• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

720,000 in Poverty In Ireland: how will be there after the Banks have been saved?


Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
41
Some Stark facts:
For 2008:
44% of unemployed individuals were at
risk of poverty.

Just under one in five of those with a
chronic illness were at risk of poverty.

6.9% of the population experience
consistent poverty.

In 2006 almost one in three lone
parent households and 11.1% of
children experienced consistent poverty
– both increased since 2005.


Overall 17% of people were at risk of
poverty using the Irish measurement.
This includes 39.6 % of lone parents,
25.8% of those with primary education
or less and 6.5% of those in work.

Source: http://www.eapn.ie/documents/15_EAPN PAPER 1.pdf


Every problem in Ireland which requires the spending of tax-payers money, will always be referenced to the Bank bailout. But the situation could not be more diverse. NAMA could cost €7bn, €30bn and the Bond holders will be spared. The higher interest payments will just have to borne by the tax-payer. The quasi-nationalisiation of banks are seen as investments, but there is no similar approach to the poor. Particulary those who are consistently in poverty.

Consistent Poverty
This measures those who are at-risk-of-poverty and
who are also unable to afford one of a set of eight
agreed items. These items are known as deprivation
items. Inability to afford one of these items means
that someone is marginalised and excluded from
participating in what are considered normal activities
in society. The list has been updated for 2007
onwards9 however, the eight agreed items for current
poverty statistics are:
- No substantial meal for at least one day in the
past two weeks due to lack of money
- Had to go without heating during the last year
through lack of money
- Experienced dept problems arising from
ordinary living expenses
- Unable to afford two pairs of strong shoes
- Unable to afford a roast dinner once a week
- Unable to afford a meal with meat, chicken,
fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day
- Unable to afford new (not second-hand) clothes
- Unable to afford a warm waterproof coat

The numbers in Relative Poverty (calculated at 60% of median income) would equate 17% of the population. 60% of Median Income is €202 for 2008, most social welfare payments are €204. Relative poverty is less stark but it highlights the disparity in income levels and one does not need to be an expert to see a link between high income inequality and crime, depression and suicide.

What needs to be done:
1) Social Welfare rates must RISE for 2009/2010.
2) The Greens need to pull out of government if there is any further talk of reducing social welfare or the minimum wage.
3) The barriers/social welfare traps need to be removed - a person must not face a threat of losing benefits or allowances by taking a part-time job, education/training or other impediment from activeely seeking employment (eg childminding for partner/family).
4) A basic income system should be considered for those in consistent poverty for greater than a year. Basic Income
5) All of the politcal parties need to sign up to the above and those who reject it shamed.

NAMA, ACC, FAS, John O'D, Thornton Hall, Luas overruns, are scandalous but pale into insignificance of the scandal of 1 in 6 people in Ireland being in poverty at the end of our greatest boom in history.
 


Monkey-Magic

Member
Joined
May 8, 2009
Messages
67
The Thatcherite polices of Fianna Fail and the PDs have ensured many single mothers are reduced to a state of semi-starvation.
 

edwin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
6,139
Some Stark facts:
For 2008:
44% of unemployed individuals were at
risk of poverty.

Just under one in five of those with a
chronic illness were at risk of poverty.

6.9% of the population experience
consistent poverty.

In 2006 almost one in three lone
parent households and 11.1% of
children experienced consistent poverty
– both increased since 2005.


Overall 17% of people were at risk of
poverty using the Irish measurement.
This includes 39.6 % of lone parents,
25.8% of those with primary education
or less and 6.5% of those in work.

Source: http://www.eapn.ie/documents/15_EAPN PAPER 1.pdf


Every problem in Ireland which requires the spending of tax-payers money, will always be referenced to the Bank bailout. But the situation could not be more diverse. NAMA could cost €7bn, €30bn and the Bond holders will be spared. The higher interest payments will just have to borne by the tax-payer. The quasi-nationalisiation of banks are seen as investments, but there is no similar approach to the poor. Particulary those who are consistently in poverty.




The numbers in Relative Poverty (calculated at 60% of median income) would equate 17% of the population. 60% of Median Income is €202 for 2008, most social welfare payments are €204. Relative poverty is less stark but it highlights the disparity in income levels and one does not need to be an expert to see a link between high income inequality and crime, depression and suicide.

What needs to be done:
1) Social Welfare rates must RISE for 2009/2010.
2) The Greens need to pull out of government if there is any further talk of reducing social welfare or the minimum wage.
3) The barriers/social welfare traps need to be removed - a person must not face a threat of losing benefits or allowances by taking a part-time job, education/training or other impediment from activeely seeking employment (eg childminding for partner/family).
4) A basic income system should be considered for those in consistent poverty for greater than a year. Basic Income
5) All of the politcal parties need to sign up to the above and those who reject it shamed.

NAMA, ACC, FAS, John O'D, Thornton Hall, Luas overruns, are scandalous but pale into insignificance of the scandal of 1 in 6 people in Ireland being in poverty at the end of our greatest boom in history.
Your suggestions would result in massive welfare and spending cuts after the IMF enter. You seem to fail to realise that we have to borrow money from other people at the moment. International investors don't care about your laudable aims and will pull the plug if they think we aren't reducing our deficit. Please deal with reality rather than a Walter Mitty wish list.
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
41
Your suggestions would result in massive welfare and spending cuts after the IMF enter. You seem to fail to realise that we have to borrow money from other people at the moment. International investors don't care about your laudable aims and will pull the plug if they think we aren't reducing our deficit. Please deal with reality rather than a Walter Mitty wish list.
A €16 rise a week in social welfare would cost approx.
440,000 people on dole - €366m
640,000 people on other social welfare - €532m.

By way of contrast the cost of State subsidies to Private Pensions in €2.9bn in 2007.
NCAOP - Consultation Responses - Green Paper on Pensions


That is for a increase which is highly unlikely at present.The miniumum which should occur is reform of the schemes to reduce beurocracy eg Basic Income, but that the rates remain unchanged.

There is serious talk of cuts in Social Welfare rates - that should be a source of outrage.
 

lotus1

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2009
Messages
28
Basic Income[/url]
5) All of the politcal parties need to sign up to the above and those who reject it shamed.

NAMA, ACC, FAS, John O'D, Thornton Hall, Luas overruns, are scandalous but pale into insignificance of the scandal of 1 in 6 people in Ireland being in poverty at the end of our greatest boom in history.
€204.30 is the max weekly payment for a single person on Jobseekers Payment, another €135.60 is paid for a qualified adult and €26 for each child.

An example would be a married couple with one child on Jobseekers Allowance receiving over €360 per week, the couple should also qualify for rent allowance having to contribute a sum of €24 per week towards their rent leaving a household income of over €330 per week.

Id imagine you would manage a couple of hot meals per week from that...
 

irish_bob

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
7,563
theese orginisations who come out with theese bogus claims every so often , do so as if they came out and said hardly anyone was at risk of poverty , they could have thier status as another QUANGO revoked in times like this
 

smitchy2

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
1,817
The Thatcherite polices of Fianna Fail and the PDs have ensured many single mothers are reduced to a state of semi-starvation.
Please have a look at the increases in the both the dole and social benefits in the last 5 years.
I am not sure a true socialist government would of giving away as much!

As for the OP, yes you are delusional.
 
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
14
whats heppening is the top brass incl politicians ,union leaders, managers in the public service and anyone above their level will be looked after ,as for the other 3.8 million of us we are in trouble. house repossessions car repossessions, unemployment, begging for food, its all happening whilst the scum i mentioned above sit back and laugh at us in poverty
 

bob3344

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
7,091
'Relative Poverty' is a bu11sh1t term designed to keep the anti-poverty quangos in funding for all eternity.

Their work , by definition, will never be done.

I personally do not accept that long term unemployed people in receipt of our generous welfare can't afford food & heating.

The people who are suffering are those who worked & bought houses & cars & subsequently lost their jobs.

Moral of the story ?

Don't ever get a job, just focus on having 6 or 7 kids. you'll get a free house & generous welfare, and you'll have no debts.
 

irish_bob

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
7,563
'Relative Poverty' is a bu11sh1t term designed to keep the anti-poverty quangos in funding for all eternity.

Their work , by definition, will never be done.

I personally do not accept that long term unemployed people in receipt of our generous welfare can't afford food & heating.

The people who are suffering are those who worked & bought houses & cars & subsequently lost their jobs.

Moral of the story ?

Don't ever get a job, just focus on having 6 or 7 kids. you'll get a free house & generous welfare, and you'll have no debts.

i dont believe the unemplyed cant afford health insurance which is why im in favour of leaving the dole alone but scrapping the HSE , privatise the whole thing and then thier will be no delay in getting rid of the surplus to requirments who,s only purpose is to supply the local fianna fail td with votes or fill the coffers of whatever union represents them , anyone who is single yet unemployed on 204 a week can afford to spend 13 euro a week on private health insurance like i do
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
41
Please have a look at the increases in the both the dole and social benefits in the last 5 years.
I am not sure a true socialist government would of giving away as much!

As for the OP, yes you are delusional.
So you want credit to go to Fianna Fail for ramping up social welfare payments without thought going into the fact that it risked created welfare traps. And now you think leaving those rates at that level is delusional! (or worse implementing Colm McCarthy's report by REDUCING SOCIAL WELFARE by 5%).

Reform social welfare by all means, consider a basic income system to replace administration for lost causes, allow the more ambitious train/work part-time without losing benefits and by all means catch and fine social welfare cheats but to cut of social welfare rates with no reform only has the effect of pushing tens of thousands into poverty. Has the country gone mad?(it would appear that Eddie Hobbs was right on the Pat Kenny Frontline show when he said that it will be the silent on social welfare who are going to get it in the neck as the public service won't reform or cut pay AND PENSIONS.
 

smitchy2

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
1,817
So you want credit to go to Fianna Fail for ramping up social welfare payments without thought going into the fact that it risked created welfare traps. And now you think leaving those rates at that level is delusional! (or worse implementing Colm McCarthy's report by REDUCING SOCIAL WELFARE by 5%).

Reform social welfare by all means, consider a basic income system to replace administration for lost causes, allow the more ambitious train/work part-time without losing benefits and by all means catch and fine social welfare cheats but to cut of social welfare rates with no reform only has the effect of pushing tens of thousands into poverty. Has the country gone mad?(it would appear that Eddie Hobbs was right on the Pat Kenny Frontline show when he said that it will be the silent on social welfare who are going to get it in the neck as the public service won't reform or cut pay AND PENSIONS.
I won’t give credit for FF for raising social welfare benefits from €8bn to €20bn in the space of 5 years.
I was just making a point to socialists who think a right wing government would actually do this.

Statistics on relative poverty are bogus as they don’t actually mean anything eg: average medium income will go down substantially in coming years and your rate will go down in a time where there will be massive unemployment!!
Consistent poverty have some credibility as they relate to what people can afford to buy.

You actually believe we should borrow half a billion extra as a handout!

Hope you don’t address your household budget like this.
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,506
Social Welfare will get it in the neck, but so to will public service.

Unfortunately this will be a double whammy for public service as they will have wage cuts, allowance cuts, taxable expenses AND they will find their childrens allowances either cut or taxed. Most public servants pay tax at 41% so if childrens allowances are taxed they will be diving towards the new poor category. Good wages, small disposable income, large debts and living expenses...............................
 

smitchy2

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
1,817
When it comes to the crunch both welfare benefits and public pay/pensions have to be cut by about €1bn each.
The other 2bn will come from cutting Quangos, driving efficiencies and redundancies in places.

Increasing certain taxes like housing will have to be addressed to have a stable tax base as well.

The pay cuts will be the hardest things to implement as hundreds of thousands of public servants will strike on the streets.
Cutting the dole back is much easier as they can’t strike!
 

Schuhart

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
4,840
Some Stark facts:
For 2008:
44% of unemployed individuals were at
risk of poverty.
You mean 56% of unemployed people are not at risk of poverty? That, for me, is a far more frightening statistic, illustrating how unsustainable our public finances became under Bertie’s “Partnership” Wafflemania.
'Relative Poverty' is a bu11sh1t term designed to keep the anti-poverty quangos in funding for all eternity.
That’s about the size of it. I mean, the answer to the question posed in the title 720,000 in Poverty In Ireland: how will be there after the Banks have been saved? is “exactly the same number, because you are using a relative measure”.
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
41
You mean 56% of unemployed people are not at risk of poverty? That, for me, is a far more frightening statistic, illustrating how unsustainable our public finances became under Bertie’s “Partnership” Wafflemania. That’s about the size of it. I mean, the answer to the question posed in the title 720,000 in Poverty In Ireland: how will be there after the Banks have been saved? is “exactly the same number, because you are using a relative measure”.
Relative poverty is assessed by reference to less than 60% of the median income. If Irish society had a more equal distribution of income, then there would fewer people considered to be in relative poverty because more people woule be closer to the median.

Why is this concept so difficult to understand?
(Mind you if you think all unemployed people should (come within the definition of) be at risk of poverty, your feigned horror is more understood - pathological greed and total self-absorbed))
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
41
Ok, back to consistent poverty:

The overall goal of the new NAPinclusion is to make a decisive impact on consistent poverty. This is underlined by the fact that a new target is being set, using the new set of up-to-date indicators, which are more realistic and in keeping with living standards today. The new target is:

To reduce the number of those experiencing consistent poverty to between 2% and 4% by 2012, with the aim of eliminating consistent poverty by 2016, under the revised definition.

The new target reflects experience and expert advice that it may be difficult to bring consistent poverty down to zero...
Office for Social Inclusion - What is Poverty?

Does anyone who thinks a Consistent Poverty rate of less than 4% is going to happen? when interest charges, bank capitalisiation, public sector pensions, public sector pay, tax breaks, Pork-belly politics will all get a bite first?

By the reaction to this thread, one who think it crazy to contemplate living in a country where (statisically) all people in the State can:

-Own two pairs of strong shoes and warm waterproof overcoat
- Eat meals with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day
- Not had to go without heating during the last year through lack of money
- Buy presents for family or friends at least once a year.

300,000 people in this State cannot be said to do the above. And people here and in Government want to cut Social Welfare rates.:eek:
 

bob3344

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
7,091
-Own two pairs of strong shoes and warm waterproof overcoat
- Eat meals with meat, chicken, fish (or vegetarian equivalent) every second day
- Not had to go without heating during the last year through lack of money
- Buy presents for family or friends at least once a year.

300,000 people in this State cannot be said to do the above. And people here and in Government want to cut Social Welfare rates.:eek:
Total garbage.

Unless you are talking about the recently unemployed & I assume you're not, because other people spouted this crap throughout the boom.

If you 'can't afford' meals with meat etc, can I assume you can't afford beers or cigs ?

Its a fkn joke & a disgrace that we're still being fed these lies given the sea of cash that has been pumped into welfare.
 
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
41
Total garbage.

Unless you are talking about the recently unemployed & I assume you're not, because other people spouted this crap throughout the boom.

If you 'can't afford' meals with meat etc, can I assume you can't afford beers or cigs ?
Do you get all you information about poor people form Shameless and Eastenders?
 

bob3344

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
7,091
Do you get all you information about poor people form Shameless and Eastenders?
We pay the best dole in europe for the lazy gits who never contributed.

Now you want me to swallow some fairy story about how the tracksuit wearing baby factories can't afford shoes & meat.

Total & utter fkn garbage.

Maybe if you venture out of your ivory tower, you'll get a taste of reality someday.
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top