unacceptable level of irregular social welfare payments

Mongfinder General

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Romania is riddled with crime actually

Who’s committing the crime in Romania?

mariaalice

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

What do you do for a living OP that allows you so much time to hate people on welfare, or "dark skinned" people you mentioned in the Greta thread? I would really hate to have that much bitterness inside me, I actually feel sorry for you. Be grateful for what you have and don't spend your days worrying about f*ckers on welfare. Sad.

There is a small few of them on boards, they are obsessed with social welfare

For some its a coping mechanism an easily identifiable group to blame, for other they really do feel they have a point.

Tony EH

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Self employed as a consultant. I spend a lot of time waiting on emails / for things to finish / people to show up.

FFS, and here's me thinking you did something valuable, like plumbing or a delivery driver. When all you are is an overpaid talking shop.

Here's news for you "Eric", one day your "consultancy" may become worthless and you'll have to suck on a lot of lemons while you go to the welfare yourself to try an make ends meet.

I hope you have a second line of work ready.

Eric Cartman

Boggles wrote: »

More bollix lad.

The majority of our social protection budget goes to pensions, disability, illness and carers.

And as weve seen pensions, disability and carers is being wildly abused

Graces7

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And as weve seen pensions, disability and carers is being wildly abused

Who is this WE?

Once again, proof please. Stats? Not just these wild clichés.. .oh and maybe buy yourself a large punchbag? Exercise will help you.. and oh yes; go to your local food bank /meals centre and meet some folk there. Talk to V de Paul.

and as you are claiming that disability benefits are abused, maybe tackle the doctors who assess and sign. It is very very hard to get these benefits.

pjohnson

Graces7 wrote: »

Who is this WE?

Once again, proof please. Stats? Not just these wild clichés.. .oh and maybe buy yourself a large punchbag? Exercise will help you.. and oh yes; go to your local food bank /meals centre and meet some folk there. Talk to V de Paul.

and as you are claiming that disability benefits are abused, maybe tackle the doctors who assess and sign. It is very very hard to get these benefits.

Eric is much to important to lower himself to go to a food bank.

Boggles

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And as weve seen pensions, disability and carers is being wildly abused

No we haven't lad that is the bollix portion of your brain kicking the absolute shít out of the logical part.

It's carnage.

Wibbs

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

They are really struggling. They get welfare but it’s not much, especially with a mortgage to pay (bills don’t go away). They are barely making ends meet on top of the stress of dealing with the illness. Do you think going from two solid incomes to needing welfare is no biggie? Come on.

Yep and as you said you can burn through savings like crazy when that happens. And there's the part that is usually forgotten about, or avoided for obvious emotional reasons; the afterwards when that sad day comes. If someone is out of the labour market for years, sometimes decades as a carer(or on disability) they go into the same labour market at a very different level to when they left it. Unless they have a marketable and static as far as technological advances go skillset not much beyond minimum wage is their bounty. If they can get hired at all. How many companies are going to give the nod to a middle aged man or woman with out of date skills, often declining health, out of the job market for years?

Eric Cartman

Boggles wrote: »

No we haven't lad that is the bollix portion of your brain kicking the absolute shít out of the logical part.

It's carnage.

The only thing ive campaigned against is waste and fraud , why are you defending this, why do so many people cherry pick genuine examples of welfare need to use as a sheild to hide the wasters behind.

If I implemented the fraud standards and measures I wanted to it would dramatically cut costs and the genuine cases wouldnt see any negative impact

ohnonotgmail

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The only thing ive campaigned against is waste and fraud , why are you defending this, why do so many people cherry pick genuine examples of welfare need to use as a sheild to hide the wasters behind.

If I implemented the fraud standards and measures I wanted to it would dramatically cut costs and the genuine cases wouldnt see any negative impact

if you are going to post nonsense like this without backing it up you can expect to get called out on it.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And as weve seen pensions, disability and carers is being wildly abused

Boggles

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The only thing ive campaigned against is waste and fraud , why are you defending this, why do so many people cherry pick genuine examples of welfare need to use as a sheild to hide the wasters behind.

Talking absolute ignorant scutter on an anonymous messaging board is not a campaign lad.

You do understand that right?

Geuze

I spoke to the head of all non-con pensions.

These are means-tested.

The main issue is that pensioners don't fully declare all assets at the means-test.

My own relations did this, and then the DSP had a claim on the assets in their estate, which is fair enough, as they hadn't told the truth.

Also, pensioners save out of their non-con pensions, and so then they may be getting overpaid, as their assets are rising.

FishOnABike

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The only thing ive campaigned against is waste and fraud , why are you defending this, why do so many people cherry pick genuine examples of welfare need to use as a sheild to hide the wasters behind.

If I implemented the fraud standards and measures I wanted to it would dramatically cut costs and the genuine cases wouldnt see any negative impact

If I recall correctly the last time there was a big public drive against social welfare fraud it was widely reported that it cost more than it saved as the amount of fraud actually detected was miniscule.

The majority of the suspected fraud cases reported to 'fraud lines' were mistaken, frequently because those 'reporting' did not understand the social supports available to people in various circumstances e.g. family income support, part time workers, back to education allowance, back to work enterprise allowance, disability allowance etc...

iamwhoiam

Geuze wrote: »

I spoke to the head of all non-con pensions.

These are means-tested.

The main issue is that pensioners don't fully declare all assets at the means-test.

My own relations did this, and then the DSP had a claim on the assets in their estate, which is fair enough, as they hadn't told the truth.

Also, pensioners save out of their non-con pensions, and so then they may be getting overpaid, as their assets are rising.

I would like to know how anyone could save out of a non con pension alone

weldoninhio

Graces7 wrote: »

Who is this WE?

Once again, proof please. Stats? Not just these wild clich. .oh and maybe buy yourself a large punchbag? Exercise will help you.. and oh yes; go to your local food bank /meals centre and meet some folk there. Talk to V de Paul.

and as you are claiming that disability benefits are abused, maybe tackle the doctors who assess and sign. It is very very hard to get these benefits.

Jesus!! Vincent De Paul!! The ones who use charity money to buy cigarettes for thugs in prison??

Boggles

weldoninhio wrote: »

Jesus!! Vincent De Paul!! The ones who use charity money to buy cigarettes for thugs in prison??

Link?

Take your time.

Geuze

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I would like to know how anyone could save out of a non con pension alone

Many pensioners have zero accomm costs, e.g. mortgage, rent.

Many lead simple lives.

Many get a FTP, med card, free TV licence, 35 pm off elec.

(The ESB actually owes a relation of mine, as in, she spends less than 35 pm on elec)


The non-con pension is 237 pw + 9 pw if you live alone = 248.

weldoninhio

Boggles wrote: »

Link?

Take your time.

I don't have a link, I know people who have been inside and got their cigarettes and some toiletries from St V de P.

Eric Cartman

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't have a link, I know people who have been inside and got their cigarettes and some toiletries from St V de P.

They also hand out dunnes vouchers around christmas which are not supposed to he used for alcohol or cigarettes which any dunnes employee ive ever spoken to said management would often tell them to turn a blind eye to that due to the violent nature of a lot of the recipients being told no when they attempt to spend the majority of the voucher on specifically those things

Graces7

Geuze wrote: »

Many pensioners have zero accomm costs, e.g. mortgage, rent.

Many lead simple lives.

Many get a FTP, med card, free TV licence, 35 pm off elec.

(The ESB actually owes a relation of mine, as in, she spends less than 35 pm on elec)


The non-con pension is 237 pw + 9 pw if you live alone = 248.

Please define "many"? thank you. And exact numbers? we need food, heating clothes.. Oh and the esb is the standing charge and a few units now,. Covers lights if you are careful. . we lead " simple " lives as we cannot afford to do what others enjoy. and a tv costs..

Boggles

weldoninhio wrote: »

I don't have a link, I know people who have been inside and got their cigarettes and some toiletries from St V de P.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

They also hand out dunnes vouchers around christmas which are not supposed to he used for alcohol or cigarettes which any dunnes employee ive ever spoken to said management would often tell them to turn a blind eye to that due to the violent nature of a lot of the recipients being told no when they attempt to spend the majority of the voucher on specifically those things

Sure.

facehugger99

I think it's completely possible to fully support a welfare state but to question it at the same time.

My job brings me into contact with Government Depts and the level of waste, that I have sight of, is frightening. It would beggar belief to think that the largest Gov Dept (in terms of expenditure) isn't wasting 10's, maybe even 100's of millions every year.

The worst thing about such waste is that it reduces the amounts available to those who genuinely need it.

Loafing Oaf

At the risk of derailing the discussion, I wonder would the introduction of a universal basic income reduce or even largely eliminate fraud and waste around welfare by streamlining the system.

Boggles

facehugger99 wrote: »

I think it's completely possible to fully support a welfare state but to question it at the same time.

We don't have a welfare state, we would need to at least double or social protection budget and fix every other vital service before we could even be considered a welfare state.

People really need to stop getting their information from sweaty incoherent simpletons like Peter Casey.

Eric Cartman

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

At the risk of derailing the discussion, I wonder would the introduction of a universal basic income reduce or even largely eliminate fraud and waste around welfare by streamlining the system.

Perhaps it would , however it wouldnt stop those who have no desire to work ever from squandering that money on luxuries they shouldnt be.

begsbyOnaTrain

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

At the risk of derailing the discussion, I wonder would the introduction of a universal basic income reduce or even largely eliminate fraud and waste around welfare by streamlining the system.

Can you even imagine. Paul Murphy, SF and all the usual types out marching against "money for the rich".

Loafing Oaf

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Perhaps it would , however it wouldnt stop those who have no desire to work ever from squandering that money on luxuries they shouldnt be.

Okay but that's a separate issue. It looks like developments in technology will mean there won't be enough work to go around, even for people who genuinely want to work, so IMO we need to be looking at ways to make the welfare system 'fit for purpose' in that future.

Tony EH

facehugger99 wrote: »

I think it's completely possible to fully support a welfare state but to question it at the same time.

There's "questioning" aspects of a system and then there's pissing and moaning about it at every single juncture.

One is fine. The other is being a petty and miserable bastard for no real reason other than being a petty miserable bastard.

I've known plenty of mouthy heroes that will bang on about welfare as if it's the worst thing that has ever happened and will continuously hold up what is a tiny, miniscule, fraction of cases to support their "cause", while continually disregarding everything else that doesn't.

To a man, the people that hold those petty views are tiresome, twisted, joyless, individuals that deserve pity more than anything else and their poisonous views on what welfare can provide for some people are worthless in the grand scheme of things.

Loafing Oaf

begsbyOnaTrain wrote: »

Can you even imagine. Paul Murphy, SF and all the usual types out marching against "money for the rich".

Would they? They generally seem to be opposed to means testing for any sort of benefit. If it was explained that the wealthy would be returning their UBI through the tax system I think opposition on the left would largely die down.

Graces7

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Perhaps it would , however it wouldnt stop those who have no desire to work ever from squandering that money on luxuries they shouldnt be.

None of your business what folk spend any money on. and how do you know they do?