Is it time to Jack the Job

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Good man thats a post about 2009 now how much more are we paing in income tax, USC not to mention the new household tax or the indirect taxes such as carbon , VAT etc...since 2009

The fact is the there is Myth going around that Ireland is a low tax country..

You think about a person going to work for 1 day.

They wake up in bed .... VAT on the bed, pillows, sheets etc

They lock their house up VAT, stamp duty, household tax, water charges (to come later)

They go down have breakie toast and tea .... VAT on electy

They jump in their car ..VAT on car, road tax, VAT on petrol, Carbon tax on petrol not to mention tolls

They get to work .... Tax on their car spot

They work .... VAT, USC PRSI on ever hour they work

They buy a meal for lunch . VAT on the meal

They go back to work - See above
They drive back home - See above
They sit down have some dinner more vat on the electy for using the cooker
Watch TV more VAT on elecy

So you tell me why the hell would this person unless they are getting an incredibly high wage bother getting up out of the bed the next day?

Facts and figures were requested, not empty rhetoric, thanks.

I wasn't aware that unemployed people were exempt from paying VAT?

fliball123

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Facts and figures were requested, not empty rhetoric, thanks.

I wasn't aware that unemployed people were exempt from paying VAT?

Prove me wrong..you put up income tax for 2009..do you disagree that this has gone up since...do you agree we are paying more in all areas of both indirect and direct tax??? We are now above the EU average

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Prove me wrong..you put up income tax for 2009..do you disagree that this has gone up since...do you agree we are paying more in all areas of both indirect and direct tax??? We are now above the EU average

That's not how it works. You don't come in, make a random comment and say "Prove me wrong."

You can prove yourself right. Well, attempt to...anyway.

fliball123

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

That's not how it works. You don't come in, make a random comment and say "Prove me wrong."

You can prove yourself right. Well, attempt to...anyway.

Sorry i was under the impression that you disregarded a previous poster point (farmer pudsley or something like that) in his question that he is paying more and more tax and it is cripling him..you dismissed that by attmpting to say the below in bold without even knowing his specific circumstances..I pulled you up and this and I cannot find the stat or the site but listening to economists for 2012/13 we will be up there above the average for paying taxes (not just income or direct taxes)...Now I showed you what a person who is working how much and how many different ways they are taxed...your retort a poor one shows figures for 2009 for income tax...I think anyone reading this will agree that I am in the right here

Farmer Pudsey, you came into the thread blaming high rates of personal taxation for all of your woes. My point still stands that you pay hardly any tax. (relatively)

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Sorry i was under the impression that you disregarded a previous poster point (farmer pudsley or something like that) in his question that he is paying more and more tax and it is cripling him..you dismissed that by attmpting to say the below in bold without even knowing his specific circumstances..I pulled you up and this and I cannot find the stat or the site but listening to economists for 2012/13 we will be up there above the average for paying taxes (not just income or direct taxes)...Now I showed you what a person who is working how much and how many different ways they are taxed...your retort a poor one shows figures for 2009 for income tax...I think anyone reading this will agree that I am in the right here

Farmer Pudsey, you came into the thread blaming high rates of personal taxation for all of your woes. My point still stands that you pay hardly any tax. (relatively)

I've bolded the only relevant point that you made. You can't prove what you're saying, is the answer you're looking for.

fliball123

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I've bolded the only relevant point that you made. You can't prove what you're saying, is the answer you're looking for.

Likewise either can you...but I have asked you are we not paying more in all types of tax..and we will be paying more in the future...so we will have to agree to disagree

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

Likewise either can you...but I have asked you are we not paying more in all types of tax..and we will be paying more in the future...so we will have to agree to disagree

We're paying more tax than in 2009? Yes.
Significantly more? No.
Making the graph still relevant.


I'm waiting for your figures that show mine to be completely out of whack. Don't bother replying till you have them

fliball123

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

We're paying more tax than in 2009? Yes.
Significantly more? No.
Making the graph still relevant.


I'm waiting for your figures that show mine to be completely out of whack. Don't bother replying till you have them

It doesnt...income tax is not the only tax we pay..

USC
PRSI
VAT
Capital Gains
Carbon Tax
Household Tax

So a graph showing 1 of the many taxes we pay from 2009 is redundant and belongs back in 2009

later12

fliball123 wrote: »

Good man thats a post about 2009 and only showing Icome tax why not all taxes we pay.. now how much more are we paing in income tax, USC not to mention the new household tax or the indirect taxes such as carbon , VAT etc...since 2009

The fact is the there is Myth going around that Ireland is a low tax country..

You think about a person going to work for 1 day.

They wake up in bed .... VAT on the bed, pillows, sheets etc

They lock their house up VAT, stamp duty, household tax, water charges (to come later)

They go down have breakie toast and tea .... VAT on electy

They jump in their car ..VAT on car, road tax, VAT on petrol, Carbon tax on petrol not to mention tolls

They get to work .... Tax on their car spot

They work .... VAT, USC PRSI on ever hour they work

They buy a meal for lunch . VAT on the meal

They go back to work - See above
They drive back home - See above
They sit down have some dinner more vat on the electy for using the cooker
Watch TV more VAT on elecy

So you tell me why the hell would this person unless they are getting an incredibly high wage bother getting up out of the bed the next day?

Because VAT, duty, tolls, road and carbon taxes are not income related? They apply to unemployed and retired taxpayers just the same as they apply to employees; the difference is that they 'hit' welfare recipients much harder than employees as a proportion of their income.

Don't forget, the ESRI launched a paper last year which noted that only about 3% of welfare recipients are better off on welfare than they are in employment.

That's not to say that the welfare bill must not be tackled, by the way; but the notion that any significant number of people are better off dependent on welfare is blatantly ridiculous.

In the table below, replacement rate refers to the ratio of disposable income when on welfare to anticipated income on taking up employment. If it is more than 100, that means that the subject is better off on welfare.



Source:
Callan, Tim, Crilly, N, Keane, C, Walsh, John R; Ni Shuilleabhain, Aine 2011. Tax, Welfare and Work Incentives. Budget Perspectives 2012. ESRI.

fliball123

fliball123 wrote: »

It doesnt...income tax is not the only tax we pay..

USC
PRSI
VAT
Capital Gains
Carbon Tax
Household Tax

So a graph showing 1 of the many taxes we pay from 2009 is redundant and belongs back in 2009

So taxes on profits and discretionary spending are wrong? Taxes which promote the use of 'greener' tech is wrong?

Come on. Why don't you include the tax you pay on cigarettes and booze in that list. Hell, I'm paying tax right now on my internet connection! This is costing me zero-zero-zero-zero-point-something percent of a cent to write this message to you! I am outraged!

fliball123

later12 wrote: »

Because VAT, duty, tolls, road and carbon taxes are not income related? They apply to unemployed and retired taxpayers just the same as they apply to employees; the difference is that they 'hit' welfare recipients much harder than employees as a proportion of their income.

Don't forget, the ESRI launched a paper last year which noted that only about 3% of welfare recipients are better off on welfare than they are in employment.

That's not to say that the welfare bill must not be tackled, by the way; but the notion that any significant number of people are better off dependent on welfare is blatantly ridiculous.

In the table below, replacement rate refers to the ratio of disposable income when on welfare to anticipated income on taking up employment. If it is more than 100, that means that the subject is better off on welfare.



Source:
Callan, Tim, Crilly, N, Keane, C, Walsh, John R; Ni Shuilleabhain, Aine 2011. Tax, Welfare and Work Incentives. Budget Perspectives 2012. ESRI.

First off I never said they were income related but they are related to individuals are they not??? But people on the dole do not have the costs of going to work factored in. My point being that it as hard as it is for a person on the dole to live it is just as hard for a person working as they have extra costs aswell as having to pay for thus said person on the dole

K-9

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I've bolded the only relevant point that you made. You can't prove what you're saying, is the answer you're looking for.

More up to date figures here:

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=income%20distribution%20statistics&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CF4QFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.revenue.ie%2Fen%2Fabout%2Fpublications%2Fstatistical%2F2010%2Fincome-distribution-statistics.pdf&ctbs=ctr%3AcountryIE&ei=bj1jT9_NOciKhQeG0u22CA&usg=AFQjCNEBsnw-VThiwW9w4EKVUyxlaTNjcg&cad=rja


Basically income would need to be more than 60k to pay any substantial Income Tax, bands have been decreased IIRC since, tax credits frozen so that would have some effect, I can't imagine that much of a change.

Yes USC came in after but that kind of is the point, the exact reason it came in was to get more tax revenue from the roughly 76% of cases who had income under 40k and paid little or nothing.

On taxes overall, we are low direct taxes like PAYE, even the USC isn't that high compared to Social Insurance rates in other EU countries, and have higher than average VAT and other indirect taxes, which is a big part of the reason we are in this mess.

Governments gave Income Tax reductions so that people would spend on houses, cars and consumer goods and spend they did, giving extra VAT etc. receipts.

Now they have to increase revenues in a recession. They don't want to raise Income tax rates so they'll get it from other areas. Tbh I'd prefer they stop the pretense and just raise Income Tax.

professore

People in this thread all compare single people's 188 pw vs working. There is obvioulsly a lot of benefit for individuals in this situation to work.

What they should be doing is comparing a married couple with 3 kids, one or both working, and renting, to remove this "they chose to get a mortgage" red herring from the argument, bringing in 40K p.a. vs the equivalent couple on welfare. The income differential there is very small I would argue.

fliball123

professore wrote: »

People in this thread all compare single people's 188 pw vs working. There is obvioulsly a lot of benefit for individuals in this situation to work.

What they should be doing is comparing a married couple with 3 kids, one or both working, and renting, to remove this "they chose to get a mortgage" red herring from the argument, bringing in 40K p.a. vs the equivalent couple on welfare. The income differential there is very small I would argue.

Spot on.....we are making it harder for people to work in this country its baffling I really do not understand what the gov are doing. They are creating poverty traps and penalising workers...

later12

fliball123 wrote: »

Spot on.....we are making it harder for people to work in this country its baffling I really do not understand what the gov are doing. They are creating poverty traps and penalising workers...

I don't disagree with you entirely. The Government do disincentivise work in many respects. However, as with many Government operations, that is not to say that they have totally succeeded. Clearly, the overwhelming majority of people are still better off working.

However, you can't have it all your own way. You seem to think that "making it harder for people to work" is synonymous with less take home pay, the corollory of which is 'give them more money, more will find work'. I would strongly disagree. Give them more money and employers will fold. If we want to incentivise work, we must not only chip away at unit labour costs, but chip away at welfare transfers to a sustainable (but not a populist or un-necessarily harsh) degree.

I would consider the biggest disincentive by the government in relation to the labour market to have been the restoration of the minimum wage at €8.65. They had a golden opportunity to really build on a cut in labour costs at Fianna Fail's electoral expense and to boost the SME sector.

All taxes eventually fall back on the taxpayer. And all expenditure cuts do as well. But you seem to think a taxpayer is a man who pays income tax. Not so. Come back to us when you're on the Dole or an Old Age Pension and you're spending disproportionate sums of your income on VAT, duties, carbon, motor and other regressive taxes relative to those in full time employment.

Readyhed

murphaph wrote: »

I can confirm. I personally know a married couple with one child, both parents on welfare (can't say exactly which benefits but neither works and they are in receipt of rent supplement) and they can afford to run a car. They don't even need it really: the kid walks to school and there's good public transport in the area-SuperValu within walking distance and bigger shops are a bus journey away (5 mins on the bus to Lidl/Dunnes etc.).

This is just so typical of how these arguments develop and gain credibility.A sample of ONE proves it beyond doubt!

Just watch "Frontline" on RTE and for weeks Pat Kenny has be promoting this poverty trap rubbish that there is a hypothetical guy with 2 kids, on the dole (probably a 9 month JSB), gets Rent allowance and whatever. The claim is he needs to get a job paying at least 50K PA(or something like this) to make it worth his while to return to work.

Countless experts have told us that if such a scenario exists it is a tiny proportion of those on the dole. It does'nt matter-the myth persists because people like the story.
If the OP or anyone wants to belive that jacking their job in is a good idea then let them think it. It makes great conversation in the pub(or on boards). None of them will ever do it though.
Just talk about it.

fliball123

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

So taxes on profits and discretionary spending are wrong? Taxes which promote the use of 'greener' tech is wrong?

Come on. Why don't you include the tax you pay on cigarettes and booze in that list. Hell, I'm paying tax right now on my internet connection! This is costing me zero-zero-zero-zero-point-something percent of a cent to write this message to you! I am outraged!

Your further backing up what I am saying...You can only use what you get paid wheater a wage or dole to pay for taxes?? and as I say you blatently leave out all other tax except income..So why is that...is it because it suits your argument?

fliball123

K-9 wrote: »

More up to date figures here:

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=income%20distribution%20statistics&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CF4QFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.revenue.ie%2Fen%2Fabout%2Fpublications%2Fstatistical%2F2010%2Fincome-distribution-statistics.pdf&ctbs=ctr%3AcountryIE&ei=bj1jT9_NOciKhQeG0u22CA&usg=AFQjCNEBsnw-VThiwW9w4EKVUyxlaTNjcg&cad=rja


Basically income would need to be more than 60k to pay any substantial Income Tax, bands have been decreased IIRC since, tax credits frozen so that would have some effect, I can't imagine that much of a change.

Yes USC came in after but that kind of is the point, the exact reason it came in was to get more tax revenue from the roughly 76% of cases who had income under 40k and paid little or nothing.

On taxes overall, we are low direct taxes like PAYE, even the USC isn't that high compared to Social Insurance rates in other EU countries, and have higher than average VAT and other indirect taxes, which is a big part of the reason we are in this mess.

Governments gave Income Tax reductions so that people would spend on houses, cars and consumer goods and spend they did, giving extra VAT etc. receipts.

Now they have to increase revenues in a recession. They don't want to raise Income tax rates so they'll get it from other areas. Tbh I'd prefer they stop the pretense and just raise Income Tax.

once again this link is about income tax..what about VAT we garnish a fair % of what our tax take is from VAT..Judging by these figures we pay more than the average..and we also had a hike in the mean time

http://www.agn-europe.org/htm/firm/news/ttf/2010/Brochure_VAT2010.pdf

But I dont just VAT to suit my argument ..I agree income tax is low in comparsion to other EU countries but all taxes have to be taken into consideration

later12

fliball123 wrote: »

Your further backing up what I am saying...You can only use what you get paid wheater a wage or dole to pay for taxes?? and as I say you blatently leave out all other tax except income..So why is that...is it because it suits your argument?

So why are you asking questions like why get out of bed in the morning, and otherwise echoing sentiments expressed by the OP?

These taxes that have suddenly awoken your interest are not limited to employees, and in fact they affect full time employees less as a proportion of their disposable income then they do the unemployed and retired. Can you recap on what your argument is?

fliball123

later12 wrote: »

So why are you asking questions like why get out of bed in the morning, and otherwise echoing sentiments expressed by the OP?

These taxes that have suddenly awoken your interest are not limited to employees, and in fact they affect full time employees less as a proportion of their disposable income then they do the unemployed and retired. Can you recap on what your argument is?

I was retorting to a poster who without even knowing the OPs circumstances stated that he is not being overly taxed..When he and most other workers are. Wheather these taxes are direct or not! This poster then tried to confirm his case by stating 2009 income tax as being low as a point in reference that the tax payer is paying very low tax..To which I have retorted as to what working person has to pay each day they work..Sorry for the long winded response but just trying to give a bit of background to this..But on your last point whatever taxes indirectly that the people on the dole are from are paying are actually all paid for by the tax payer as we supply the cash for dole?

later12

fliball123 wrote: »

But on your last point whatever taxes indirectly that the people on the dole are from are paying are actually all paid for by the tax payer as we supply the cash for dole?

The likes of income tax and vat are not ringfenced nor directly diverted to welfare transfers. Welfare transfers can be said to be derived from a variety of sources, including by the way, from recipients themselves whose tax contributions are all flushed back into the same system to be recycled.

That is all an aside.

The point is that if one recognizes that Vat and all of these other charges, duties, levies and taxes are paid by welfare recipients, then that has to be discounted from the welfare recipients' income in a similar way (in fact in a proportionately larger way) than is discounted from employees' income.

So you see the net effect is that a person choosing to 'jack in the job' as per the OP and as per you "why get out of bed?' question, is that they pay many of the same taxes, which because these are regressive, they are proportionately more demanding. They don't have to pay income tax, certainly, but that is more than offset by the fact that employees simply earn more money anyway, after mandatory deductions.

Pure and simple, the notion that one is better of 'jacking in the job' to go on welfare is rubbish. There is no plausible argument in its favour.

K-9

fliball123 wrote: »

once again this link is about income tax..what about VAT we garnish a fair % of what our tax take is from VAT..Judging by these figures we pay more than the average..and we also had a hike in the mean time

http://www.agn-europe.org/htm/firm/news/ttf/2010/Brochure_VAT2010.pdf

But I dont just VAT to suit my argument ..I agree income tax is low in comparsion to other EU countries but all taxes have to be taken into consideration

That's basically just repeating what I said without taking it in, I've pointed out why we have high enough VAT rates.

The reason VAT and other indirect taxes are above average is exactly because Income taxes are below average, mainly because households below 60k pay little.

As others said focusing on VAT is a bit pointless in relation to the OP, everybody pays VAT, employed or unemployed, whereas Income Tax is a key consideration when comparing welfare and employment. Pointing to VAT is just a way to shout about the high cost of living, which everybody suffers!

fliball123

later12 wrote: »

The likes of income tax and vat are not ringfenced nor directly diverted to welfare transfers. Welfare transfers can be said to be derived from a variety of sources, including by the way, from recipients themselves whose tax contributions are all flushed back into the same system to be recycled.

That is all an aside.

The point is that if one recognizes that Vat and all of these other charges, duties, levies and taxes are paid by welfare recipients, then that has to be discounted from the welfare recipients' income in a similar way (in fact in a proportionately larger way) than is discounted from employees' income.

So you see the net effect is that a person choosing to 'jack in the job' as per the OP and as per you "why get out of bed?' question, is that they pay many of the same taxes, which because these are regressive, they are proportionately more demanding. They don't have to pay income tax, certainly, but that is more than offset by the fact that employees simply earn more money anyway, after mandatory deductions.

Pure and simple, the notion that one is better of 'jacking in the job' to go on welfare is rubbish. There is no plausible argument in its favour.

Well your kind of wrong there the levies and taxes that are got re cycled but it has to be got from somewhere...ala some kind of source...such as income tax ..I mean as a simple example I agree to give you 50 euros a week and you spend 40 and keep 10 and then I give you another 40 as you have 10 and you put that 10 on top of the 40..it doesnt mean that you have supplied yourself with 10 it just means that you had 10 which was already given to you by me.

So look at welfare 100% of it is gotten from the state...The state gets money from taxes and loans (which will have to be paid back via taxes) the state gets its money from gathering taxes...in your analogy we wouldnt have to work at all as the money we pay for in tax will be given back to us. So you can see although people on social welfare are contributing to tax they need someone to give them that money in order to do so?

fliball123

K-9 wrote: »

That's basically just repeating what I said without taking it in, I've pointed out why we have high enough VAT rates.

The reason VAT and other indirect taxes are above average is exactly because Income taxes are below average, mainly because households below 60k pay little.

As others said focusing on VAT is a bit pointless in relation to the OP, everybody pays VAT, employed or unemployed, whereas Income Tax is a key consideration when comparing welfare and employment. Pointing to VAT is just a way to shout about the high cost of living, which everybody suffers!

What about the other taxes ala carbon tax, USC, PRSI, these are not taxes that effect the people collecting the dole well maybe carbon tax might.. As I say when all taxes are taken into account we are paying more than are fair share

K-9

fliball123 wrote: »

So look at welfare 100% of it is gotten from the state...The state gets money from taxes and loans (which will have to be paid back) the state gets its money from gathering taxes...in your analogy we wouldnt have to work at all as the money we pay for in tax will be given back to us. So you can see although people on social welfare are contributing to tax they need someone to give them that money in order to do so?

And if you carry that on, people who pay little Income tax, incomes less than say 50k must be taxed in some other way, hence VAT, duties etc. problem is it's dependent often on people spending which is why VAT receipts aren't doing great.

Anyway, in a way an increase in VAT is better for workers if we are comparing to welfare. Everybody pays VAT while a raise in income tax only affects the worker.

K-9

fliball123 wrote: »

What about the other taxes ala carbon tax, USC, PRSI, these are not taxes that effect the people collecting the dole well maybe carbon tax might.. As I say when all taxes are taken into account we are paying more than are fair share

I don't really see your point, yep, you pay USC and PRSI and other taxes, shocking I know!

What is a fair share? This amount that you pay more than. Can you quantify it?

fliball123

K-9 wrote: »

And if you carry that on, people who pay little Income tax, incomes less than say 50k must be taxed in some other way, hence VAT, duties etc. problem is it's dependent often on people spending which is why VAT receipts aren't doing great.

Anyway, in a way an increase in VAT is better for workers if we are comparing to welfare. Everybody pays VAT while a raise in income tax only affects the worker.

I agree with that..my only point in this is as a middle income earner I pay a good deal in taxes both direct and indirect..I have made no argument as to how much we pay in income tax..in fact I have agreed it is low in comparison

fliball123

K-9 wrote: »

I don't really see your point, yep, you pay USC and PRSI and other taxes, shocking I know!

What is a fair share? This amount that you pay more than. Can you quantify it?

I put up a mock scenario of a person going to work and what taxes they pay...As I say I have heard (not sure where ) that when all taxes are taken into account we are now up past the euro average...So how long can this equation continue when you look at where these taxes are going?

Readyhed

fliball123 wrote: »

Spot on.....we are making it harder for people to work in this country its baffling I really do not understand what the gov are doing. They are creating poverty traps and penalising workers...

Yeah. Employers are walking the streets begging people to take jobs at 40K a year.No one want them. It's ridiculous!!

fliball123

Readyhed wrote: »

Yeah. Employers are walking the streets begging people to take jobs at 40K a year.No one want them. It's ridiculous!!

Whats your point there? I never said anything about there being jobs..I know there is a shortage of jobs...My point is that people on the lower end of the scale are finding it easier to throw in the job and to be looked after the state...I mean how much is it in actual money terms is it before people go well if I am on the dole I get X,Y and Z and if I stay in employment I only get x amount more for breaking my arse to get into work....I have a nephew who is asking himself this question he is working 30 odd hours in a spar shop and he is looking at the costs and he is only up 60 quid a week and he keeps saying there is very little point spending this amount of time getting to and from and in work and only getting basically 2 euro an hour more for working ...

rasper

fliball123 wrote: »

Readyhed wrote: »

Yeah. Employers are walking the streets begging people to take jobs at 40K a year.No one want them. It's ridiculous!!

Whats your point there? I never said anything about there being jobs..I know there is a shortage of jobs...My point is that people on the lower end of the scale are finding it easier to throw in the job and to be looked after the state...I mean how much is it in actual money terms is it before people go well if I am on the dole I get X,Y and Z and if I stay in employment I only get x amount more for breaking my arse to get into work....I have a nephew who is asking himself this question he is working 30 odd hours in a spar shop and he is looking at the costs and he is only up 60 quid a week and he keeps saying there is very little point spending this amount of time getting to and from and in work and only getting basically 2 euro an hour more for working ...

Tell him to give up the job and he'll see what that only €60 means every week. , we live in a very expensive country where to survive on social welfare is tough unless u live with your parents ,

fliball123

rasper wrote: »

Tell him to give up the job and he'll see what that only €60 means every week. , we live in a very expensive country where to survive on social welfare is tough unless u live with your parents ,

He was on the dole living with his granny (my mother) and is able to live very comfortably on 188 a week...My point is that in terms of you working he is only getting in money value 2 Euros per hour..Now I have argued the rights and wrongs but he seems to think that he is better off on the dole...and I cant argue with that..but I do try to tell him that in the futhur he will be more employable by being in the spar for say a year than being on the dole for a year.

rasper

Thought he may be finacially a little bit better off than someone on their own , otherwise he 'd be glad of that €60.
Someone living with relatives shouldn't be paid €188 of taxpayers money maybe a ce scheme or something may be more appropriate , but 188 a week ain't much here , add up ur Bills and see why's left over

fliball123

rasper wrote: »

Thought he may be finacially a little bit better off than someone on their own , otherwise he 'd be glad of that €60.
Someone living with relatives shouldn't be paid €188 of taxpayers money maybe a ce scheme or something may be more appropriate , but 188 a week ain't much here , add up ur Bills and see why's left over

But would you work for 2 Euro an hour..thats the basis of his argument and I cannot find fault with it other than to retort that it looks better on his CV to show that he his working.....When he was on the dole he gave my mam 50 a week left him with 138...He gets all his meals no other utility bills so he had that for going out on the lash..Now I am not saying everyone on the dole is like that but this is his argument?

crusher000

cast_iron wrote: »

I think you've been reading a few too many tabloids.
Yes, there might well be no diesel bill. But then there's no car, because you can't afford it on the dole long term. There is no free state to those who lose (or jack in) their jobs.
Summertime? Personally I've found our winters more pleasant than our summers in recent years. And what would you do in the summer - on €180 odd, and that's not "spending money". That's ALL of your money.

Aside from that, lets put a couple of number on it.
Single person earning €45k: take home = €33,000 (that's €634 per week)
Single person on the JSA: take home = €9,776k (that's €188 per week)

That's €23,000 worth of "benefits" required every year before it even breaks even to be more beneficial on the dole.

Where do you work ? 45k a year in my dreams nowhere near it and this is before I deduct my tax. I'm 14 years in the same job and it's 32k.

rasper

In those lines I'd imagine the vast majority of workErs are working for about €4 an hour ., it's no fun to be on social welfare and the longer ur on it the deeper into a poverty trap you ll go.
Your nephew is in the minority , as he's in a comfortable position

fliball123

rasper wrote: »

In those lines I'd imagine the vast majority of workErs are working for about €4 an hour ., it's no fun to be on social welfare and the longer ur on it the deeper into a poverty trap you ll go.
Your nephew is in the minority , as he's in a comfortable position

I agree with you in what your saying but his point is also one that is valid.....its no fun being in a job when your not being compensated enough to do so and when he sees friends of his in the field playing ball or whatever he cant as he has to go to work...

rasper

fliball123 wrote: »

rasper wrote: »

In those lines I'd imagine the vast majority of workErs are working for about €4 an hour ., it's no fun to be on social welfare and the longer ur on it the deeper into a poverty trap you ll go.
Your nephew is in the minority , as he's in a comfortable position

I agree with you in what your saying but his point is also one that is valid.....its no fun being in a job when your not being compensated enough to do so and when he sees friends of his in the field playing ball or whatever he cant as he has to go to work...

Grass is alwAys greener , he should understand that there is a lot of people our playing ball that would gladly swap with him , I knOw some form of work for welfare or job centres are required but don't hold much faith in our politicians or civil servants to design this

fliball123

rasper wrote: »

Grass is alwAys greener , he should understand that there is a lot of people our playing ball that would gladly swap with him , I knOw some form of work for welfare or job centres are required but don't hold much faith in our politicians or civil servants to design this

maybe but the general concenous is that he is a sucker for working for so little extra

Readyhed

fliball123 wrote: »

Whats your point there? I never said anything about there being jobs..I know there is a shortage of jobs...My point is that people on the lower end of the scale are finding it easier to throw in the job and to be looked after the state...I mean how much is it in actual money terms is it before people go well if I am on the dole I get X,Y and Z and if I stay in employment I only get x amount more for breaking my arse to get into work....I have a nephew who is asking himself this question he is working 30 odd hours in a spar shop and he is looking at the costs and he is only up 60 quid a week and he keeps saying there is very little point spending this amount of time getting to and from and in work and only getting basically 2 euro an hour more for working ...

My point is this.

A. If there are people on the dole getting rent allowance, children's allowance, medical cards etc., who find that taking a job at 40K a year in
not worth their while then they are a tiny minority.

B. Even if such people exist it is irrelevent whether they are prepared to take a job at 40K a year because:

a. There are precious few jobs coming on the market.
b. There are thousands of people on the dole who don't fit into this hypothetical group who would bite your hand off for a 40K a year job.

The time to go after dole scoungers was when there was virtually full employment in the country.

Catching on now and putting him to work just puts him in a job that a genuine job seeker could fill. The effect on the public purse is zero.

The country is in a really bad state at the moment. The main cause - correction SYMPTOM is UNEMPLOYMENT. Anyone suggesting that a quick fix solution is to go after a few people who don't want to work is not going to drop the cost of unemploment by a single penny.

Catching fraudsters who are claiming and working in the black economy is different. By all means we should do this ruthlessly. We should have done it in the Celtic Tiger years when it was easy to find them.

A final point that is often completely overlooked when people talk about this infamous 40K a year dole man. The calculations always assume he is on "Job Seekers Benefit". This means that he has contributed money into the system by virtue of his past PRSI contributions and now he is gettiing
SOME of it back.

rasper

fliball123 wrote: »

rasper wrote: »

Grass is alwAys greener , he should understand that there is a lot of people our playing ball that would gladly swap with him , I knOw some form of work for welfare or job centres are required but don't hold much faith in our politicians or civil servants to design this

maybe but the general concenous is that he is a sucker for working for so little extra

How long does he intend in living with his grandmother considering he must be over 25 now seeing that's hes eligible for the full sw rate , life may not be so easy then

fliball123

Readyhed wrote: »

My point is this.

A. If there are people on the dole getting rent allowance, children's allowance, medical cards etc., who find that taking a job at 40K a year in
not worth their while then they are a tiny minority.

B. Even if such people exist it is irrelevent whether they are prepared to take a job at 40K a year because:

a. There are precious few jobs coming on the market.
b. There are thousands of people on the dole who don't fit into this hypothetical group who would bite your hand off for a 40K a year job.

The time to go after dole scoungers was when there was virtually full employment in the country.

Catching on now and putting him to work just puts him in a job that a genuine job seeker could fill. The effect on the public purse is zero.

The country is in a really bad state at the moment. The main cause - correction SYMPTOM is UNEMPLOYMENT. Anyone suggesting that a quick fix solution is to go after a few people who don't want to work is not going to drop the cost of unemploment by a single penny.

Catching fraudsters who are claiming and working in the black economy is different. By all means we should do this ruthlessly. We should have done it in the Celtic Tiger years when it was easy to find them.

A final point that is often completely overlooked when people talk about this infamous 40K a year dole man. The calculations always assume he is on "Job Seekers Benefit". This means that he has contributed money into the system by virtue of his past PRSI contributions and now he is gettiing
SOME of it back.

Well just on your points : 40k a year would be considered a very good wage this lad is getting nowhere near that. If someone was caught refusing this amount they should be cut off from the dole full stop. He has no medical card or dependants and I have said he pays 50 a week to stay in my mothers gaff so no rent allowence but it is cheap 50 a week for your room, elecy and food....I know there is a lack of jobs out there I never disputed this...As for when to go after people..Yes I agree with they should of tackled it during the boom..but if anyone is on it now over 5 years they should have their dole cut for a start and you also have to take into consideration where the pool of money that pays the dole is coming from. Tax payers are haemoraging at a very high rate, the fact is that we can no longer afford to pay out over 50% of what we take in on taxes on social welfare. Something somewhere has to give.. and to end I never said anything about the dole guy on 40k ..I was bringing in figures from personal experience. You are debating about something else and in your argument you have still not addressed my main bone of contention..that he a young lad 22 sees thats he is only getting 2 Euro extra an hour than his friends who are doing nothing and he gets ridiculed over it...Now like you, I think he should stay in the job and keep going but its hard to argue with him when he is up at 6am in the morning and running for the bus.

fliball123

rasper wrote: »

How long does he intend in living with his grandmother considering he must be over 25 now seeing that's hes eligible for the full sw rate , life may not be so easy then

No he is 22 and once your not living with your parents your are eligable for the full rate at any age.

rasper

We had virtually full employment during the bubble , people in general want to work even if it's for €2 and their dignity , it's well worth it , media and government love harping on about the fraudsters as it justified their actions

fliball123

rasper wrote: »

We had virtually full employment during the bubble , people in general want to work even if it's for €2 and their dignity , it's well worth it , media and government love harping on about the fraudsters as it justified their actions

You cannot blankedly say that people all people on the dole will work for 2 Euros an hour ... The same can be said that not all would not work for this amount but the point is that some would not work for this. As I say not listening to the media or gov this is a personal experience and as I say I understand the kids logic in it. I think I would be the same I would not be motivated to get up at 6am to go to work for a 60Euros more?

rasper

Won't say all most I feel would , your nephew is in a unique situation. , only 22 yet would get full rate coz he lives with his granny as opposed to parents , friends his own age unlikely to be in same position,
Definitely should be changes with long term unemployed to prevent them turning to unemployable but can't label most people as unwilling to work

Readyhed

fliball123 wrote: »

Well just on your points : 40k a year would be considered a very good wage this lad is getting nowhere near that. If someone was caught refusing this amount they should be cut off from the dole full stop. .

I would cut more than his dole !!
The dole element in this ficticious 40K man is only 10K however. People talk about Social welfare as if it is all about the dole. The Social welfare bill
for 2010 was 20.8 billion of which 4 billion was JSA/JSB. Pensions/Children's allowances Rent Supplement and a plethora of other
charges account for the rest.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Policy/ResearchSurveysAndStatistics/Documents/statsa2010.pdf

Have a look at table A5. It is interesting reading.

Many of these cost are benefits not allowances. They are returning to people money they paid into the system in better times. Our problems now need to be solved and the solution is MORE JOBs not red herrings.

if anyone is on it now over 5 years they should have their dole cut for a start and you also have to take into consideration where the pool of money that pays the dole is coming from. Tax payers are haemoraging at a very high rate, the fact is that we can no longer afford to pay out over 50% of what we take in on taxes on social welfare.

NO. He should be placed on a list for serious detailed investigation by people who are trained to do the job and his entitlements lokked at by a group of people who look at facts.

Welfare never do this. They think due dilligence is making everyone fill out forms, answer the same question twice or three times and to generally make things a little awkward or uncomfortable for everyone claiming anything.

fliball123

Readyhed wrote: »

I would cut more than his dole !!
The dole element in this ficticious 40K man is only 10K however. People talk about Social welfare as if it is all about the dole. The Social welfare bill
for 2010 was 20.8 billion of which 4 billion was JSA/JSB. Pensions/Children's allowances Rent Supplement and a plethora of other
charges account for the rest.

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Policy/ResearchSurveysAndStatistics/Documents/statsa2010.pdf

Have a look at table A5. It is interesting reading.

Many of these cost are benefits not allowances. They are returning to people money they paid into the system in better times. Our problems now need to be solved and the solution is MORE JOBs not red herrings.




NO. He should be placed on a list for serious detailed investigation by people who are trained to do the job and his entitlements lokked at by a group of people who look at facts.

Welfare never do this. They think due dilligence is making everyone fill out forms, answer the same question twice or three times and to generally make things a little awkward or uncomfortable for everyone claiming anything.

You make valid points here like the other poster Rasper but you still have not addressed the fact that the pool of money used to pay welfare in any size, shape or form is having its pool of tax payers diminished each day..You cannot expect tax payers to keep paying more and more and not see any cuts on the other end..That dog dont hunt. I know its difficault and I know you see someone actually in work and you think I dont know the hardships of the dole and this may be..But I do know the hardships of the low to medium earning worker who is also suffering..You cannot continue to make one group of individuals ala the tax payer suffer more so that another gruop ala people on the dole to remain on the same terms and conditions...That will never work...More taxes are needed as cuts are needed aswell

Readyhed

fliball123 wrote: »

You make valid points here like the other poster Rasper but you still have not addressed the fact that the pool of money used to pay welfare in any size, shape or form is having its pool of tax payers diminished each day..You cannot expect tax payers to keep paying more and more and not see any cuts on the other end..That dog dont hunt. I know its difficault and I know you see someone actually in work and you think I dont know the hardships of the dole and this may be..But I do know the hardships of the low to medium earning worker who is also suffering..You cannot continue to make one group of individuals ala the tax payer suffer more so that another gruop ala people on the dole to remain on the same terms and conditions...That will never work...More taxes are needed as cuts are needed aswell

I have addressed the point. People (not getting at you BTW) should stop chasing red herrings and focus on the problem. The top priority is Job Creation. It takes a guy off the dole and it lets him start paying taxes and PRSI which give a double boost to the country's finances. Cuts are needed, have been made and I'm sure they will continue to be made. Despite the fact that people say you can't live on the social welfare they are surviving so you obviously can.

I also believe that welfare fraud is costing a substantial amount and stopping this is a must. It has always cost us a fortune. Not because we are in a recession and "can't afford it" but because it is wrong in any economy. Irish governments never seriously address this. The thinly disguised "Jobs to work" plan seeks to do this but it is nothing more than the FF "National Employment Action Plan" re-packaged.

It seems to that you can't say something in Ireland anymore without people immediately building an entire profile of your entire belief system.

If I say "stop demonizing the unemployed during a recession and focus on job creation to solve the problem" then it translates to "I am opposed to welfare cuts". I am not. Welfare is in many cases too generous particularly when it compounds up and give a person a more than comfortable lifestyle then it is wrong. Not because he won't bother taking a job that is not there but because he does not need quite so much and "we can't afford it. - EVER". Mechanisms should be in place to fix these anomolies but be under no illusion that it will save huge sums of money.

I am opposed to sweeping cuts that are based on totally false assumptions.

Reinforcing the argument by claiming that multitudes on the dole are getting 35K a year and are being dis-incentivised to work is a bare-faced lie and I cannot believe anyone who propogates it is so stupid as to genuinely believe it.

Characterising the problem by saying anyone on the dole is a dole scrounger or ignoring the fact that only 20% of the Social Wefare budget goes on JSA/JSB helps no one. (unless one gets to feel good by ranting and raving)

Suggesting that if everyone on the dole tried harder to get a job would result in a fall in unemployment is to suggest that the basic rules of arithmetic can be defied.

The solution to a problem is not to solve another imaginary one just because the second "solution" is easy to implement.

The problem is that Job Creation is really, really hard to do. Governments
don't know how to do it and they know they don't.

It is easier to print glossy brochures, hold a press conference and say we are tackling unemployment by creating "one-stop-shops", "re-training and upskilling", "actively engaging with those on the live register" blah,blah,blah.

Anyway, with regard to the OP I would ask? Have you jacked in the job yet?

fliball123

Readyhed wrote: »

I have addressed the point. People (not getting at you BTW) should stop chasing red herrings and focus on the problem. The top priority is Job Creation. It takes a guy off the dole and it lets him start paying taxes and PRSI which give a double boost to the country's finances. Cuts are needed, have been made and I'm sure they will continue to be made. Despite the fact that people say you can't live on the social welfare they are surviving so you obviously can.

I also believe that welfare fraud is costing a substantial amount and stopping this is a must. It has always cost us a fortune. Not because we are in a recession and "can't afford it" but because it is wrong in any economy. Irish governments never seriously address this. The thinly disguised "Jobs to work" plan seeks to do this but it is nothing more than the FF "National Employment Action Plan" re-packaged.

It seems to that you can't say something in Ireland anymore without people immediately building an entire profile of your entire belief system.

If I say "stop demonizing the unemployed during a recession and focus on job creation to solve the problem" then it translates to "I am opposed to welfare cuts". I am not. Welfare is in many cases too generous particularly when it compounds up and give a person a more than comfortable lifestyle then it is wrong. Not because he won't bother taking a job that is not there but because he does not need quite so much and "we can't afford it. - EVER". Mechanisms should be in place to fix these anomolies but be under no illusion that it will save huge sums of money.

I am opposed to sweeping cuts that are based on totally false assumptions.

Reinforcing the argument by claiming that multitudes on the dole are getting 35K a year and are being dis-incentivised to work is a bare-faced lie and I cannot believe anyone who propogates it is so stupid as to genuinely believe it.

Characterising the problem by saying anyone on the dole is a dole scrounger or ignoring the fact that only 20% of the Social Wefare budget goes on JSA/JSB helps no one. (unless one gets to feel good by ranting and raving)

Suggesting that if everyone on the dole tried harder to get a job would result in a fall in unemployment is to suggest that the basic rules of arithmetic can be defied.

The solution to a problem is not to solve another imaginary one just because the second "solution" is easy to implement.

The problem is that Job Creation is really, really hard to do. Governments
don't know how to do it and they know they don't.

It is easier to print glossy brochures, hold a press conference and say we are tackling unemployment by creating "one-stop-shops", "re-training and upskilling", "actively engaging with those on the live register" blah,blah,blah.

Anyway, with regard to the OP I would ask? Have you jacked in the job yet?

What is the red herring here..we have to borrow 15 billion to keep the lights on and almost half of what we get through both borrowing and tax is paid in social welfare...thats not a red herring thats a big feckin monster which is constantly poking at us..I agree that it is tough on those on the dole and the cost of living is going up but as I say you cannot expect the tax payer to remain bent over a barrel while this monster rapes the ass of them and expect no cuts...Wheather the cuts in fraud, the base rate, how it is paid, the clerical work behind it, child benefit..it needs to be brought back in or we are completely fcuked