Should we be making it harder to remain on the social welfare gravy train

later12

KidKeith89 wrote: »

If they've paid tax for the last few years and are expected to cough up billions of euros for the bankers' and politicians' idiocy, why shouldn't they be supported, for at least a while?

I'm not opposed to support at all, but it is worth bearing in mind that if the current levels of support were maintained over a decade, the social welfare bill would come to €200 billion. Meanwhile, the bank bailout, which is a capital cost as opposed to ongoing/ annual expense, is €70 billion. That's not even four years of social welfare spending, so lets gather some perspective.

pocketvenus

feicim wrote: »

And do you think somebody else (like dand's imaginary woman with a gaggle of kids) gets access to a different "better" system than you do?

On my god you are so so out of touch and I am not being nasty but you really need to do some in dept research on this. There is a fair % of people on the SW who get a better system as you so call it and do you know why because they are protected by the Gov, bleeeding hearts etc. Take some single mothers for example 3 or 4 kids they get the choice of house ( not just give one suitable for their needs but driven around by a Gov paid taxi so they can choose from a list of x amount - fact my friends dad is a taxi driver who 2 or 3 times a week does this), claiming single parents allowance and have the boyfriend living in with them, are given everything they want no means test or questions asked.
I could go on with other examples but we be here all day.

Its available to everybody who is entitled to it. If not you won't get it.

Tell me then how all I get is €188 a week and was refused a medical card even though I do not have any savings, which I had to use. Everything and Gov literature tells me I am entitled an yet I am not.
I know plenty of recently unemployed families in same position and are struggling to keep some level of VHI cover up as if they don't well they are in trouble. Gov are delaying and cutting down on medical cards being handed out as costs are rising and who sufffers - yet again genuine people.

If you are genuinely entitled to it, you don't have to lie or defraud, all you do is fill out the form and apply for it.

Appplying for it and actually receiving it are two very different things. Genuine people are being squeezed out and those who are defrauding the system are the ones getting the most out of it. FACT

pocketvenus

jc84 wrote: »

it amazes me that all this talk of social welfare reform happens now, when most of the people who are on it are genuinely out of work, but where was all this talk of reform 4 or 5 years ago when there were plenty jobs and 99% of the people on benefits were just milking the system, they need to cut the pension, i thought everyone needs to take a hit?

Exactly the Gov and the bleeding heart's have alot to answer for and now they are making genuine people suffer for their idiocy.

I mean what intelligent person when it times of huge growth and job opportunities not only lets quite a large number of people remain on the SW but then gives them increases. I mean WTF
These individuals should have been given a kick up the ass, told to get into the jobs or trained to then get into work.
What do the Irish do sweep the issue under the carpert, lets the culture of life long SW fester and hope it goes away.

Two scared chalices in Ireland Public Service and OAP.

KidKeith89

later10 wrote: »

I'm not opposed to support at all, but it is worth bearing in mind that if the current levels of support were maintained over a decade, the social welfare bill would come to €200 billion. Meanwhile, the bank bailout, which is a capital cost as opposed to ongoing/ annual expense, is €70 billion. That's not even four years of social welfare spending, so lets gather some perspective.

So I suppose paying out €70 billion for other people's mistakes is okay, but supporting those that have to pay that €70 billion isn't? Gotcha..

SupaNova

So I suppose paying out €70 billion for other people's mistakes is okay, but supporting those that have to pay that €70 billion isn't? Gotcha..

The people on welfare aren't paying the debt. Its the people currently working who are paying.

The bank bailout is a separate issue. We cannot spend more in services than we take in on tax.

pocketvenus

SupaNova wrote: »

The people on welfare aren't paying the debt. Its the people currently working who are paying.

The bank bailout is a separate issue. We cannot spend more in services than we take in on tax.

Everybody in the country is paying it be it in tax, lower payments which have already been implemented over past few years, through higher prices in the shops, insurance, etc.

Nobody in the country is exempt and when you think about it the genuine people on the SW are putting all of their cash back into this State.

I am not begrudging anyone anything but there are plenty of people still working who still buy off the net, take hols to Spain etc. You could loook at it in well there is money which could be spent in Irleand to boost economy and is not.


On the point of spending cuts

First to go child benefit for people who are above a certain income say €55,000 - €60,000 maybe and that is probably being generous.

OAP'S complaing about cuts to their children, grandchildren. They are helping the Gov in that sense by refusing to give anything up be it €10 a week, free travle, passports maybe cuts to allowances in phone etc.

I do not agree with this view the majority of people work hard for their € and are entitled to take a holiday but they shouln't be so closed minded as to say that people who worked all their lives contributed nothing to the State.

Again biggest issue FRAUD.

CPA - Tear it up and implement real reform and cuts.

Amateurish

Hi all, first post on Boards simply because i felt i had to. To put it into context for you I'm a mature student on a social failure payment at the moment after working twenty odd years and employing up to 3 people at times. Apologies in advance if I stray from the rules a little but it's my first day...
O/P You've a master's? Which you put yourself through 7 years of college to get? No you didnt ... I paid for the subsidised roads you travelled on. I paid for the subsidised buses you probably used. I paid for the subsidised lecturers who taught you and the gardai who protected you ..... I could go on and on couldn't I? don't bother cos I accept that society works better when we help each other. It's ok you dont owe me anything.
You know someone who's better off than you while in receipt of some payments? So why not give up work and go for those payments yourself? I'll bet it's because you like working and would feel completely demeaned to sign on even if its from central government money you have paid into over the years. I bet about 400K people feel exactly the same but you would like to put them onto an expenses type scheme and really **** into their coffee. People are entitled to dignity. If not then you owe me a lot of money.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

Imagine if you and your husband were allowed to save instead forced to pay taxes to fuel the obviously useless social welfare system for years.

And imagine if the government had never instated the ridiculous Child Benefit. No one else should pay for you to have a child. The hard working person without children is definitely one of the worst victims of the system.

The sad reality is that you and many others are going to be up **** creek as you say. All because they made plans on the basis of these ridiculous benefits being around for ever.

As for treats, were these social welfare benefits ever meant to be for treats? Instead of children paying €60 for Playstation or Xbox game, maybe they can make do with playing football with their friends. As for books and educational material, there is a ton free online. I am sure anyone who shops at gamestop has a computer and internet connection in their home also.

Firstly no one is "paying for me to have a child"
I have 2 children and was working in a good job when both were concieved and therefore I had never anticipated having to rely on social welfare payments to pay for things like school books or indeed household expenses

We made plans for our second child based not on the level of CB we recieve but rather on the income that I was earning
Going from a dual income household to a single income one is quite a drop

I agree that there is lots of educational material online but books?? For kids?? Not for free there isn't
Besides which there is nothing quite like having a physical book in front of you

It never ceases to amaze me that people feel that they have a right to dictate to an unemployed person how their social welfare payments should be spent

Obviously enough we have broadband at home and a computer (duh)
Maybe I should contact my ISP because someone on the net thinks broadband is a luxury that we can't afford :rolleyes:

SupaNova

Everybody in the country is paying it be it in tax, lower payments which have already been implemented over past few years, through higher prices in the shops, insurance, etc.

Everyone who works or will work over the next few years will pay. If you pay tax on stuff you buy while getting your sole source of income from other taxpayers you are not really paying the debt.

pocketvenus

angelfire9 wrote: »

Firstly no one is "paying for me to have a child"
I have 2 children and was working in a good job when both were concieved and therefore I had never anticipated having to rely on social welfare payments to pay for things like school books or indeed household expenses

We made plans for our second child based not on the level of CB we recieve but rather on the income that I was earning
Going from a dual income household to a single income one is quite a drop

I agree that there is lots of educational material online but books?? For kids?? Not for free there isn't
Besides which there is nothing quite like having a physical book in front of you

It never ceases to amaze me that people feel that they have a right to dictate to an unemployed person how their social welfare payments should be spent

Obviously enough we have broadband at home and a computer (duh)
Maybe I should contact my ISP because someone on the net thinks broadband is a luxury that we can't afford :rolleyes:

Angelfire9 why don't we go one step further and ensure we are tatooed with scrounger on our forheads and have us segerated in streets, shops etc.

Certain people here have what my friend refer to as a carriage atttitude. Like the wealthy years ago going along in their carriages looking down on everyone who is not in the same position as them. That how dare they expect food any decent standard of living don't we give them enough.

You will know no matter what you say people will hear what they want and nothing will change their mind but a one way ticket to redundancy.

SupaNova

Firstly no one is "paying for me to have a child"
I have 2 children and was working in a good job when both were concieved and therefore I had never anticipated having to rely on social welfare payments to pay for things like school books or indeed household expenses

We made plans for our second child based not on the level of CB we recieve but rather on the income that I was earning
Going from a dual income household to a single income one is quite a drop

You are obviously not one of the people i am talking about as regards planning a family. The idea of CB at its core is absolutely silly. Anyone who doesn't have children subsidizes anyone who does.

feicim

pocketvenus wrote: »

On my god you are so so out of touch and I am not being nasty but you really need to do some in dept research on this. There is a fair % of people on the SW who get a better system as you so call it and do you know why because they are protected by the Gov, bleeeding hearts etc. Take some single mothers for example 3 or 4 kids they get the choice of house ( not just give one suitable for their needs but driven around by a Gov paid taxi so they can choose from a list of x amount - fact my friends dad is a taxi driver who 2 or 3 times a week does this), claiming single parents allowance and have the boyfriend living in with them, are given everything they want no means test or questions asked.
I could go on with other examples but we be here all day.

So let me get this straight... you feel that you should have the same benefits as a single mother? Since you don't seem to understand why you can't have single parent benefits, I presume its because you are not a single parent.

pocketvenus wrote: »

Tell me then how all I get is €188 a week and was refused a medical card even though I do not have any savings, which I had to use. Everything and Gov literature tells me I am entitled an yet I am not.

I can only presume the reason you can't get these things is because you don't meet the criteria to be entitled to receive them. Is it possible you are making a mistake when reading the the government literature?

pocketvenus wrote: »

Appplying for it and actually receiving it are two very different things. Genuine people are being squeezed out and those who are defrauding the system are the ones getting the most out of it. FACT

Do you have any sources for any of your "facts"?

pocketvenus

SupaNova wrote: »

Everyone who works or will work over the next few years will pay. If you pay tax on stuff you buy while getting your sole source of income from other taxpayers you are not really paying the debt.

Well to taKe your attitude then then anyone who does not have children or have grown up children should not have to pay taxes for child benefit. Why should they.

Majority of people on the SW are getting back their own taxes actually the ones they have paid for years and years. They are entitled to it, they contributed to it and no one has the right to say they do not deserve it.

Those who never contributed to society need to the tackled not honest decent hardworking people who through no fault of their own find themselve unemployed.

Hope it never comes knocking on your door.

feicim

SupaNova wrote: »

You are obviously not one of the people i am talking about. The idea of CB at its core is absolutely silly. Anyone who doesn't have children subsidizes anyone who does.

Not really.

The cost of raising a child is a factor in peoples decision to have children. If people have less children = less future workers to pay your pension.

Google "legislate to procreate" and do a bit of reading on the pension crisis that awaits the western world before you write off something as silly.

later12

KidKeith89 wrote: »

So I suppose paying out €70 billion for other people's mistakes is okay, but supporting those that have to pay that €70 billion isn't? Gotcha..

No, you're deliberately mis-reading a very simple post.

I don't support the bank bailout of €70bn in its current form, but neither do I support the social welfare system in its current form, eclipsing, as it does, the bank bailout after just three and a half years by current standards.

€200bn in welfare would be completely unworkable over the coming decade - therefore it needs to fall. It needs to fall be re-examining where supports are given, and by how much, and also by rigorously encouraging people back into the work force and into upskilling.

SupaNova

It never ceases to amaze me that people feel that they have a right to dictate to an unemployed person how their social welfare payments should be spent

I'm not of the opinion that we should tell unemployed how they should spend their money. Just that they be given less money.

feicim

SupaNova wrote: »

I'm not of the opinion that we should tell unemployed how they should spend their money. Just that they be given less money.

The unemployed need a job. Not less money.

SupaNova

Not really.

The cost of raising a child is a factor in peoples decision to have children. If people have less children = less future workers to pay your pension.

Google "legislate to procreate" and do a bit of reading on the pension crisis that awaits the western world before you write off something as silly.

I knew that's where it had its roots. Thats why i don't agree with government pension ponzi schemes either.

pocketvenus

feicim wrote: »

So let me get this straight... you feel that you should have the same benefits as a single mother? Since you don't seem to understand why you can't have single parent benefits, I presume its because you are not a single parent.

No what I was making was a point. Listen ok, obviously SW will be based on a person circumstances quiet easy to understand, so no need to be so smart. The point myself and other posters are making is people can just waltz into the SW office never having done a day works in their lives and be entitled to more than the person who has worked all their lives. You take a working single mother ( recently unemployed) she gets basic against the one who can get everything she is & probably isn't just becasue she hasn't worked a day in her life. That is a better system for those who never contributed.

I can only presume the reason you can't get these things is because you don't meet the criteria to be entitled to receive them. Is it possible you are making a mistake when reading the the government literature?

Nope reading it all correctly, I do hold 2 honours degress and other qualifications and work experience I can easily work my way around Gov literature.
So you are telling me living on €188 a week does not entitle you to a medical card.

Do you have any sources for any of your "facts"?

Google is at your fingertips. There are plenty of newspaper articles outlining stories of fraud, the Gov own reports show there is massive fraud going on in the SW. They are even running a campaign encouraging people to alert cases of fraud to local offices.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

I'm not of the opinion that we should tell unemployed how they should spend their money. Just that they be given less money.

The ONLY payment I get from DSCFA is child benefit

And you want to take that as well???

Max Power1

angelfire9 wrote: »

Firstly no one is "paying for me to have a child"

Well what is CB then?

A payment that you only recieve when you have children

Seems to me that we are all paying people to have children. This practice should be stopped imo.

pocketvenus

Max Power1 wrote: »

Well what is CB then?

A payment that you only recieve when you have children

Seems to me that we are all paying people to have children. This practice should be stopped imo.

Nobody is paid to HAVE children. If that was the way then every women in the country of a child bearing age would be popping them out.

Child Benefit is there to help parents pay for the cost of having a child no matter what your financial circumstances are. Your parents got it, if you have children then you get it.

Stoppping CB alltogether is a very silly idea. Have it that if you earn a certain amount and above it you do not get any.
People under that threshold then receive CB.

angelfire9

Max Power1 wrote: »

Well what is CB then?

A payment that you only recieve when you have children

Seems to me that we are all paying people to have children. This practice should be stopped imo.

I am not being paid to have a child

I am recieving a payment to help me support the children i have!

There is a difference

The first would be illegal (In Ireland anyway):D

The second is assistance with child related expenses, given by the state as an acknowlegement that children are expensive but are essential for the future of the state! (my kids will help fund your pension)

SupaNova

The ONLY payment I get from DSCFA is child benefit

And you want to take that as well???

I never said i wanted to take it away now. But definitely would like steps to have it removed over a period of time as i completely disagree with it in principle. I really don't think you can make any morale argument that justifies penalizing people who don't have children to subsidize those who do.

SupaNova

given by the state as an acknowlegement that children are expensive but are essential for the future of the state! (my kids will help fund your pension)

Having a state pension is not essential to the future of states.

Having a steady population is essential to keep a states pension ponzi scheme functioning.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

I never said i wanted to take it away now. But definitely would like steps to have it removed over a period of time as i completely disagree with it in principle. I really don't think you can make any morale argument that justifies penalizing people who don't have children to subsidize those who do.

Everyone who works regardless of marital or parental status contributes to the social welfare fund via PAYE/PRSI

So people without children are not being penalized its just that people WITH children are recieving the benefit whereas the childless are not

It is the choice of every individual whether they want to have children or not
The state does not force you to nor force you not to (like in China)

You are therefore not being penalized
You are (if you are childless) CHOOSING not to avail of the benefit

(with the exception obviously of people who cannot have children for medical reasons)

pocketvenus

SupaNova wrote: »

I never said i wanted to take it away now. But definitely would like steps to have it removed over a period of time as i completely disagree with it in principle. I really don't think you can make any morale argument that justifies penalizing people who don't have children to subsidize those who do.

The last part of your statement can apply to anything then.

Why should the young pay for OAP's pension now and in the next 10 years, why should someone who does not drive taxes go toward fixing potholes when it does not affect them etc.

Very silly comment to make. Society would not be able to function if we were to take your attitude.
Cannot be "everyone for themselves" as much as you may want it that way.

SupaNova

So people without children are not being penalized its just that people WITH children are recieving the benefit whereas the childless are not

They are paying for something they will never benefit from.

SupaNova

The last part of your statement can apply to anything then.

Why should the young pay for OAP's pension now and in the next 10 years, why should someone who does not drive taxes go toward fixing potholes when it does not affect them etc.

Very silly comment to make. Society would not be able to function if we were to take your attitude.
Cannot be "everyone for themselves" as much as you may want it that way.

Society would function fine but maybe not child benefit or government pension scheme.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

They are paying for something they will never benefit from.

If I pay for car insurance and am lucky enough to never have to make a claim am I being penalized by being forced to pay for something I will never benefit from?

SupaNova

If I pay for car insurance and am lucky enough to never have to make a claim am I being penalized by being forced to pay for something I will never benefit from?

You either pay for car insurance because you perceive that the benefit of being insured is worth it even if you never crash or maybe just because you are required by law.

Child Benefit cannot be compared. Ask someone who doesn't have children or doesn't want children would they like to pay for child benefit.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

You either pay for car insurance because you perceive that the benefit of being insured is worth it even if you never crash or because you are required by law.

Child Benefit cannot be compared. Ask someone who doesn't have children or doesn't want children would they like to pay for child benefit.

You pay for PRSI because you are REQUIRED TO BY LAW

Same difference no?? :rolleyes:

pocketvenus

SupaNova wrote: »

You either pay for car insurance because you perceive that the benefit of being insured is worth it even if you never crash or because you are required by law.

Child Benefit cannot be compared. Ask someone who doesn't have children or doesn't want children would they like to pay for child benefit.

I do not have kids nor can I have them but it does not bother me that other's do and receive CB. They pay for things through taxes which I may benefit from which does not affect them. I think the majority of people are not petty in the end everyone benefits in some way.
On that note would you like people resent your parents for taking CB as they are taking it from others who did not have children.

Only thing I would change about CB is the likes of Gov Ministers, millioniares and other on high wages being able to claim.

How about you air your greivances when you fill out your Cenus Form tonight if there is space for that.

Balmed Out

THe country is financially ruined and everyone seems to have the attitude that somebody else, anybody else should pay.
We all do, that means more tax, less benefits, less pay and less numbers in the public service. There shouldnt be any group completely untouched.

Thankfully im still working but have sympathy to all those who arent.(excluding those who thought mcdonalds or wherever wasnt good enough for them during the boom and chose to be be unemployed)

The vast majority of unemployed want to work and have seen a bigger reduction in their lifestyle then the rest of us. Unfortunately they still do need to see more, as do the rest of us. I dont think a debit card for child benefit is out of order tbh. I would hate to see the payment stopped as Irish people we should all feel responsible to some degree for the nations children.

SupaNova

You pay for PRSI because you are REQUIRED TO BY LAW

Same difference no??

I don't think car insurance should be compulsory either. I am sure car insurance would still exist. But i am sure many would buy it.

Child benefit would never exist unless it was forced.

pocketvenus

Balmed Out wrote: »

THe country is financially ruined and everyone seems to have the attitude that somebody else, anybody else should pay.
We all do, that means more tax, less benefits, less pay and less numbers in the public service. There shouldnt be any group completely untouched.

Thankfully im still working but have sympathy to all those who arent.(excluding those who thought mcdonalds or wherever wasnt good enough for them during the boom and chose to be be unemployed)

The vast majority of unemployed want to work and have seen a bigger reduction in their lifestyle then the rest of us. Unfortunately they still do need to see more, as do the rest of us. I dont think a debit card for child benefit is out of order tbh. I would hate to see the payment stopped as Irish people we should all feel responsible to some degree for the nations children.

Well then if we all have to keep on giving then taxes need to go up again for the workers, CPA needs to be torn up, OAP's need to be hit etc.

It cannot be just the SW and everyone else is exempt which seems to be the sentiment here with alot of posters.

Problem is there are groups being untouched and this willl continue.

dan_d

feicim wrote: »

Dan, I'n not sure what your point is... you would be entitled to the following like everybody else on welfare.

1. a college course (this is free for working people too)
2. Subsidised housing (no one gets fully free housing)
3. fuel allowance in winter
4. spending money each week (job seekers benefit or allowance)

the only thing of your list that you would not get (without a gaggle of kids) is not-surprisingly - childrens allowance (or as you call it "kids paid for")

Good news - you have access to this unbelieveable system too! You too can get all this "free stuff" "thrown" at you.

My point is that the less you did/do the more you get.

To be quite honest I haven't bothered asking if I'm entitled to anything else because I'm quite sure that I'm not. I genuinely do not understand how people remain on SW for years on end. I don't understand how they get away with it.

I have my degree (I presume that's what you're referring to in terms of the free college course??) and I have a house of my own. So I worked through college, came out, got a job, worked for the last 5 years (feckin hard, though that's not relevant!!) and bought a house. (as prudently as possible, that's a subject for another thread). What I'm trying to say is that the position I am in is genuinely one of someone who has simply fallen into a completely sh*te situation through no fault of their own, and who is working their hardest to get out of it. Surely people in my position should be the focus of the Social Welfare? And I don't mean by that that we should get a selection of benefits available to us. But the current system is geared to those who make little or no effort, long term. And like someone else says here, I have got a problem with people who go on about scroungers and wasters on the dole.

As feicim put it quite succinctly a few posts ago "the unemployed need a job.Not less money.".That's it, in a nutshell.Exchange the word "need" for "want" in most cases of those on the dole at the moment. Therefore, the OP's original post was extremely insulting to those of us who are here.Believe me we DO NOT want to be here. Not once, in my time at school, college or in the last few years, did I ever imagine I would have to darken the door of a social welfare office in my lifetime. Not once did I ever picture myself saying the words "I'm on the dole" in my life. I saw a completely different life, that I worked hard to get. This whole situation is so out of my (our) control at this point, and I (we) are working with a system that is more geared for those who simply aren't interested in work, rather than those who need a hand for a while, until they manage to find something else. When you add the attitude of posters like the OP, it makes me hope to hell that karma exists and finds people who make statements like that, because they deserve whatever they get.

As I've said before (repeatedly), I'm all for a complete overhaul of the SW system because it's approaching complete meltdown at this stage and costing stupid amounts of money. But I think when people start preaching about how things should be changed they need to take into account the unprecedented levels of unemployment we are currently experiencing and the fact that one size will not fit all at this point in time.

Balmed Out

If you were a child in 1975 or later then you benefitted from child benefit.
If you live to retirement and recieve a pension you benfit from those that did being in a better position to pay taxes.
I also think if more children live in poverty we would quickly have more crime, anti social behaviour etc etc. Again we benefit. I do think though it should be used for children and a debit card or something wouldnt be a bad way of doing that. You might also find very wealthy people less likely to make use of it then.

SupaNova

I do not have kids nor can I have them but it does not bother me that other's do and receive CB. They pay for things through taxes which I may benefit from which does not affect them. I think the majority of people are not petty in the end everyone benefits in some way.
On that note would you like people resent your parents for taking CB as they are taking it from others who did not have children.

Fair enough. But I don't expect people who don't have kids to ever subsidize those that do.

Only thing I would change about CB is the likes of Gov Ministers, millioniares and other on high wages being able to claim.

I am sure those on both sides of the argument would love to see that cut out.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

I don't think car insurance should be compulsory either. I am sure car insurance would still exist. But i am sure many would buy it.

Child benefit would never exist unless it was forced.

If car insurance wasn't compulsary then the insured drivers would end up being PENALIZED because of the uninsured drivers
:D:D

SupaNova

If car insurance wasn't compulsory then the insured drivers would end up being PENALIZED because of the uninsured drivers

Perhaps the way our current insurance is set up. Without compulsory insurance you would pay car insurance that doesn't depend on the insurance of other drivers.

The people who really benefit from compulsory Insurance are Insurance companies. I wonder was there ever a demand from the electorate for compulsory Insurance, I doubt it.

Please stop trying to link child benefit with car insurance.

angelfire9

SupaNova wrote: »

Perhaps the way our current insurance is set up. Without compulsory insurance you would pay car insurance that doesn't depend on the insurance of other drivers.

The people who really benefit from compulsory Insurance are Insurance companies. I wonder was their ever a demand from the electorate for compulsory Insurance, I doubt it.

Please stop trying to link child benefit with car insurance.

You stated that people were being penalised by being forced to pay for something that they may never benefit from
I thought car insurance was a good correlation

Anyway people CHOOSE whether or not to have kids and therefore they CHOOSE whether or not to receive Child Benefit
QED
No one is being PENALISED
They are making a CHOICE

Balmed Out

angelfire9 wrote: »

You stated that people were being penalised by being forced to pay for something that they may never benefit from
I thought car insurance was a good correlation

Anyway people CHOOSE whether or not to have kids and therefore they CHOOSE whether or not to receive Child Benefit
QED
No one is being PENALISED
They are making a CHOICE

Lots of people medically cant have children.....
Others arent fortunate enough to meet someone they would like to have children with.

angelfire9

Balmed Out wrote: »

Lots of people medically cant have children.....
Others arent fortunate enough to meet someone they would like to have children with.

i did to be fair state that there would be exceptions as regards people who are medically unable to have kids

But generally speaking it is a choice

Even those whom you say don't meet the right person do theoretically make a choice

Oh_Noes

angelfire9 wrote: »

Anyway people CHOOSE whether or not to have kids
They are making a CHOICE

I'd be interested to see statistics abour how many births are actually planned. I'd guess a substantial fraction aren't. There's no choice in this situation unless you want to have an abortion which isn't legal in this country.

SupaNova

You stated that people were being penalised by being forced to pay for something that they may never benefit from

I should have said will not receive benefit. Insurance would be a may receive benefit from.

EDIT: I actually said will in an earlier post.

Anyway people CHOOSE whether or not to have kids and therefore they CHOOSE whether or not to receive Child Benefit
QED
No one is being PENALISED
They are making a CHOICE

They are being penalized for the choice not to have children. Lol what a funny way of twisting it though. I am actually in tears laughing at this logic. I suppose you would tell the man who works all his life and disagrees with the dole that he has the choice to avail of something he doesn't agree with by quitting work.

bmarley

Max Power1 wrote: »

Well what is CB then?

A payment that you only recieve when you have children

Seems to me that we are all paying people to have children. This practice should be stopped imo.

Child Benefit is a ridiculous payment and should be means tested with immediate effect. And the principal that the 3rd and 4th child..and so on.. in a family requires a higher payment than the 1st and 2nd child is absurd. Why would it cost more to feed and cloth the 3rd child than the 1st. Surely you would have a lot of clothes/other essentials already in place. As the man says why would he allow her to take contraception when the state will pay generous amounts based on the more children you have the higher the value of them.

I'm sorry for all those people on welfare who want to be employed but cannot find work. It is hard to make ends meet on 188 euro per week. But the long term unemployed who never looked for work during the good times and were rewarded extra payments for being long term unemployed are a scourge. They are the ones who know how to work and use the system. No wonder people moved here in their droves from other European countries as well as England to take advantage of our generous welfare system. Time to review all those on long term payments and force training/work placements. Those on welfare should not enjoy the same/better standards of living as those who are working and paying their taxes.

pocketvenus

bmarley wrote: »

I'm sorry for all those people on welfare who want to be employed but cannot find work. It is hard to make ends meet on 188 euro per week. But the long term unemployed who never looked for work during the good times and were rewarded extra payments for being long term unemployed are a scourge. They are the ones who know how to work and use the system. No wonder people moved here in their droves from other European countries as well as England to take advantage of our generous welfare system. Time to review all those on long term payments and force training/work placements. Those on welfare should not enjoy the same/better standards of living as those who are working and paying their taxes.

Then why should people who have worked and paid their taxes etc be made to suffer.

I agree with the point you are making and have stated here before in the height of the boom with plenty of jobs for all different educational levels we did not tackle the people who want to stay on SW for life. The Gov rewarded them with more €.

So how about the Gov goes after them first, this is where the fraud lies and where savings can be made. But telling a recently unemployed person well sorry but €188 a week is too generous for you after all your working life is not right. These are the people who hopefully will end up back in employment soon & will be still paying for those scroungers on the dole.

Ask any of these recently unemployed people and they will tell you on €188 a week they are def not having higher living standards then those working.

AlekSmart

bmarley wrote: »

I'm sorry for all those people on welfare who want to be employed but cannot find work. It is hard to make ends meet on 188 euro per week. But the long term unemployed who never looked for work during the good times and were rewarded extra payments for being long term unemployed are a scourge. They are the ones who know how to work and use the system. No wonder people moved here in their droves from other European countries as well as England to take advantage of our generous welfare system. Time to review all those on long term payments and force training/work placements. Those on welfare should not enjoy the same/better standards of living as those who are working and paying their taxes.

Crikey Bobmarley,they`ve come from a lot further than Europe,thats for sure !

Reading this account from the Dublin District Court last week just about sums it all up......

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/courts/judge-lashes-student-over-stolen-laptops-2614824.html

The figures quoted in court are appalling,in the context of attempting to figure out who`s going to foot the bill for this lads continuing education and doubtless,that of his many co-students.

€350 Weekly for an "Education grant"....
€212 Weekly in Rent Allowance....... wtf,WTF...how can this lad NOT have been put straight back on a Lagos bound aircraft immediately after the hearing ?

When I read of Pat Rabbitte dropping hints about further cuts in Public Service Pay I thoroughly hope and pray that the first and deepest cuts will be on those members of the PS who actively conspire to keep criminally inclined chancers such as this lad in Ireland at the expense of ordinary folk trying to keep the ship afloat :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Vizzy

AlekSmart wrote: »

http://www.herald.ie/national-news/courts/judge-lashes-student-over-stolen-laptops-2614824.html


When I read of Pat Rabbitte dropping hints about further cuts in Public Service Pay I thoroughly hope and pray that the first and deepest cuts will be on those members of the PS who actively conspire to keep criminally inclined chancers such as this lad in Ireland at the expense of ordinary folk trying to keep the ship afloat :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

What !!!

So now it is the fault of the public service because we have foreign nationals( and plenty of our own) stealing and receiving stolen property ??

Unbelievable.