Was the Government right to cut Social Welfare?

nesf

As above.

Daithinski

This poll is nearly guaranteed to start a row!

ntlbell

yes, should have been a much bigger cut

and it should be removed if you refuse a job.

pensions should be reduced also.

Rev. BlueJeans

Yes they were right.

They should couple any future cuts (which should not be across the board-that's too politically easy an option) with reform, to ensure that deserving people get the help training, and support they need.

Additionally, funds should be earmarked to combat fraud in a meaningful way, whether through dual PPS numbers, or bozos who think it's a good idea to work on the side.

Long term unemployed (as opposed to the people who lost their jobs in the last two years) should be scrutinized with a fine tooth comb.

Genuine disabled persons should receive all assistance possible.

Any savings achieved from the above, together with a percentile of the proceeds from this mooted universal deduction, should be invested in the provision of universal child care, even on a phased basis.

The fact that the pensioners were left alone had a lot more to do with political fallout than it had to do with any sense of fairness. They should not have been exempted. One woman on the radio today bemoaned the fact that she had to spend more on coal, while receiving no increase in the pension. Burn something else ffs.

cson

Yes and no.

Whilst it's too big for most cases in my opinion, it should be linked to what you earn - i.e. some people will contribute more to PRSI in their lifetime than they will ever take out. An across the boards Social Welfare is possibly not the ideal position.

Having said that, I'm firmly of the opinion that it is too much. I've mentioned this quite a few times but if you take a comparison with our nearest neighbour the UK, it makes for ugly reading. A lot of the benefits and allowances are similar to here but the disparity in Welfare payments is mind boggling. It's €204 here versus €70 there. Thats a difference of 183%. Now allowing for VAT and wage differences along with differing costs of living etc, you cannot creditably claim that its 183% more expensive to live in the Republic.

It has been mentioned in other threads too about career dolers, and a Portuguese national advocated the system there which I thought was very interesting; basically if you can't get a job within 12 months they look for one for you. If you turn down 3 offers of jobs they get for you without reason then your welfare is cut - gone. That'd go a long way to solving the problem of career dolers imo.

efb

JSB cut by rate of inflation
JSA SLASHED for all
Widows/Carers/Long Term Disabilty/Blind no cuts

Rev. BlueJeans

Daithinski wrote: »

This poll is nearly guaranteed to start a row!

Probably. Going by this forum, the country seems full of unskilled labourers who think they were and are worth seven hundred for a flat week, and self styled neuro-surgeons who think that most work is beneath them.

jimmycrackcorm

SW needs reform to make it more effective for people to get back to work.

e.g. anyone who was unemployed say 2005 onwards when we had effectively full employment should have been given graduated cuts because they obviously were not interested in working.

Long term unemployed should get the carrot and stick - cuts in SW but more opportunities to get training and work experience.

ntlbell

efb wrote: »

JSB cut by rate of inflation
JSA SLASHED for all
Widows/Carers/Long Term Disabilty/Blind no cuts

Just out of curiosity

why not the widows?

cson

Rev. BlueJeans wrote: »

Probably. Going by this forum, the country seems full of unskilled labourers who think they were and are worth seven hundred for a flat week, and self styled neuro-surgeons who think that most work is beneath them.

I think a lot people need to realise that welfare is a means to allow you to survive and get by and its not a means of maintaining any previous standard of living one may have become accustomed to.

CamperMan

efb wrote: »

JSB cut by rate of inflation
JSA SLASHED for all
Widows/Carers/Long Term Disabilty/Blind no cuts

these should be slashed!!

The people on JSA or JSB HAVE to spend extra money in trying to find a job, bus tickets, taxis, having CV's prepared, maybe new clothes for the interview, Widows/Carers/Long Term Disabilty/Blind have no such expenses.

efb

They are the weak and vunerable, we have a duty of care to them, long term unemployed...not so much

nesf

efb wrote: »

JSB cut by rate of inflation
JSA SLASHED for all
Widows/Carers/Long Term Disabilty/Blind no cuts

Widows, Carers, Disability and Blind pensions were cut. People have been complaining about this all day.

ntlbell

nesf wrote: »

Widows, Carers, Disability and Blind pensions were cut. People have been complaining about this all day.

i think he's suggesting what _should_ have happened

efb

It is what I would have done. Those cuts (and lack thereof for JSA) is the only issue I have with the budget

ntlbell

efb wrote: »

They are the weak and vunerable, we have a duty of care to them, long term unemployed...not so much

I'm sort of indifferent to these cuts.

calling a blind person weak and vunreable is pretty insulting IMO.

I would prefer to see money go into better services for people in these situations than a few euro.

cson

My aunt is a widow and in full time employment and she gets the widow's benefit afaik. Now it is tough for her raising two young kids on her own but at the same time I'd say she'd admit she could survive without it. It helps a lot but it wouldn't be the breaking of her to see it cut or lost.

There is a strong argument for a lot of these benefits to be means tested.

cson

ntlbell wrote: »

I'm sort of indifferent to these cuts.

calling a blind person weak and vunreable is pretty insulting IMO.

I would prefer to see money go into better services for people in these situations than a few euro.

Definitely, I'd agree it'd be more preferable to see these benefits directed toward developing skills and coping with their disabilities than just handing money out to them.

gav240

should have cut the dole alot more

old boy

i know a school teacher who has the widows pension, also a farm.

CityCentreMan

I think that its very tough on sw recipients but that he did not have a choice.

halkar

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

SW needs reform to make it more effective for people to get back to work.

e.g. anyone who was unemployed say 2005 onwards when we had effectively full employment should have been given graduated cuts because they obviously were not interested in working.

Long term unemployed should get the carrot and stick - cuts in SW but more opportunities to get training and work experience.

+1
This should have been done when there were jobs out there. Instead they kept increasing it during boom years.

KC JONES

CamperMan wrote: »

Long Term Disabilty/ have no such expenses.

Rubbish

http://www.pwdi.ie/news_events/publications/budget_index1.htm
"It is estimated that a weekly payment of �40 is needed to meet the extra costs associated with a high level of disability, down to �10 for those with moderate disabilities. A cost of living payment for those with a disability should be set at a minimum level of �40 per week, means tested in a sensible way."

http://www.rehab.ie/press/article.aspx?id=590
"It is time to recognise the extra cost of living with a disability, and while savings must be made these should not disproportionately impact on people with disabilities.”

ejmaztec

old boy wrote: »

i know a school teacher who has the widows pension, also a farm.

And no doubt the farm makes a loss each year and she gets a tax refund to boot.

chocgirl

I think 4% was fair, anything more would have been a bridge too far! I do believe though that there should be a different, lower rate for the long term unemployed, there needs to be a bigger disincentive to long term unemployment!

KC JONES

old boy wrote: »

i know a school teacher who has the widows pension, also a farm.

I once heard of someone getting blind pension who could thread a needle! Honest, was some years ago

johngalway

Cutting VAT a little more and not touching dole would have been fairer.

Jessibelle

As someone recently unemployed and only in receipt of JSB, I don't like the fact its been cut but I do think it had to be done. If for no other reason other than I may be unemployed for awhile, and if I am, I'd like the funds to be there to help support me a little bit longer. I think it should have been an even cut across the boards though, cutting it radically for 24 year olds and under is grossly unfair, particularly if they have worked and contributed to society. I don't think saying you must accept the first job offered on JSA is workable, as some jobs will spread a ten hour week over 5 days, meaning that someone who must accept that, may be on markedly less money, and be unable to claim additional JSA to supplement their income. I do think that career welfarists though (and by that I mean those on JSA for, say 5 years plus with no training or nothing to show for it) should be exaimined in depth