How do people survive on wages close to minimum wage?

pilly

People still trying to squeeze the "yeah but the ones on social welfare are much better off" into this thread I see.

pilly

pilly wrote: »

People still trying to squeeze the "yeah but the ones on social welfare are much better off" into this thread I see.

With very clear and plausible reasons why it can be true in some situations.

Pac1Man

Glenster wrote: »

As would I. But I don't think someone living off the bank of mammy and daddy when in college is realising his/her potential.

And I think that they're less equipped to deal with the real world (which, I think we can all agree, is a balls) once they graduate.

Nobody should live their life by some predetermined blueprint. If you have a blueprint for college do you also have one for life after college and what boxes you should be ticking at certain milestones?

Let me guess, the route you are highlighting is the exact route you took? Isn't that convenient.

This is just an example of looking down your nose and justifying the path that you took or were forced to take as the best path there is. It's a very pedestrian way of putting yourself on a pedestal.

One eyed Jack

Glenster wrote: »

As would I. But I don't think someone living off the bank of mammy and daddy when in college is realising his/her potential.

And I think that they're less equipped to deal with the real world (which, I think we can all agree, is a balls) once they graduate.

And finally, it was tough working and studying, but I was 18 and healthy and had no dependents and was well able for it. Having a part time job and moaning about it is part of the college experience.
Obviously if you're circumstances are different you'll have different needs. I'm just talking about those people in my specific situation.

I completely get where you're coming from and all, but honestly, their reality is just as much real world as anyone elses, and if their parents want to support them, I wouldn't judge them for that or suggest they're living off the bank of mammy and daddy (or sometimes someone unrelated who just wants to see them do well for themselves, and financing their education being one less thing for them to worry about).

Sure, having a part-time job and moaning about it (and there are many who just get on with it and don't moan), is part and parcel of college life for some, and more power to them, but the experience isn't universal, just like the experience of being unable to find a part-time job isn't universal. I don't think broad strokes really can be applied like that.

To answer the OPs question as to how do people survive on minimum wage, welfare, etc - that's about all they do, is survive on it. Some people are happy to do just that, some people want to better themselves, but they lack the opportunities or the tools to make opportunities for themselves, and some people do indeed see being on welfare as a lifestyle choice. It shouldn't be IMO, for anyone - nobody should be given that "opportunity".

paulmurphyvec

unfortunately not everyone has the option to go to college

_Brian

Zascar wrote: »

I wonder that myself. ?400 a week, ?1600 a month, less tax - how do you pay rent, bills, food... and the rest...

Most get by on a combination of FIS and child allowance.

Graces7

Lacey Helpful Sifter wrote: »

With very clear and plausible reasons why it can be true in some situations.

But you have not convinced anyone here. And many also seem not to understand what a welfare state is about. Need not virtue.

Graces7

pilly wrote: »

People still trying to squeeze the "yeah but the ones on social welfare are much better off" into this thread I see.

more than a hint of begrudgery creeping in too.

pilly

Graces7 wrote: »

more than a hint of begrudgery creeping in too.

Just amazes me how almost every single thread somehow ends up in:

"yeah but free houses"
"yeah but my tax money"
"yeah but scroungers"

What the fcuk has any of that to do with the initial OP?

Nothing. Some people just love to moan and bitch, have a certain agenda and can not let it go regardless of the subject.

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

But you have not convinced anyone here. And many also seem not to understand what a welfare state is about. Need not virtue.

I don't need to convince most people as they simply know its true, I'll never convince some are they are too blinded by bias.

To use the example quoted earlier. The difference between a single man on the dole + rent allowance and a single man on minimum wage is not much much more than 100 euro a week. But the person working has to actually work along with all the costs of working (transport, clothes, food etc). It also doesn't take into account any cash in hand work the person on the dole could be doing.

The working person also has to live in some sort of proximity to their job which could mean much higher rent than someone on the dole who can pretty much live anywhere.

One eyed Jack

Graces7 wrote: »

more than a hint of begrudgery creeping in too.

Yes Grace, I absolutely do begrudge people who view perpetuity on welfare as a lifestyle choice. That's not need, that's want. It's a very different scenario and I don't think anyone here would deny someone the opportunity to better themselves if they saw that person making an effort to better themselves.

You have no idea how much it ticks me off when I meet someone who says "I'm only talking to you because you can get me a house", she was wrong, but that's beside the point when there were four generations of them living in the same cramped, dirty hellhole and her attitude would transfer to her children, the same way her parents attitude had transferred to her.

pilly

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yes Grace, I absolutely do begrudge people who view perpetuity on welfare as a lifestyle choice. That's not need, that's want. It's a very different scenario and I don't think anyone here would deny someone the opportunity to better themselves if they saw that person making an effort to better themselves.

You have no idea how much it ticks me off when I meet someone who says "I'm only talking to you because you can get me a house", she was wrong, but that's beside the point when there were four generations of them living in the same cramped, dirty hellhole and her attitude would transfer to her children, the same way her parents attitude had transferred to her.

Again, what has that got do with this thread?

Glenster

Pac1Man wrote: »

Nobody should live their life by some predetermined blueprint. If you have a blueprint for college do you also have one for life after college and what boxes you should be ticking at certain milestones?

Let me guess, the route you are highlighting is the exact route you took? Isn't that convenient.

This is just an example of looking down your nose and justifying the path that you took or were forced to take as the best path there is. It's a very pedestrian way of putting yourself on a pedestal.

I'm just expressing what I think is the better option. In my opinion.

People need to relax on the whole "stop looking down your nose at me" kick.

I just think the earliest someone can experience their independence the better, you can always give an excuse for putting your life on hold; have to finish college, get my first job, get my first high paying job, save for my deposit, etc.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

pilly wrote: »

Again, what has that got do with this thread?

About as much as your post

tomwaterford

Graces7 wrote: »

But you have not convinced anyone here. And many also seem not to understand what a welfare state is about. Need not virtue.

Tbh I remember seeing before on some money advise programme on rte (remember them??)


That there was a lad working and his gf was in college and 2 kids with them,at the time he was earning 27K a year and the equilivalent at the time between dole and it qualifying his girlfriend for welfare (BTE) was 28K a year


It was something along those lines anyway (obviously he didn't quite the job as he was in line for payrise in a year or two and no rational person wants to sign on forever)

One eyed Jack

pilly wrote: »

Again, what has that got do with this thread?

It's more directly related to the opening post than any of your complaining so far that we shouldn't discuss people who view social welfare as a lifestyle choice. Why shouldn't we discuss people who view social welfare as a lifestyle choice when their attitudes and their actions have a direct impact on not only themselves, but their children, and a wider impact on society?

They're literally forcing generation after generation into living on a low-income lifestyle due their attitude to education and welfare from their own perspective, so their children often won't even get to where the OP is at -

Hollister11 wrote: »

Plenty of people I went to school with are working full time in supermarkets. Most would be on circa €10 per hour.

How do people live on roughly 400 quid a week. Now they all live at home with the folks but what are they going to do in the future when they need a mortgage? How are they going to afford it?

I'm in college atm, and earn €50 a week, just to get by, but I'm sacrificing money now to have a good paying job for life.

Would these people not go to college and at least doubt what there on now a few years after graduating?

EDIT: Thread Title should be - How do people survive on wages close to minimum wage?

You're more than welcome to report my posts if you have an issue with them rather than continue to post passive aggressive nonsense in every thread as if you think I value your opinion as much as you do.

Graces7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yes Grace, I absolutely do begrudge people who view perpetuity on welfare as a lifestyle choice. That's not need, that's want. It's a very different scenario and I don't think anyone here would deny someone the opportunity to better themselves if they saw that person making an effort to better themselves.

You have no idea how much it ticks me off when I meet someone who says "I'm only talking to you because you can get me a house", she was wrong, but that's beside the point when there were four generations of them living in the same cramped, dirty hellhole and her attitude would transfer to her children, the same way her parents attitude had transferred to her.

And you know how many such people? And are judging on what criteria? MYOB comes to mind.

Graces7

pilly wrote: »

Again, what has that got do with this thread?

Nothing. same few same posters

Graces7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's more directly related to the opening post than any of your complaining so far that we shouldn't discuss people who view social welfare as a lifestyle choice. Why shouldn't we discuss people who view social welfare as a lifestyle choice when their attitudes and their actions have a direct impact on not only themselves, but their children, and a wider impact on society?

They're literally forcing generation after generation into living on a low-income lifestyle due their attitude to education and welfare from their own perspective, so their children often won't even get to where the OP is at -





You're more than welcome to report my posts if you have an issue with them rather than continue to post passive aggressive nonsense in every thread as if you think I value your opinion as much as you do.

Maybe start a new thread?

pilly

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It's more directly related to the opening post than any of your complaining so far that we shouldn't discuss people who view social welfare as a lifestyle choice. Why shouldn't we discuss people who view social welfare as a lifestyle choice when their attitudes and their actions have a direct impact on not only themselves, but their children, and a wider impact on society?

They're literally forcing generation after generation into living on a low-income lifestyle due their attitude to education and welfare from their own perspective, so their children often won't even get to where the OP is at -





You're more than welcome to report my posts if you have an issue with them rather than continue to post passive aggressive nonsense in every thread as if you think I value your opinion as much as you do.

I have never said we shouldn't discuss people who make a choice to live on welfare. Simply that it has nothing to do with this thread.

You've posted the OP again which has no mention of social welfare as if that proves your point somewhat. It is about someone living on MINIMUM WAGE.

I for one am tired of every single thread turning into the same discussion over and over and I know plenty of others are too. And I will continue to moan about it and report posts that are off topic as I please.

Nothing passive aggressive about my posts. I'm quite open in my dislike for people constantly bringing up the same subjects as if it will convince the population if it's mentioned in every thread, regardless of the subject.

One eyed Jack

Graces7 wrote: »

And you know how many such people? And are judging on what criteria? MYOB comes to mind.

I do Grace, and working in social care I got to meet plenty more than I would have liked, which is why I don't work in social care any more, because their criteria were knowing their rights and their entitlements.

As for minding my own business, well I have no doubt that if you're familiar with the concept of welfare, you're familiar with how it's funded, and you're also familiar with the concept of social responsibility. People who choose welfare as a lifestyle choice, aren't.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

pilly

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Okay, so how does the discussion on how to live on very low income wherever it comes from turn into "spongers, free house, blah blah blah"?

jamesthepeach

When i was working for a company that provided me with a place to live i had to pay benefit in kind as it was classed as income.
So was anything else they gave me that wasn't officially pay.
I had a free house but got taxed on it.
So i suppose it wasn't free after all.

Graces7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I do Grace, and working in social care I got to meet plenty more than I would have liked, which is why I don't work in social care any more, because their criteria were knowing their rights and their entitlements.

As for minding my own business, well I have no doubt that if you're familiar with the concept of welfare, you're familiar with how it's funded, and you're also familiar with the concept of social responsibility. People who choose welfare as a lifestyle choice, aren't.

People do what people are allowed to do and there are correct channels to stop this. And you not judge and jury. MYOB is a good way? Plenty of better ways to use your commendable zeal!

You know that there is nothing you can do here; except complain.

Plenty of ways too to express and use your "social responsibilty". that might change things?

I see things I agree with you about but nothing I can do . Or that you can do.

One eyed Jack

pilly wrote: »

Okay, so how does the discussion on how to live on very low income wherever it comes from turn into "spongers, free house, blah blah blah"?

Because pilly I was answering from the perspective of how some people survive on low incomes - that's literally all they're doing, is surviving. There's a distinction IMO between surviving, and living - being able to enjoy a minimum standard of living, with access to quality healthcare, education and the opportunities for social mobility to get to, as I said, even where the OP is now, where they are determined that through applying themselves in education, they will earn a salary at some point which will afford them what they feel is a better quality of life.

Not everyone has access to those opportunities, and as I said - I don't think anyone here would deny anyone any opportunity to make a better life for themselves. There's quite a difference between those people who need social welfare, that's what it's there for; and those people who want social welfare, and reject any opportunity given to them in favour of social welfare as a lifestyle choice - that's not what it's there for.

I'm not engaging in any sort of bashing all people on social welfare as I was quite clear to make that distinction. You would have understood that if you'd actually read my posts instead of going off on one because I had the temerity to mention social welfare and housing in the same post.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Graces7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I do Grace, and working in social care I got to meet plenty more than I would have liked, which is why I don't work in social care any more, because their criteria were knowing their rights and their entitlements.

As for minding my own business, well I have no doubt that if you're familiar with the concept of welfare, you're familiar with how it's funded, and you're also familiar with the concept of social responsibility. People who choose welfare as a lifestyle choice, aren't.

Ah I missed that bit. I see! :rolleyes:

Welfare state rules. If you are able and lucky enough to work then you pay for those who cannot.

Widdershins

pilly wrote: »

People still trying to squeeze the "yeah but the ones on social welfare are much better off" into this thread I see.

I think it's easy to become bitter when working is getting you nowhere and things like USC are taking huge chunks from your income, car insurance is going through the roof in an almost unprecedented way and on one hand you have people smarmily saying things like ''you just have to upskill'' (without knowing the circumstances) and on the other, you can see the supports that are out there but they'd out of reach because you're maybe twenty euro a week over the threshold that doesn't take into account your mortgage and other costs, or they're just not available because you aren't claiming a weekly SW payment.
We do all have our struggles and I do agree there can be begrudgery to SW recipients though. It's not their fault, they don't make the rules or the system.

The most frustrating thing to me is hearing ''you have to cut your cloth and know how to budget'' especially coming from anyone who can avail of the supports and who is assuming I don't know and do those things already. Well, not as much of an issue now but that was a time I'll never forget and it taught me a lot about humility and not being judgemental.

Graces7

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Because pilly I was answering from the perspective of how some people survive on low incomes - that's literally all they're doing, is surviving. There's a distinction IMO between surviving, and living - being able to enjoy a minimum standard of living, with access to quality healthcare, education and the opportunities for social mobility to get to, as I said, even where the OP is now, where they are determined that through applying themselves in education, they will earn a salary at some point which will afford them what they feel is a better quality of life.

Not everyone has access to those opportunities, and as I said - I don't think anyone here would deny anyone any opportunity to make a better life for themselves. There's quite a difference between those people who need social welfare, that's what it's there for; and those people who want social welfare, and reject any opportunity given to them in favour of social welfare as a lifestyle choice - that's not what it's there for.

I'm not engaging in any sort of bashing all people on social welfare as I was quite clear to make that distinction. You would have understood that if you'd actually read my posts instead of going off on one because I had the temerity to mention social welfare and housing in the same post.

With great respect for your integrity, you are in fact judging many folk by your standards of health and ability.

I am seriously wondering what the correlation is between the closure of the big long stay mental hospitals and any increase in welfare take up?
Not everyone is blessed with the ability to hold down a good job .. they may seem to you to be feckless when they are in fact unwell
Not everyone is capable of living up to what YOU call a better life" for social reasons. If you "offer" what they cannot cope with? And they are aware of their limitations. As are their drs and social workers.

Graces7

Widdershins wrote: »

I think it's easy to become bitter when working is getting you nowhere and things like USC are taking huge chunks from your income, car insurance is going through the roof in an almost unprecedented way and on one hand you have people smarmily saying things like ''you just have to upskill'' (without knowing the circumstances) and on the other, you can see the supports that are out there but they'd out of reach because you're maybe twenty euro a week over the threshold that doesn't take into account your mortgage and other costs, or they're just not available because you aren't claiming a weekly SW payment.
We do all have our struggles and I do agree there can be begrudgery to SW recipients though. It's not their fault, they don't make the rules or the system.

The most frustrating thing to me is hearing ''you have to cut your cloth and know how to budget'' especially coming from anyone who can avail of the supports and who is assuming I don't know and do those things already. Well, not as much of an issue now but that was a time I'll never forget and it taught me a lot about humility and not being judgemental.

Oh dear! You speak as if eg the pension is a luxurious payment? Ideas re budgetting apply across all income and so does being content with what you have. Budgetting is simply common sense after all? Whatever you earn or have you have to live within it.

pilly

Widdershins wrote: »

I think it's easy to become bitter when working is getting you nowhere and things like USC are taking huge chunks from your income, car insurance is going through the roof in an almost unprecedented way and on one hand you have people smarmily saying things like ''you just have to upskill'' (without knowing the circumstances) and on the other, you can see the supports that are out there but they'd out of reach because you're maybe twenty euro a week over the threshold that doesn't take into account your mortgage and other costs, or they're just not available because you aren't claiming a weekly SW payment.
We do all have our struggles and I do agree there can be begrudgery to SW recipients though. It's not their fault, they don't make the rules or the system.

The most frustrating thing to me is hearing ''you have to cut your cloth and know how to budget'' especially coming from anyone who can avail of the supports and who is assuming I don't know and do those things already. Well, not as much of an issue now but that was a time I'll never forget and it taught me a lot about humility and not being judgemental.

Well I hope I'm not giving the impression of telling people they have to "cut their cloth". I certainly don't mean to.

I started off though by saying it is possible to live quite a content life on €400 a week. The same as yourself, I've been in all situations from earning huge money to being on social welfare to earning minimum wage to earning moderate money. It gives great perspective on things.

For some people, especially those who hit a rough patch later in life, owning their own home will never be a possibility so we can not assume everyone has the ability to do this.

What started it all off was the OP's assertion that everyone should go to college.

Graces7

Graces7 wrote: »

Ah I missed that bit. I see! :rolleyes:

Welfare state rules. If you are able and lucky enough to work then you pay for those who cannot.

No issue there, its paying for those who won't work that people have an issue with.

Graces7

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

NC has terrible poverty.

Your last para is so true; what is irking folk is the condemnation.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Graces7 wrote: »

With great respect for your integrity, you are in fact judging many folk by your standards of health and ability.

I am seriously wondering what the correlation is between the closure of the big long stay mental hospitals and any increase in welfare take up?
Not everyone is blessed with the ability to hold down a good job .. they may seem to you to be feckless when they are in fact unwell
Not everyone is capable of living up to what YOU call a better life" for social reasons. If you "offer" what they cannot cope with? And they are aware of their limitations. As are their drs and social workers.

And with equal respect, the discussion is about workers surviving on minimum wage rates in Ireland.

pilly

Widdershins wrote: »

I think it's easy to become bitter when working is getting you nowhere and things like USC are taking huge chunks from your income, car insurance is going through the roof in an almost unprecedented way and on one hand you have people smarmily saying things like ''you just have to upskill'' (without knowing the circumstances) and on the other, you can see the supports that are out there but they'd out of reach because you're maybe twenty euro a week over the threshold that doesn't take into account your mortgage and other costs, or they're just not available because you aren't claiming a weekly SW payment.
We do all have our struggles and I do agree there can be begrudgery to SW recipients though. It's not their fault, they don't make the rules or the system.

The most frustrating thing to me is hearing ''you have to cut your cloth and know how to budget'' especially coming from anyone who can avail of the supports and who is assuming I don't know and do those things already. Well, not as much of an issue now but that was a time I'll never forget and it taught me a lot about humility and not being judgemental.

I also agree it's easy to become bitter, but it's not good for anyone.

pilly

Edith Tart Thundercloud wrote: »

And with equal respect, the discussion is about workers surviving on minimum wage rates in Ireland.

Have you read the last 10 pages where posters are insisting that it's not? :rolleyes:

Be careful or you'll be described as passive/aggressive.

One eyed Jack

Graces7 wrote: »

Ah I missed that bit. I see! :rolleyes:

Welfare state rules. If you are able and lucky enough to work then you pay for those who cannot.

Of course Grace, that's why I was quite clear in my initial reply to you that I was only referring to those people who chose welfare as a lifestyle choice. I have no issue at all with the State supporting those people who cannot work. I have issues with people who choose welfare as a lifestyle choice with no intention nor will to ever work.

I also know plenty of elderly people who want to work, and people with cognitive and physical disabilities who want to work and want to contribute to society, and I don't begrudge those people welfare either. I want to give them every opportunity too. I am minding my own business, because that is the whole idea of social responsibility - social protection and social responsibility go hand in hand, and when some people are only interested in themselves, that upsets a delicate balance and tilts the scales in favour of those people only interested in themselves.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Graces7 wrote: »

Whatever you earn or have you have to live within it.

True to a degree but if you are a young adult starting off in life and only earning minimum wage, and not having the state paying towards your electricity bills, rent, fuel etc., it is not actuality possible to live as people should be living in 21st century Ireland and have some hope of bringing up a family or building a future.

Widdershins

pilly wrote: »

I also agree it's easy to become bitter, but it's not good for anyone.

And I don't mean that I am, but I think that's at the root of the begrudging posts. Fighting over it doesn't improve anyone's lot, of course.

I think it's just a sign that there are people who feel their needs are being ignored. Maybe someone in power will read this thread, you never know.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I think anyone contributing towards social protection is actually minding their business when they question it. What's bizzare is someone berating a person earning their own coin, for spending their cash frivolously. Surely that's more of an issue to MYOB on? Same way as I wouldn't begrudge someone spending all day Saturday in the bookies if they've earned the money they're blowing whereas I'd personally be disgusted by someone unemployed in the bookies all day

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

pilly wrote: »

Again, what has that got do with this thread?

Because it had to be said in reply to someone who keeps taking the discussion away from Minimum Wage.



I give up!!!

pilly

Widdershins wrote: »

And I don't mean that I am, but I think that's at the root of the begrudging posts. Fighting over it doesn't improve anyone's lot, of course.

I think it's just a sign that there are people who feel their needs are being ignored. Maybe someone in power will read this thread, you never know.

It's totally where the begrudging posts are coming from. I don't agree that fighting over it doesn't improve anyone's lot though.

Sweeping generalisations and out and out makey up stuff can not be allowed to be perpetuated.

Only this morning I've heard the old "she threw the buggy away because she knew she'd get a new one" line. I mean it's going around so long now you think the pram shops would be reporting huge surges in profits.

pilly

Edith Tart Thundercloud wrote: »

Because it had to be said in reply to someone who keeps taking the discussion away from Minimum Wage.



I give up!!!

I give up too, I've been trying to say exactly what your saying since the thread has turned into a social welfare bashing one for about the last 10 pages and posters have said it's relevant all of sudden.

That's my point.

ludite

One thing is they will have access to more grants etc. in the future. Council housing maybe...

Peregrine

I think this thread has run its course. It's turned into a philosophical discussion on what the topic is! :P

A few users banned for comments made yesterday.