Here is a novel idea.

hunglikeaflee

I am one of the working force that constantly gets hit in the pocket when the government wants to collect more money. I am sick of always giving while others just take. Here is an idea that would spread the pain over the whole country not just the same people the whole time.

Why not look at the net amount every one gets. Include wages for those that are working, unemployment benefit for those that are not. Include rent allowances, housing payments, children’s allowance, and all the other benefits people get. Include what rent would be paid for a house owned by or paid for by the council, so if it is a council house allow 500 – 1200 a month depending on location as that is what you would be paying if it was private. Take everything into account.

Next get people to pay a % of that, 1,2, 4 whatever. That way everyone is paying not just the same people paying while the same people sit back and take.

Yes it would take a lot to administer this in the first place but once done it would be easy to monitor and as I said make it fair on the people that have been doing all the paying up to now.



Make everyone pay.

cbrlover

Great idea but I feel it would take too much to admin it.

cson

That's not a million miles away from Communism what you're suggesting there.

themadchef

cson wrote: »

That's not a million miles away from Communism what you're suggesting there.

Wouldint it make a nice change Ted.

For the love of God they cant administrate means testing the childrens allowance. We need a radical overhaul of how things are being done that's for sure. We dont elect the people for the jobs though. We elect teachers instead of economists. (No offence meant to teachers but they are trained to teach, not run the God dam country).

Would you ask a plumber to bake your wedding cake? He'd have a crack at it if the money was good and the pension was sound. I would especially if i was handy at baking.




So how do you get those people into government? The people with the skills to do the jobs.

hunglikeaflee

cson wrote: »

That's not a million miles away from Communism what you're suggesting there.

Let me suggest, rather than make yourself look silly, you do some research before making a statement like this. You obviously don’t understand what Communism is, let me help you. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=definition+of+communism

It has noting to do with getting people to pay a fair share.

maximoose

I dunno, it's an interesting idea.. but would it make a good book? Not so sure

bbsrs

[Quote=themadchef; We need a radical overhaul of how things are being done that's for sure. .[/Quote]

We do need radical change the only problem Irish politicians say radical when they really mean , we'll make a number of slight changes which should ,if everything goes to plan , make no difference at all and we'll maintain the status quo.

General Atomic

You live in a society with wealth redistribution, if you don't like it then move to Somalia; their laissez-faire approach might appeal to you. The social safety net isn't designed to be fair to everyone, it's designed to make sure that no-one can fall below a certain level. That means that those of us, myself included, who earn money must pay to maintain that floor.

The people that you characterize as 'takers' don't want to be in this position; we had an extremely low unemployment rate before the crash. The people who are now unemployed didn't suddenly decide to stop working and sit on their arses, they lost their jobs due to the recession. Just be thankful that you didn't lose yours. I'm sure that if you had, you wouldn't be strutting around feeling self-righteous as you are now. You'd be terrified that the government really would institute the changes you've mentioned and make life even more miserable for you.

The number of posts I see where people advocate for gutting social welfare or letting go half the civil service is truly frightening. What do you think would happen if we ballooned that unemployment register like that or put so many poor people out on the street? Look to Greece if you want the answer, we'll have right-wingers patrolling the streets for immigrants to assault, parents giving up their children for adoption because they can't afford them and elderly people huddling in cold dark houses because they can no longer afford bills. And if you think it would solve the country's debt issues, you've got a very poor grasp of economics.

hunglikeaflee

General Atomic wrote: »

You live in a society with wealth redistribution, if you don't like it then move to Somalia;

First off I don’t live in a society where wealth is redistributed; the wealthy of this country are still wealthy. What you are talking about sounds more like what cson suggested, communism.
Secondly, where do you get off telling me or anyone to leave my country.

General Atomic wrote: »

The social safety net isn't designed to be fair to everyone, it's designed to make sure that no-one can fall below a certain level. That means that those of us, myself included, who earn money must pay to maintain that floor.

Well that is funny because my neighbor who doesn’t work has a bigger income coming into his house (when you take all the benefits) than I have to mine. He can have 2 cars and at least 1 holiday in the sun a year. I can’t. So where is the safety net? My wife is at home flat on her back in pain and can’t afford to get a doctor, yet he has a medical card for his whole family.

General Atomic wrote: »

The people that you characterize as 'takers' don't want to be in this position:

A huge amount of them do want to be there and no mater what way you spruce it up, they are takers.

General Atomic wrote: »

we had an extremely low unemployment rate before the crash..

We still had 10s of thousands, yet there were companies looking for staff and couldn’t fill the posts.

General Atomic wrote: »

The people who are now unemployed didn't suddenly decide to stop working and sit on their arses, they lost their jobs due to the recession. Just be thankful that you didn't lose yours.

I would be better off if I was but I would still be prepared to give up rather than expect others to do it all the time.

General Atomic wrote: »

The number of posts I see where people advocate for gutting social welfare or letting go half the civil service is truly frightening. What do you think would happen if we ballooned that unemployment register like that or put so many poor people out on the street? Look to Greece if you want the answer, we'll have right-wingers patrolling the streets for immigrants to assault, parents giving up their children for adoption because they can't afford them and elderly people huddling in cold dark houses because they can no longer afford bills. And if you think it would solve the country's debt issues, you've got a very poor grasp of economics.

What have these ratings got anything to do with what I am suggesting.

frankosw

General Atomic wrote: »

. The people who are now unemployed didn't suddenly decide to stop working and sit on their arses, they lost their jobs due to the recession..

What,all of them?

I know of three people with kids who havnt worked in at least 5 years because they cant afford childcare and the dole provides a better life for them.

An ex of mine went to college as a mature student,finished up 3 years ago and has done exactly nothing since,the rent allowance alone making it more than worth her while.

A guy i know who's a plumber was doing a big contract job for some company,has been inter-railing,travelled to hong kong and now spends pretty much all day in bed..he wont even look at work people might have because he cannot be bothered.

In adition a number of people i know from school have been unemployed ever since and have always supplemented thier income doing Nixers and have pretty good lifestyles as a result.

Dont forget also that this recession cannot be blamed for everything,the so-called "newly unemployed" are now coming up to 4 years on the dole..you really mean to say they could find *nothing* in that time?

Idbatterim

The people that you characterize as 'takers' don't want to be in this position; we had an extremely low unemployment rate before the crash. The people who are now unemployed didn't suddenly decide to stop working and sit on their arses, they lost their jobs due to the recession.

LOL yes Id agree the majority dont, but there are far too many creaming off the hard work of others with no intention of ever getting off their h**es the parasites! I read in the indo the other day shock horror, that a Labour, yes you read correctly, TD said that welfare for life has to stop. I agree the majority would would prefer to work if a they could find it a. find work and b. it paid to work as opposed to claim welfare.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/labour/199814-colm-keaveney-calls-end-era-welfare-life.html

I know of three people with kids who havnt worked in at least 5 years because they cant afford childcare and the dole provides a better life for them.

frank thats why as per my point b. above, it doesnt pay for everyone to work. You can thank the government for that!

Man007

I have to agree with most of what Frankosw says

Welfare should exist to stop people falling below a certain level not supplement cushy lifestyles

I don't buy this newly unemployed line there are whole areas in parts of Dublin were the majority have never worked and never intend to why because welfare gives them a good lifestyle

I'd like to see this Government tackle welfare fraud its so easy in my opinion if a Single Mother has 2 kids for the same father and both have the fathers surname yet they claim all the benefits while the father lives with them she is clearly scamming the system

You might say that it won't save much money but it will go a long way to me thinking the system is fairer as I for one am sick of seeing my take home pay decrease while these people who contribute nothing are laughing at us

Everyone should have to pay something

Idbatterim

I have to agree with most of what Frankosw says

Welfare should exist to stop people falling below a certain level not supplement cushy lifestyles

I don't buy this newly unemployed line there are whole areas in parts of Dublin were the majority have never worked and never intend to why because welfare gives them a good lifestyle

I'd like to see this Government tackle welfare fraud its so easy in my opinion if a Single Mother has 2 kids for the same father and both have the fathers surname yet they claim all the benefits while the father lives with them she is clearly scamming the system

You might say that it won't save much money but it will go a long way to me thinking the system is fairer as I for one am sick of seeing my take home pay decrease while these people who contribute nothing are laughing at us

Everyone should have to pay something

i dont think anyone disagrees with this except the long term wasters... In relation to the kids, I reckon that the fathers name should have to be put on the birth cert and that they would have to contribute a certain percentage of their welfare or salary on a weekly basis, if it stung them in the pocket, they wouldnt be as Blasé at popping out a few sprogs they expect the state taxpayer to pay for their entire lives!

I am one of the working force that constantly gets hit in the pocket when the government wants to collect more money. I am sick of always giving while others just take. Here is an idea that would spread the pain over the whole country not just the same people the whole time.

I also agree that nobody should be entitled to anything that any other citizen isnt, with the exception of the possible greyish area of housing. That includes free legal aid etc!

John.Icy

frankosw wrote: »

I know of three people with kids who havnt worked in at least 5 years because they cant afford childcare and the dole provides a better life for them.

Can I have their names so I can report them to the state?

Seriously, people who are just munching away on the dole and not bothered to look for work are the reason the country will take forever to get out of this mess.

frankosw

John.Icy wrote: »

Can I have their names so I can report them to the state?

.

The state knows all about them..there's no penalties for being on the dole forever..no penalties for failing to look for work..its a welfare state that supports people for life if they want.

hunglikeaflee

John.Icy wrote: »

Seriously, people who are just munching away on the dole and not bothered to look for work are the reason the country will take forever to get out of this mess.

This is why I say everyone should pay.

doc_17

The USC was brought in partly to make everyone pay something. But then the government weaked it so that the lower paid (under 10,000) now don't have to contribute and those on average industrial wage will (reportedly) have to pay more after this year's budget

Scortho

frankosw wrote: »

What,all of them?

I know of three people with kids who havnt worked in at least 5 years because they cant afford childcare and the dole provides a better life for them.

An ex of mine went to college as a mature student,finished up 3 years ago and has done exactly nothing since,the rent allowance alone making it more than worth her while.

A guy i know who's a plumber was doing a big contract job for some company,has been inter-railing,travelled to hong kong and now spends pretty much all day in bed..he wont even look at work people might have because he cannot be bothered.

In adition a number of people i know from school have been unemployed ever since and have always supplemented thier income doing Nixers and have pretty good lifestyles as a result.

Dont forget also that this recession cannot be blamed for everything,the so-called "newly unemployed" are now coming up to 4 years on the dole..you really mean to say they could find *nothing* in that time?

Frank I think this is the first post of yours that i've agreed with!:D
The problem with the social welfare is there is no incentive to move from basic dole to minimum wage work as the effort:wage difference is too small.

A person on Job seekers allowance who is 25 or over will get €188 a week. If they're working in a minimum wage job and doing 40 hours a week, they'll be getting €346.
The difference between what they were getting on Job seekers allowance is €158. This gives them an effective wage for their 40 hours work of €3.95 an hour.

Farmer Pudsey

Scortho wrote: »

Frank I think this is the first post of yours that i've agreed with!:D
The problem with the social welfare is there is no incentive to move from basic dole to minimum wage work as the effort:wage difference is too small.

A person on Job seekers allowance who is 25 or over will get €188 a week. If they're working in a minimum wage job and doing 40 hours a week, they'll be getting €346.
The difference between what they were getting on Job seekers allowance is €158. This gives them an effective wage for their 40 hours work of €3.95 an hour.

Also there is the actual cost of going to work, transport in the cities is possible to get however if you live in rural or if your work is a distance away in larger urban area's you need a car. You also cannot turn up for work in most jobs in tackies and tracksuits so that is another cost. If your work is mobile (driving) you have the cost of lunch etc. All in all it cost a minimum of 50 euro/week to go to work and for most 100/week.

So for a person earning 346 the effective extra is at most 100/ week so about 2.5 euro/hour. Oh I made a mistake it a 39 hour week.

harry21

Identify the 3 or 4% of people who don't want to work and take away all their payments completely.

Have everyone else perfrom at a minimum 15 hours a week general service (some time must be maintained for job seeking)

Give a €500 bonus to both companies and employees of the company when they gain employment and keep it for 12 months.

Means assess everyone - elimate Jobseekers benefit (but enure the means is tested immediately)

Require all jobseekers to register a skill/trade/ability/service and to trade in credit hours with other jobseekers for any requirements

€50 of the weekly payment should be in foodstamps which all food shops must accept (and they can claim the money directly from the government)

Scortho

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Also there is the actual cost of going to work, transport in the cities is possible to get however if you live in rural or if your work is a distance away in larger urban area's you need a car. You also cannot turn up for work in most jobs in tackies and tracksuits so that is another cost. If your work is mobile (driving) you have the cost of lunch etc. All in all it cost a minimum of 50 euro/week to go to work and for most 100/week.

So for a person earning 346 the effective extra is at most 100/ week so about 2.5 euro/hour. Oh I made a mistake it a 39 hour week.

I excluded the cost of employment so no-one could argue the base figure.
I should have included it however so thank you for high-lighting it.

the cut off for the usc is €10,036 so they'd be paying this every week too.
They wouldn't be paying prsi however.
Would they lose their rent allowance? Citizens information say you might if youre working more than 30 hours a week.

Its a tough call to make.
Do you reduce social welfare to make it benifical to take up a job on minimum wage?
Or do you increase minimum wage to a level where it makes sense to take a job for financial reasons (obviously you should take a job if offered, but many wont if all they're earning is an extra €2.50 an hour)?
However there may not be any minimum wage jobs then.

Farmer Pudsey

Scortho wrote: »

I excluded the cost of employment so no-one could argue the base figure.
I should have included it however so thank you for high-lighting it.

the cut off for the usc is €10,036 so they'd be paying this every week too.
They wouldn't be paying prsi however.
Would they lose their rent allowance? Citizens information say you might if youre working more than 30 hours a week.

Its a tough call to make.
Do you reduce social welfare to make it benifical to take up a job on minimum wage?
Or do you increase minimum wage to a level where it makes sense to take a job for financial reasons (obviously you should take a job if offered, but many wont if all they're earning is an extra €2.50 an hour)?
However there may not be any minimum wage jobs then.

The cost of going to work also includes loss of benifits which happen very early in the wage structure and thisng's like rent allowance,medical card in the case of single people and educational benifits as well in the case of families.

As it is we have one of the highest minimum wage in the the EU so there is not much room to rise it

thebman

harry21 wrote: »

Identify the 3 or 4% of people who don't want to work and take away all their payments completely.

And do what with them ...

Leave them to die? They'll probably turn to crime first.

harry21

Offer them €5000 to leave the country!!

Man007

thebman wrote: »

And do what with them ...

Leave them to die? They'll probably turn to crime first.

Why not maybe they might get up off their lazy arses and get a job.

Maybe cutting them off altogether is too much but they should definitely have their benefits cut.



Anyone long term unemployed should be made to work for their benefits whether it be sweeping streets helping on state construction jobs or anything then if they refuse they should be given nothing. Cut them off altogether

jmayo

Some people seem to forget that even during the height of the bubble in 2005 we had 4.2% unemployment, that equates to about 80,000 to 90,000 who were not working.
In 2007 we had 4.5% unemployment, around 100,000 which is just under a quarter of our current number.
And I know that 4 odd percent is termed full employment.
Why I would like to know ?

And what did our government do ?
Well they decided that the unmeployed during the boom/bubble should be rewarded rather than forced out to work, often filling vacancies that could only be filled by the importation of foreign labour.
And I am not talking about professionals and skilled trades people, but people doing good honest menial jobs.

I would say that there is about a 1/5 of our unemployed who would never work anyway and they have always been rewarded for this lifestyle choice.