Just look at the support proposed for Irelands unemployed.....

The Ruthsayer said:
Interesting. I will check that Trug. What those (including myself), who worked in organisations that advised on benefits actually saw was that it was often detrimental to the early born children as the benefits encouraged additional children. I know that sounds draconian and prescriptive, but I am talking about that which I actually experienced (albeit working only a few hours per week on a voluntary basis). From a theoretical perspective I didn't agree, but there's often an imperfect transition from theory to reality.
Click to expand...
We have fostered kids for 25 years. We have definately seen the increase in family break ups and kids being removed from them since this was introduced. Neglect has shot up. It is not always the youngest who goes into care either. There is not enough food for a large family- how can there be if there is only enough money to feed two kids? Some kids we have taken in have brought a small plastic bag with their belongings. And that is it. Christmas does not exist for some kids. Some kids are smelly, unkempt, dirty. Parents need to make a decision on buying food, clothes, hygiene products. It is safer for the kids to be brought into care.
I cannot go into details but some of the kids stories that we cared for will break your heart and if you have any sense of humanity you will curse the government to eternal damnation
 
Trug said:
Some parents need a hand- instead they are getting a boot
Click to expand...
I'm sure that is true, but some abuse the privilege of having children and unrestricted support encourages this. I know this doesn't fit the view we would like to hold of parents, but I'm reporting my experience.
Edit: just for those unfamiliar with our Byzantine benefits system, there is no limit on the number of children that receive child benefit, but 'child tax credits' are limited to the first two children only. This was introduced in 2003.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't help that a lot of people who work in the benefits system don't know what they're doing.

I'm sure most of us on here know people in the MDSA. One of their members was on a telephone call discussing his congenital condition, when the caseworker asked how long he'd had the condition.
 
The UK welfare for the unemployed has reduced in recent years.

I know the replacement for jobseekers is only about £80 per week, when living take homelivinbg wage is around £300 per week. In the UK you can claim housing benefit (say for 1 bed property) and council tax relief (I think at 80%), thats probably worth around £140 per week in average part of the UK, giving £220 a week. Still £80 short of enough the live on.

Looking at Ireland can an unemployed person claim housing benefit?

In the UK Jobseekers became means tested after 6 months?

As I have posted before alot of the UK unemployed have been moved onto sickness benefits, in part because it is easier to hide unemployment, particularly in the economically deprived regions like Teesside and ex-mining areas. For the claimant there is no need to look actively for work or less need. The media tend to not talk about these things.

I also think raising the age for pensioner status will produce problems - although its illegal there is age discrimination amongst many employers. I also don't think the mid range population is more healthy and fitter than say 30 yeards ago. Heavily processed food (e,g chcken nuggests), takeaways, sedantry work and lifestyle are really starting to affect the 45 to 66 age group and I count myself. For women the retirement age has quickly risen from 60 to 66 in the last 7 years.
 
Unravel_Morrison said:
It doesn't help that a lot of people who work in the benefits system don't know what they're doing.

I'm sure most of us on here know people in the MDSA. One of their members was on a telephone call discussing his congenital condition, when the caseworker asked how long he'd had the condition.
Click to expand...
We are told they they assessors are all health and medical professionals. Last week it was announced 5,000 more are going to be recruited in the next 12 months. I was told of someone with no eye balls, who had been asked what they could see.
 
Rofesleg said:
Is it a like for like comparison?
As far as I can tell the €220 is only available to people who earned on average, over €300 p.w. in the previous year and have paid enough PRSI contributions. And it is paid for a maximum of 9 months.
I think it drops to less than €100 if they don't meet the criteria.

I was recently speaking to my sister in Ireland whose friend has just lost his job. They felt the lack of care he received was disgraceful. Apparently if he doesn't find a job in 9 months his payments will stop altogether as he has savings. Once he has spent them he can reapply. There were lots of other complaints about travel, health care, water costs, energy, food prices, tax.....but it was a bit of a generic rant.

The grass isn't always as green as it appears.

It do like their 'Parachute Payment' system used to ease the initial burden of losing a job.

The pension contribution for carers already exists in the UK.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. Really difficult to compare stuff like this.
 
The Ruthsayer said:
I'm sure that is true, but some abuse the privilege of having children and unrestricted support encourages this.
Click to expand...
Isn't this exactly the argument the government want people to be making about benefits though?

Some will abuse the system, of course they will. But how many and can you justify penalising everyone else because of it?

You'll never have a perfect system that isn't open to abuse. And of course the cost to the tax payer of benefit fraud is tiny compared to that of tax avoidance by multi nationals and billionaires.
 
Ref problems for the over 50s to get work - see linked article. It is GB News, but its not a particular political debate, don't see why they would distort this information.

 
Trug said:
In Germany, unemployed people over 50 are entitled to extra benefits as it is recognised that it is harder to find work at that age, despite it being illegal to discriminate on age grounds
Click to expand...
Sensible approach in Germany - In the UK, the agenda is more about how Government actions look - not common sense - so we have sending asylum seekers to Rwanda for assessment and telling 65 year olds with medical conditions their benefits will be cut or stopped if they don't quickly find a job, because it looks good in the right wing media outlets and with the Lee Andersons of this World.
 
The Ruthsayer said:
Probably the only Tory policy I agreed with was restricting child benefits.
Click to expand...
I thought you meant phasing out child benefit if one parent was earning over £50k.

There are an absolute load of middle class people on twitter complaining about an 80% marginal tax rate as they have 1 parent earning £60k+ & the other a stay at home parent and how unfair it is that families with 2 incomes of £50k receive full child benefit payments.
 
newusername said:
I thought you meant phasing out child benefit if one parent was earning over £50k.

There are an absolute load of middle class people on twitter complaining about an 80% marginal tax rate as they have 1 parent earning £60k+ & the other a stay at home parent and how unfair it is that families with 2 incomes of £50k receive full child benefit payments.
Click to expand...
80% marginal tax rate is obscene.

The problem is these bizarre tax rates at certain points in the tax system. Needs sorting.

Check Dan Niedle on twitter for info.
 
The Ruthsayer said:
Probably the only Tory policy I agreed with was restricting child benefits.
Click to expand...
Why? It just pushes more children into poverty when the levels are currently the highest in a generation.

With an aging population and a declining birth rate, who are the workers for the future? When we are working until 80 in the future I’m sure you won’t agree with the policy at that stage
 
Colgates_shaving_foam said:
Tell me you don't understand how an economy works without telling me you don't understand how an economy works.
Click to expand...
I do think this is a major problem with the EU. If you have a common trading zone then allowing variable rates of corporation tax and offshoring of profits should have been a non-starter under EU rules.
 
JM14 said:
Why? It just pushes more children into poverty when the levels are currently the highest in a generation.

With an aging population and a declining birth rate, who are the workers for the future? When we are working until 80 in the future I’m sure you won’t agree with the policy at that stage
Click to expand...
They is too many people on the planet need to depopulate to provide a better society for future that's the facts. If you can't fund your child why have them it's not on the state to provide for your children. The best way to resolve climate change is to reduce human population
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top