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 official AH budget discussion thread (Rules/useful links in first post)

Options
1…1314161819

Comments

  • Options
    #452
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Puddleduck wrote: »
    Seriously. Stop. You quoted me and missed my point entirely. Pointing the fingers accomplishes nothing other than arguing pointlessly while the country goes down the toilet. We have to pay tax, cuts have to be made. Thats the long and the short of it. They should be made all across the board. End of.

    I didn't miss your point, a tax instead of a PS pay cut is extremely unfair. But we're not allowed talk about it in this thread.


  • Options
    #453
    jumpguy
    Registered Users Posts: 7,962 ✭✭✭jumpguy


    RoyalMarineComm wrote: »
    what are you talking about?

    i have a medical card. if im sick, i ring my GP. they usually make an appointment for the day after or if an emergency, the same day.
    when the doctor gives me a prescription, i walk across the road to the chemist, and hand it in. i wait 5 mins, and then im handed my medicine.

    it costs me personally nothing.
    how is that a ****ty system?

    the only thing thats going to change is i hand in a .50c coin.
    im poor, and its not going to affect me one bit.
    my grandparents both have medical card's. they are in their 80's.
    The medical card system works grand when it comes to GPs and things, but sure how could that go wrong? I'm referring to the hospital care in this country which I know from the experience of a relative is disgraceful as it is. Also, why is it only medical card users that pay the charge? What about private customers? It's the principles that annoy me.


  • Options
    #454
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    RobbieTheRobber wrote: »
    You did say that should happen, I quoted it, but thats semantics!

    What I said: "Since redundancies are off the table, either because they need everyone or because the unions won't allow it, for the public sector to truly be hit as hard as the private sector there'd probably have to be pay cuts in the region of 50% to 60%"

    "There'd" is a contraction of "there would", ie I was speaking in the condition tense. There's a difference between would and should.


  • Options
    #455
    Degsy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,397 ✭✭✭✭Degsy


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    I love when public sector people say that we should all unite against the government and stop fighting with each other. I always wonder if they intend to get the government to force my employer to give me back the pay cut I took or are we just standing tall together to prevent their pay cut by increasing my tax


    Listen pall..my wages are down by 9% in the last year plus another 7% with this new budget..close on 20% in a year.
    How much of paycut are we supposed to take while you keep spouting your drivel?

    I reccomend you STFU.


  • Options
    #456
    phasers
    Registered Users Posts: 18,159 ✭✭✭✭phasers


    ouch!

    Although I only lose like 75 euro from my grant, as long as I cut out the caviar and solid gold teeth I'll be grand


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #457
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Degsy wrote: »
    Listen pall..my wages are down by 9% in the last year plus another 7% with this new budget..close on 20% in a year.
    How much of paycut are we supposed to take while you keep spouting your drivel?

    I reccomend you STFU.

    You should take pay cuts until the government can afford to pay your wages without bankrupting the country, just like any employer the government can only pay what it can afford. Fairness doesn't really come into it.

    And if you don't like it, take your chances in the private sector


  • Options
    #458
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Degsy wrote: »
    Listen pall..my wages are down by 9% in the last year plus another 7% with this new budget..close on 20% in a year.
    How much of paycut are we supposed to take while you keep spouting your drivel?

    I reccomend you STFU.

    Well, if we can't sack anyone, which we can't, then it would have to be 50-60% :eek:


  • Options
    #459
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    What I said: "Since redundancies are off the table, either because they need everyone or because the unions won't allow it, for the public sector to truly be hit as hard as the private sector there'd probably have to be pay cuts in the region of 50% to 60%"

    "There'd" is a contraction of "there would", ie I was speaking in the condition tense. There's a difference between would and should.
    Degsy wrote: »
    Listen pall..my wages are down by 9% in the last year plus another 7% with this new budget..close on 20% in a year.
    How much of paycut are we supposed to take while you keep spouting your drivel?

    I reccomend you STFU.
    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    You should take pay cuts until the government can afford to pay your wages without bankrupting the country. Fairness doesn't really come into it.

    And if you don't like it, take your chances in the private sector

    The pair of you can knock it off.


  • Options
    #460
    RobbieTheRobber
    Registered Users Posts: 6,825 ✭✭✭RobbieTheRobber


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    What I said: "Since redundancies are off the table, either because they need everyone or because the unions won't allow it, for the public sector to truly be hit as hard as the private sector there'd probably have to be pay cuts in the region of 50% to 60%"

    "There'd" is a contraction of "there would", ie I was speaking in the condition tense. There's a difference between would and should.


    So that condition being if your opinion mattered so if you had been leader then there would be or should be such a cut.

    So your still saying there should be (in your opinion) a cut of .......( see previous post for )


  • Options
    #461
    RoyalMarine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,824 ✭✭✭RoyalMarine


    jumpguy wrote: »
    The medical card system works grand when it comes to GPs and things, but sure how could that go wrong? I'm referring to the hospital care in this country which I know from the experience of a relative is disgraceful as it is. Also, why is it only medical card users that pay the charge? What about private customers? It's the principles that annoy me.

    hold on there, i dont see how hospital treatment has anything to do with a medical card?
    my gran has alzheimer's and had 6 major strokes over the last 8 months, she was admitted to hospital almost 11 times in the last year. Not once was there a problem with anything.

    secondly, several close friends of mine have been to hospital for various reason's and they have never made a complaint about being or NOT being a medical card holder. their treatment was all the same.

    a few weeks ago, i dropped my laptop on my foot while drunk, and my friend brought me to hospital. i gave my medical card number to the reception staff, and within 30mins i was on the xray table.
    as soon as i got the results, they gave me some pain killer's some advice on how to walk on my foot over the next 2 weeks, and even gave me contact information for a physio.
    this was at 3am. there were several drunk and disorderly people there that night, but the staff were excellent.

    so having a medical card and going to the hospital has absoloute nothing to do with each other. your still treated the same as a paying customer.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #462
    pikachucheeks
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,488 ✭✭✭pikachucheeks


    Degsy wrote: »
    I reccomend you STFU.

    Don't let to get to you - it's not worth it. There's going to be difference of opinion in any debate!

    Just know that most people can sympathise, or indeed empathise with your situation.
    It's a hell of a tough time for a lot of people :(


  • Options
    #463
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    RobbieTheRobber wrote: »
    So that condition being if your opinion mattered so if you had been leader then there would be or should be such a cut.

    So your still saying there should be (in your opinion) a cut of .......( see previous post for )

    If that's what you want to think but that's very clearly not what I said. I said for it to be equal there would..., I did not say it should be equal . But we can't continue this conversation here


  • Options
    #464
    RobbieTheRobber
    Registered Users Posts: 6,825 ✭✭✭RobbieTheRobber


    pikachucheeks wrote: »
    Don't let to get to you - it's not worth it. There's going to be difference of opinion in any debate!

    Just know that most people can sympathise, or indeed empathise with your situation.
    It's a hell of a tough time for a lot of people :(

    Well done poster a little bit of empathy can be a great thing.

    As oppossed to percieving people as part of some larger organisation or group you have shown the ability to consider people as individuals.


  • Options
    #465
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    You should take pay cuts until the government can afford to pay your wages without bankrupting the country. Fairness doesn't really come into it.

    And if you don't like it, take your chances in the private sector

    The very reason I and many others didn't "take our chances with the private sector" was because of job security, better pension etc. Now thats been taken away from us.


  • Options
    #466
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The very reason I and many others didn't "take our chances with the private sector" was because of job security, better pension etc. Now thats been taken away from us.

    http://jobs.ie/


  • Options
    #467
    Sam Vimes
    Registered Users Posts: 21,611 ✭✭✭✭Sam Vimes


    I really have to stop now. There's no point responding to one of my PS related posts because I won't be responding to it from........now


  • Options
    #468
    Johnnnybravo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,115 ✭✭✭Johnnnybravo


    Degsy wrote: »
    Listen pall..my wages are down by 9% in the last year plus another 7% with this new budget..close on 20% in a year.
    How much of paycut are we supposed to take while you keep spouting your drivel?

    I reccomend you STFU.



    Ive seen you post a lot of drivel in the past.

    Infact most of it is derogatory to people who were genuinely let go from jobs and are now on welfare. I for one am personally absolutely ecstatic that people like you are taking cuts and the only thing that could make me happier is if you ended up having to sign on.

    Many people in this country have taken a 100% cut so its only fair that people like you in steady jobs should take them too.


  • Options
    #469
    nouveau_4.0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 162 ✭✭nouveau_4.0


    RobbieTheRobber wrote: »
    Dont employers normally try to negotiate with their worker first and resort to cutting pay last?

    Perhaps public servants would have liked that consideration from their government/Employer before they anounced to the general public several months ago that they were slashing pay.
    LOL what world are you living in. In private sector there's aren't negotiations with the employee's!!

    And the government met the unions, just couldn't agree on a pay deal. So in essence they did negotiate with (representatives of) their workers first and resort to cutting pay last?


  • Options
    #470
    RoyalMarine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,824 ✭✭✭RoyalMarine


    on a lighter note, anyone else this this guy sitting beside richard bruton looks like an older slightly fatter version of mathew perry?

    0002d29910dr.jpg


  • Options
    #471
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    Sam Vimes wrote: »
    http://jobs.ie/

    Banned.

    You had already been warned.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #472
    Puddleduck
    Registered Users Posts: 1,183 ✭✭✭Puddleduck


    I love that they all get serious, point the finger and call for peoples heads when its someone else in power...


  • Options
    #473
    Blazer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,434 ✭✭✭✭Blazer


    RoyalMarineComm wrote: »
    on a lighter note, anyone else this this guy sitting beside richard bruton looks like an older slightly fatter version of mathew perry?

    0002d29910dr.jpg

    could the public sector...BE...any more píssed off :D


  • Options
    #474
    pikachucheeks
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,488 ✭✭✭pikachucheeks


    Berkut wrote: »
    could the public sector...BE...any more píssed off :D

    Haha excellent :)

    You know, I think the weekend can't come soon enough, given today's budget. Think there's a lot of people needing a few pints!

    Should be interesting to read tomorrow's papers...


  • Options
    #475
    Degsy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,397 ✭✭✭✭Degsy


    pikachucheeks wrote: »
    Haha excellent :)

    You know, I think the weekend can't come soon enough, given today's budget. Think there's a lot of people needing a few pints!

    Wanna meet me after work??;)


  • Options
    #476
    Plug
    Registered Users Posts: 9,248 ✭✭✭Plug


    What happens for existing people on jobseekers benefit, not new applicants.
    I know new applicants are fcuked but what about existing people on it? cheers.


  • Options
    #477
    nouveau_4.0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 162 ✭✭nouveau_4.0


    Degsy wrote: »
    Listen pall..my wages are down by 9% in the last year plus another 7% with this new budget..close on 20% in a year.
    How much of paycut are we supposed to take while you keep spouting your drivel?

    I reccomend you STFU.
    I envy you. For a 7 % cut in wages, you'd have to have been on over €80,000.

    If you are suck it up, you can well afford it!!


  • Options
    #478
    4zn76tysfajdxp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,944 ✭✭✭✭4zn76tysfajdxp


    Johnnnybravo wrote: »
    Ive seen you post a lot of drivel in the past.

    Infact most of it is derogatory to people who were genuinely let go from jobs and are now on welfare. I for one am personally absolutely ecstatic that people like you are taking cuts and the only thing that could make me happier is if you ended up having to sign on.

    Many people in this country have taken a 100% cut so its only fair that people like you in steady jobs should take them too.

    Banned.

    Hey, everyone? Remember this?:
    dr.bollocko wrote: »
    1. No negative generalisation about public or private service. This is very important to note as both public and private service are regular posters on boards and we don't want any insults.

    Do keep it in mind.


    Degsy wrote: »
    Wanna meet me after work??;)

    Take it to PM, Degsy.


  • Options
    #479
    Plug
    Registered Users Posts: 9,248 ✭✭✭Plug


    Plug wrote: »
    What happens for existing people on jobseekers benefit, not new applicants.
    I know new applicants are fcuked but what about existing people on it? cheers.
    anyone, dust?


  • Options
    #480
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Lennihan is live on RTE1 News now ..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #481
    Typhoon.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 986 ✭✭✭Typhoon.


    Social welfare cuts for younger people... is that not ageism?


Advertisement