Is Ireland ageist?

meoklmrk91

I am sick to the teeth of young people in this country who are just trying to get on in life paying out the nose for everything. Getting your first car and learning to drive is a rite of passage [and a necessity for a lot of people] and now new ''life saving laws'' have been put in place which say that drivers must have a mandatory 20 driving lessons, according to TV3 news this is about E800 worth, although I don't know where they got E35 from because I have never seen any cheaper than E40. This is all on top of tax and insurance and that is assuming that you even had any help buying a car from your parents.

These laws totally miss the point in my opinion, because those who race/drive dangerously are just going either stay on provisionals or drive without them, they don't have any regard for human life never mind the law. And the rest of us who just want to learn to drive, stay within the law and be productive members of society will be the ones that end up paying while the death toll on our countries roads stays pretty much the same. What a load of crap.

amacachi

They haven't already passed that have they? Was hoping to get my licence before they got it through, save some cash in the longterm.

Driving isn't a right, it's a privilege, and it's about time there was some overhaul of the qualification system, though more continuous testing/evaluating would be my choice. It's not ageist to test people before they're allowed drive.

meoklmrk91

amacachi wrote: »

They haven't already passed that have they? Was hoping to get my licence before they got it through, save some cash in the longterm.

Driving isn't a right, it's a privilege, and it's about time there was some overhaul of the qualification system, though more continuous testing/evaluating would be my choice. It's not ageist to test people before they're allowed drive.

It isn't the testing part I'm bothered by, it's the ridiculous 20 lessons, if you can pass a driving test on less then shouldn't you be a allowed to?

Blink182rock

if there all into bringing in this in the middle of a recession where half the people around this age are in college or school (well not right now) and can't even get a job, being ripped of with ridiculous insurance and paying tax for roads that half the time aren't even drivable they should be paying us 800euro to do the tests not us paying for 20 driving license that we don't even need!!

If they reduced it to a few driving lessons fair enough , but 20 at 40euro a pop ... come on your taking the piss surely ?

Jako8

Insurance might go down as a result of more rigorous testing.

amacachi

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

It isn't the testing part I'm bothered by, it's the ridiculous 20 lessons, if you can pass a driving test on less then shouldn't you be a allowed to?

I don't like the idea of the 20 lessons either, the test is stupidly easy already for what it gives someone the right to do.
I still don't see how it's ageist though.

highlydebased

I'm damn glad I got lessons and did the test when I did!

The whole "young male drivers are bad drivers" gets me.

meoklmrk91

amacachi wrote: »

I don't like the idea of the 20 lessons either, the test is stupidly easy already for what it gives someone the right to do.
I still don't see how it's ageist though.

Because it is mostly young people who will be doing said test and having to get the 20 lessons.

KnifeWRENCH

20 lessons at €700-800 is a bit over the top but I wouldn't call it ageist.

Although I do think that the RSA tends to over-sensationalise the extent to which young people are responsible for road accidents.

What pisses me off more is that the RSA is unashamedly sexist - "He drives, she dies" must be one of the most obnoxious and enraging ad campaigns ever. :mad:

meoklmrk91

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

20 lessons at €700-800 is a bit over the top but I wouldn't call it ageist.

Although I do think that the RSA tends to over-sensationalise the extent to which young people are responsible for road accidents.

What pisses me off more is that the RSA is unashamedly sexist - "He drives, she dies" must be one of the most obnoxious and enraging ad campaigns ever. :mad:

As a girl I 100% agree I think the whole thing has negative connotations for both sexes, but obviously far more for men. I also think that it proves how out of touch the RSA are with the things that are killing people on Irish roads.

storm2811

I'll be finished college before I can affors all those driving lessons ffs!:(

"He drives she dies"...wtf is this?:eek:

Ginja Ninja

Yes,Ireland is very Ageist[sp?]

And rightly so,I know I'm going to sound like an angry old man.But when it comes down to it;
Who has the highest road fatality rate? The 18-25 age bracket
Who has the highest rate of suicides?18-25
Who has the lowest employment rate? 18-25
Who has the lowest qualifications per capita? 18-25
Who has never lived through a recessionary time period?18-25

I don't like it,but the simple facts are we're the generation that has to do the hard work to fix this sh*storm and we also have the added bonus of never knowing financial hardship [well most of us anyway].

E.G: almost everyone in this thread has assumed they have the right to a car,you don't folks that's the reality.It's a privilege and be glad it's one most people can afford,I know working people who can't afford to run a car because of some bad choices they made in life.

I'm not saying some of the crap coming our way is right,the less the better.But the tough stuff always comes down to the young ones,who else is better suited to it?

cheesefiend

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

What pisses me off more is that the RSA is unashamedly sexist - "He drives, she dies" must be one of the most obnoxious and enraging ad campaigns ever. :mad:

Agree 100% that's incredibly idiotic. I think maybe what they're trying to get at is that the passengers are normally the fatalities. They just went about it in a stupid way.

meoklmrk91

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

Yes,Ireland is very Ageist[sp?]

And rightly so,I know I'm going to sound like an angry old man.But when it comes down to it;
Who has the highest road fatality rate? The 18-25 age bracket
Who has the highest rate of suicides?18-25
Who has the lowest employment rate? 18-25
Who has the lowest qualifications per capita? 18-25
Who has never lived through a recessionary time period?18-25

I don't like it,but the simple facts are we're the generation that has to do the hard work to fix this sh*storm and we also have the added bonus of never knowing financial hardship [well most of us anyway].

E.G: almost everyone in this thread has assumed they have the right to a car,you don't folks that's the reality.It's a privilege and be glad it's one most people can afford,I know working people who can't afford to run a car because of some bad choices they made in life.

I'm not saying some of the crap coming our way is right,the less the better.But the tough stuff always comes down to the young ones,who else is better suited to it?

So should we just take everything lying down, I know that we are the ones who end up paying for the economic downturn but why this as well. Seriously I know that people are saying that having a car is a privilege not a right, but if I want to go to college I will have to live at home, public transport is not only crap but really expensive, and I know that there are literally thousands out there in the same boat.

phlegms

My lessons cost €25, the benefits of actually looking around for the best prices I guess..

Seloth

Whats worse is for those of us who live in the countryside!

Theres no public transportation for us out here...the only thing is taxis and they cost a bomb,and now so will these lessons.

challengemaster

meoklmrk91 wrote:

I am sick to the teeth of young people in this country who are just trying to get on in life paying out the nose for everything. Getting your first car and learning to drive is a rite of passage [and a necessity for a lot of people] and now new ''life saving laws'' have been put in place which say that drivers must have a mandatory 20 driving lessons, according to TV3 news this is about E800 worth, although I don't know where they got E35 from because I have never seen any cheaper than E40. This is all on top of tax and insurance and that is assuming that you even had any help buying a car from your parents.

These laws totally miss the point in my opinion, because those who race/drive dangerously are just going either stay on provisionals or drive without them, they don't have any regard for human life never mind the law. And the rest of us who just want to learn to drive, stay within the law and be productive members of society will be the ones that end up paying while the death toll on our countries roads stays pretty much the same. What a load of crap.

To you, I suggest you read this

Ginja Ninja wrote: »

And rightly so,I know I'm going to sound like an angry old man.But when it comes down to it;

No, not rightly so. Especially not when the only people it seems fair to discriminate against on this basis are YOUNG WHITE MALES.

When was the last time you saw/heard of someones insurance going up because they were an old black female. There'd be fecking uproar.

Who has the highest road fatality rate? The 18-25 age bracket

Actually, no.

Here's figures released by the RSA in 2008 for road fatalities.

Age . . . . . Male . . . . Female

18-24 . . . . 498 . . . . . 396
25-34 . . . .490 . . . . . 472
35-44 . . . .327 . . . . . 287
45-54 . . . .198 . . . . . 217

For the most part there, it looks like 18-24 males are the worst off, however, if you take into account there's more male drivers than female on Irish roads (I've been told 36% more) then these are the corrected statistics

Age . . . . . Male . . . . Female

18-24 . . . . 498 . . . . . 396 ->538
25-34 . . . .490 . . . . . 472->641
35-44 . . . .327 . . . . . 287 ->390
45-54 . . . .198 . . . . . 217 ->295

So actually, Males are safer drivers than female ones on an equal amount of male:female drivers on the road, and between 18-34 is actually the highest road fatality grouping, with the 18-24 slightly safer than 25-34.

So, I think you might be somewhat wrong on that one.

You might also notice from the above, "he drives, she dies" is a load of bull as well.

Who has the lowest employment rate? 18-25
Who has the lowest qualifications per capita? 18-25

Jeez, I wonder why that is.... Wouldn't by any chance have to do with the fact that 18-25 would be the ages where people would be in 3rd level education... therefore anyone over that age would have a qualification, and with the majority of jobs requiring a qualification... they have a greater chance of having a job?

Seriously, think about it logically for a second. It makes sense, and rightly so, it's also a useless fact.

Who has never lived through a recessionary time period?18-25

I don't really see the relavence here... again, another pointless fact. It's really saying, anyone who's 18-25, is 18-25.

Is Ireland ageist? Yes
Does it have any real basis for this? No

cheesefiend

challengemaster wrote: »

No, not rightly so. Especially not when the only people it seems fair to discriminate against on this basis are YOUNG WHITE MALES.

When was the last time you saw/heard of someones insurance going up because they were an old black female. There'd be fecking uproar.
Actually, no.

Don't really get why race came into this?

challengemaster

cheesefiend wrote: »

Don't really get why race came into this?

Sorry, maybe I didn't make that clear. I was making the point that even if you came up with some statistic saying black people are more inclined to die in car crashes than white people, there would be absolute uproar. Can you imagine "Blacks drive, whites die" ? It seems acceptable to discriminate against someone, racially, as long as they're white...

In much the same way, it seems more generally acceptable to discriminate on grounds of gender against men, or on ageist grounds against younger people.

I suppose I coupled three things together in that one, gender, age, race.

storm2811

challengemaster wrote: »

No, not rightly so. Especially not when the only people it seems fair to discriminate against on this basis are YOUNG WHITE MALES.

Is insurance lower for young black males?
I'm not making a dig at you,just curious.

amacachi

Seloth wrote: »

Whats worse is for those of us who live in the countryside!

Theres no public transportation for us out here...the only thing is taxis and they cost a bomb,and now so will these lessons.

Supply and Demand tbh. Any services provided to people outside urban areas are generally subsidised by those in urban areas. Electricity, phones, water & waste (if you're on the main networks) etc. Is that fair? Not trying to have a dig or anything, just pointing out that everything has to be paid for, and in this country usually by someone else.

Pygmalion

challengemaster wrote: »

Jeez, I wonder why that is.... Wouldn't by any chance have to do with the fact that 18-25 would be the ages where people would be in 3rd level education... therefore anyone over that age would have a qualification, and with the majority of jobs requiring a qualification... they have a greater chance of having a job?

Seriously, think about it logically for a second. It makes sense, and rightly so, it's also a useless fact.

I recall hearing that people in full time education aren't counted in the employment statistics in this country for that reason, might be wrong though.

johnmcdnl

amacachi wrote: »

Supply and Demand tbh. Any services provided to people outside urban areas are generally subsidised by those in urban areas. Electricity, phones, water & waste (if you're on the main networks) etc. Is that fair? Not trying to have a dig or anything, just pointing out that everything has to be paid for, and in this country usually by someone else.

This is grand for you Dubs to say... but when you go outside of the 50 mile radius of Dublin Ireland is completely different... there's a huge number of people living in rural areas and have always lived in the countryside.. A car is required for anyone in the countryside because even to do the main weekely shopping generally requires us having to go to the large town in the region...

It's completely unfair to ask people to cough up 800 euro for driving lessons when a large number of culchies have been learning to drive in fields and lanes since we were 10 years old... I've not taken any lessons yet but I'd be fairly confident that I have a good chance to pass the test on my first go as long as I hold my head... If I can pass my test without lessons I can't see why I'd need to cough up 800 euro for lessons..

800 euros for lessons isn't going to stop dangerous drivers.. these dangerous drivers already know how to drive and some old lad in a car for 40 minutes a week isn't going to stop their bad driving habits... maybe 20 classes highlighting what happens in a bad accident would be a better deterrent or raise the insurance for anyone caught doing dangerous driving by 10x or something like that would be a far better deterrent and would also make it much fairer on the 80-90% of young men that actually want to learn to drive and follow the rules of the road...

those lads on rte news the other night would still have drove at those speeds with their feet out the windows even if they had gotten 20 lessons...

20 lessons are grand for ye dubs who've never sat in a car seat til your 17-18-19 years old... for the rest of us who've grown up knowing how to drive cars and tractors.. it's just extra cost and an attempt to make it even harder for young people who live in the countryside...

it won't save lives imo... just make more money for the insurance companies as more young people will have to stay on the provisional for longer...

amacachi

johnmcdnl wrote: »

This is grand for you Dubs to say... but when you go outside of the 50 mile radius of Dublin Ireland is completely different... there's a huge number of people living in rural areas and have always lived in the countryside.. A car is required for anyone in the countryside because even to do the main weekely shopping generally requires us having to go to the large town in the region...

It's completely unfair to ask people to cough up 800 euro for driving lessons when a large number of culchies have been learning to drive in fields and lanes since we were 10 years old... I've not taken any lessons yet but I'd be fairly confident that I have a good chance to pass the test on my first go as long as I hold my head... If I can pass my test without lessons I can't see why I'd need to cough up 800 euro for lessons..

800 euros for lessons isn't going to stop dangerous drivers.. these dangerous drivers already know how to drive and some old lad in a car for 40 minutes a week isn't going to stop their bad driving habits... maybe 20 classes highlighting what happens in a bad accident would be a better deterrent or raise the insurance for anyone caught doing dangerous driving by 10x or something like that would be a far better deterrent and would also make it much fairer on the 80-90% of young men that actually want to learn to drive and follow the rules of the road...

those lads on rte news the other night would still have drove at those speeds with their feet out the windows even if they had gotten 20 lessons...

20 lessons are grand for ye dubs who've never sat in a car seat til your 17-18-19 years old... for the rest of us who've grown up knowing how to drive cars and tractors.. it's just extra cost and an attempt to make it even harder for young people who live in the countryside...

it won't save lives imo... just make more money for the insurance companies as more young people will have to stay on the provisional for longer...

Wow, did you read the bit of my post where I said that I don't like the minimum number of lessons measure?

johnmcdnl

amacachi wrote: »

Wow, did you read the bit of my post where I said that I don't like the minimum number of lessons measure?

probably shouldn't have quoted you but from a few city and townies I've been discussing this with they've come up with that 20 lessons is good to learn how to drive so my point stands for those.. sorry about misreading your post...

challengemaster

How has this gone from Ageism to Dubs vs Non-Dubs....completely irrelavent.

If you live in the country, city, or 500 feet under the earths surface in some mario-esque world and are called luigi, driving is not a right, no matter what you think.

Also, I live outside dublin - so technically I fall into the "culchie" bracket, right? (such a stupid word...) I've never driven a tractor, and I've never learned to drive in a field. Seriously, tar everyone with the same brush? no better than the RSA campaign.

As I've already said numerous times, €800 is nothing compared to the cost in other countries. And, if anything, 20 compulsory lessons might actually lower insurance premiums...

Also, where exactly is this specifically saying "this only applies to anyone under X age" ? People don't only learn to drive when they're 17-20.

What you should take from this post: You are not special. You do not have a right to drive. You are in the same boat as everyone else. Now grow up, and deal with it.

SarahBeep!

Neon-Circles wrote: »

The whole "young male drivers are bad drivers" gets me.

I know plenty of young lads who drive just as safely as my dad who's been at it for years!!

KnifeWRENCH wrote: »

What pisses me off more is that the RSA is unashamedly sexist - "He drives, she dies" must be one of the most obnoxious and enraging ad campaigns ever. :mad:

However, young males are more likely to drive erratically! I know it sounds like I'm generalising but when was the last time you heard of the young adult behind the wheel killing X amount of people being a female?

amacachi

SarahBeep! wrote: »

However, young males are more likely to drive erratically! I know it sounds like I'm generalising but when was the last time you heard of the young adult behind the wheel killing X amount of people being a female?

That's not an proper argument.

Peppapig

What? It's not a minimum of 20! It's however many lessons the instructor feels you are capable of taking the test!

Insect Overlord

amacachi wrote: »

That's not an proper argument.

Develop your point and make a proper argument so :rolleyes:

SarahBeep!

amacachi wrote: »

That's not an proper argument.

Male drivers are more willing to take a chance be it on the roads or life in general. It's in their nature (Yes I know not everyone is like this but I've to study this rubbish and it's what I'm being taught). I see it from being in the car with an 18 year old boy every day. A lot of teenage boys think they're invincible, heck, at times so do I but I'd never ever take a chance on the roads? Do you know how long it takes to distract you? A split second! Do you know how long it takes a child or an animal to run into the road? A split second! Do you know how long it takes the sight of an obstruction to go to your brain to send a message to your foot to hit the brakes? Too long, when a life is concerned.

Never have I ever had to turn around to a female driver and say WTF are you doing?? I have to say it at least once a week to male drivers of all ages.
Women don't suffer from this 'alpha male' complex. And thank god for it.