sense. I take advice readily from people who know what they are talking about.

    It may have came across as if I was trying to insult you, but no insult was intended.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Bandit12
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,442 ✭✭✭Bandit12


    cm2000 wrote: »
    Our social welfare payment of 204 euro needs to be cut as it is too close to the minimum wage and stops people working for minimum wage. Here are some stats.

    If I work a 35 hour week at minimum wage, I will earn a whopping €302.75 per week.
    If I stay at home and choose not to I will earn €204 per week.
    If I need to get one train to work and one train home that would be €4.60 a day, €23 a week.
    Now say I need to get a very moderately priced lunch while at work, say €5 a day, €25 a week.
    Therefore, my 35 hour week will in essence get me €50.75 more than if I choose not to.
    This is wrong yes?
    204 euro a week :eek: Sure that's feck all.


Advertisement