Er, surely you mean the SW benefits in Ireland are really bad (try living on it yourself) ….. when you’ve just lost your job through no fault of your own and were earning five times that amount ………………. and the benefits in the UK are even worse/quite shocking? Let’s get it all into some relative context.

I vaguely recall that in Luxembourg you received 80% of your previous salary for the first year (and then nothing) if you were made unemployed - which I thought was a reasonably good system. It discouraged career doleistas and gave you a reasonable cushion while you were trying to find another job.

PIAAC will also gather a range of other information including the antecedents and outcomes of skills, as well as information on usage of information technology and literacy and numeracy practices generally.”

1994! And that’s the last figure available? Madness. Thank you for the link.

Come to Australia! 200,000 last year.

Do not expect fairness from a government that pays itself too much and still has crony capitalism.

Nama will need cash and the water system will be sold off to get it!

alternative rendition: one man’s waste is another man’s income.

Re: what is a cut?
It’s a cut when it happens to you, it’s a saving when it happens to someone else.

Like it’s redistribution when the rich pay more taxes, it’s oppressive when you are characterised as rich…

According to the revenue’s income statistics from 2006, Sarah’s couple both earning the average industrial wage are rich (in the top 10% of income earners). John, I am flying with lights on waiting to be shot down…

Since you are the ‘paper of record’, let me put the record straight.

The 23% figure (actually 22.6%) is for adult reading ‘illiteracy’. It derives from the International Adult Literacy Survey (IALS). This survey covered 18 countries and the figures for all of them (%age lacking functional reading literacy) were:

http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr04_complete.pdf

Sweden 7.5%
Norway 8.5%
Denmark 9.6%
Finland 10.4%
Netherlands 10.5%
Germany 14.4%
Czech Rep. 15.7%
Canada 16.6%
Australia 17.0%
Belgium 18.4%
New Zealand 18.4%
U. States 20.7%
U. Kingdom 21.8%
IRELAND 22.6%
Hungary 33.8%
Slovenia 42.2%
Poland 42.6%
Portugal 48%

However, what is rarely mentioned when this figure is bandied about in the media is that the survey was carried out in 1994. So, it is totally out-of-date. It covered the population aged 16 to 65 (their ages in 1994). So, quite a lot who took part in the survey will now be dead. At that time, probably half those taking part in the survey in Ireland (those aged 40+) would have left school before universal secondary education was introduced in the late 1960s. But, even then, the Irish figure was not much different from the other English-speaking countries.

Since 1994, there have been no further surveys of adult literacy, either in Ireland or in any other country (with one or two exceptions). That is why the media keep bandying about the 1994 figure as if it was the current figure. However, we know the figure for Ireland will have dramatically improved since then. This is because, starting in 2000, the OECD began regular surveys of reading (and other) literacy among students aged 15. They call them the PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) surveys. In these, Irish students (aged 15) regularly come in the top three in the OECD. In the most recent PISA survey in 2006, Irish students (aged 15) came second only to Finland in the entire OECD for reading literacy.

So, with each passing year since the IALS in 1994, as the older among those taking part in the 1994 IALS survey start to pop their clogs, and their place is taken by the 15-year-old students entering adulthood, it is certain that the adult literacy rate for Ireland will now be much improved. In due course (ie in around 30 years time), when this flow of 15-year olds eventually form the entire adult population, then, if Ireland continues to do as well in the PISA surveys, we could expect to have the second lowest (after Finland) adult illiteracy rate in the OECD.

I’m not so sure about that backlash. Almost everyone I come into contact with (outside of the protest groups ) thinks it is absolutely bizarre that they get this “free money” lodged into their bank accounts every month irrespective of their income. In the professional/executive classes (well up until their practices took a hammering in the last year) they put the money into long term savings accounts and shake their heads at the reality that they get to save for their children’s third level education courtesy of the state while others might leave school illiterate (23%?).

In fact, the loudest protests come, not from the “upper middle classes” but from those who claim to represent “working people” (which I always find to be a frustratingly difficult group to identify since we’re all working, or worse, not). But if it means workers on the average industrial wage (36k?) then surely they would get the payment in full. Even a double income family earning 70-80k could still retain a good part of the benefit. I haven’t heard anyone in the upper middle classes say anything except that it is crazy to have this universal payment. Have you?

Anyway, it’s probably one of those situations where the radio texters would be shrieking and the lobby groups whining, but most people would accept its only fair to direct this payment at lower income groups.

On the taxing vs means testing, I did call for a means test before but several expert contacted me and said means testing is much more expensive to administer and can lead to harsher traps for people. Taxing, (I was assured) is cheaper and leads to fewer hardship cases. Perhaps the more learned contributors on the site could confirm that.

If you work for the state, there should be a upper limit on what you can earn, same as there is a minimum wage………., no matter how many directorships or pensions you have.
If you depend on the state there is a limit to the level of support, e,g, unemployed or retired. In the vast majority of cases, the upper limit will not affect anyone.
Same if you work, and are getting any state benefits there are limits

All should be academic to the vast vast majority of people.

It should include salary, dole, children’s allowances, salary, farm payments, state pension, disability benefits, medical card payments, rent allowance, etc etc etc…. everything… with 100% tax on the surplus.

The limits for both should be set with regard to private sector wages and the state of the nations finances. and should be academic to the majority of people.

The limit on wages should apply to all state funded organizations, public servants, local authorities, registered charities, farmers, bailed out banks, recognized organizations (IBEC, trade unions) etc etc etc etc… if you are getting state funds or tax breaks, the message should be ….this money will cost the highest earners in your organization.

With a third tax band at the public sector wage limit so the private sector highest earners contribuite more starting at this level, to keep the PS unions happy..

And maybe the maximum public sector wage should be the maximum tax that a true private sector worker can save with tax allowances/schemes etc….

Theres all this focus on cuts on minimum wages, but there should be a focus on both extremes…. Something like the above provides an incentive to private enterprise to operate without state subsidy….. but both higher and lower earners are subject to limits.

“So long as they don’t cut corporate welfare…”

After all ……. Can’t have FAS cutting its billion euro budget can we?

What?

They train plumbers?

OK,

Let’s see if the Green Party can “create” 127,000 “windmill engineers”.

The Green Party can turn FAS into a destruction of capital that you have not yet dreamed of.

Still, they have found good company in the business of capital destruction.

Hug a hungry mink for the Greens and forget your family.

If we reduce social welfare payments by X, allowing us to reduce total tax take by X, are we sure that the economy actually benefits? If not, then whats the justification for such a cut?

“Er, I think the bottom line is that it is incredibly difficult to have lost your job - through no fault of your own - and now, several months or a year down the line, the savings and redundancy money have run out and it ain’t just food you’ve got to pay for. Think of all the usual bills on top of that and the increased costs we all see in the winter (extra heating etc.). Believe me, there is not a lot of ‘dignity’ in trying to live on welfare with a couple of children and spending all day, every day, looking for a job.”

Joseph,

Can you think of anyone who would not empathise with your analysis? I think not.

“I’m all for hitting anyone who is a long term/career welfare scrounger…”

Identify them Joseph, are they the 150,000 who were unemployed throughout the “boom”?

“but I can’t abide these blanket calls for cuts in welfare that I keep seeing”

What if the State has run out of money?

“- and they are usually coming from people who are well off and likely to continue being so even in these difficult times”

Would they be the ones protected by the Green Party and NAMA?

“There’s a lot of great brainpower out there. Maybe it could be used to find a better way to balance the books.”

Don’t underestimate the power of your own brain.

“Or would that be hurting the ‘vested interests’ a little too much?”

Don’t underestimate the power of your own brain. Do something about it.

“These are real people you are talking about. It is not just a ‘numbers game’.”

Tell that to Fianna Fail and the Green Party and don’t underestimate the power of your own brain. Do something about it.

“Can I suggest you take a reality check?”

Can I suggest that you stay exactly where you and your family are? If someone tries to evict you, stay put. Put your life on the line. Stop taking this sht.

If the directors of Anglo Irish Bank are allowed to avoid the law you and your family can do the same.

Stop paying your debts. That’s reality.

I think you’ll find that social welfare benefits in Ireland are extremely good. I’m from Northern Ireland. I know a few people there who are unemployed and are receiving the princely sum of 65 pounds sterling (about 75 euros) a week. Child benefit and old age pensions are also much higher in Ireland than in the U. Kingdom, even allowing for the higher cost of living.

Er, I think the bottom line is that it is incredibly difficult to have lost your job - through no fault of your own - and now, several months or a year down the line, the savings and redundancy money have run out and it ain’t just food you’ve got to pay for. Think of all the usual bills on top of that and the increased costs we all see in the winter (extra heating etc.). Believe me, there is not a lot of ‘dignity’ in trying to live on welfare with a couple of children and spending all day, every day, looking for a job.

I’m all for hitting anyone who is a long term/career welfare scrounger but I can’t abide these blanket calls for cuts in welfare that I keep seeing - and they are usually coming from people who are well off and likely to continue being so even in these difficult times - the NDI’s (not directly impacted).

There’s a lot of great brainpower out there. Maybe it could be used to find a better way to balance the books. Or would that be hurting the ‘vested interests’ a little too much?

These are real people you are talking about. It is not just a ‘numbers game’. Did you know that it’s the car that gets sold first when the money runs out? Then, as time goes on and still no job (or even a whiff of a job) appears, it’s “what can we sell on Ebay that we no longer need?” and so it goes on….

Can I suggest you take a reality check?

“People should be given 2 months to apply for child benefit”

Why?

The Revenue already have details of the income of everybody in the State.

Start there and work forward.

If someone has income of €100k +, they lose child benefit immediately.

If there is some social injustice they or their spouse can reapply.

As regards the logistics of going through all the applications?
Well the government have acquired the services of hundreds of administrators with very little to do when they nationalised Anglo.
How about giving them some admin to do?

I recon this would be both a very profitable and progressive cut.

Noted and noted. Thanks.

I think that those on low income should pay some tax even if not a whole lot. At least then they could be part of the “all hands” at the pump and could not be accused of free-loading. This would stop them being scape-goated. It would also allow them to make a contribution towards the common weal.

But my main point is that prices are down significantly even if you can’t shop around, and don’t have a freezer.

It might solve little in the overall scheme of things but if its all hands to the pump time the sequencing matters.

Colm MCCarthy says “solely on the HICP, which is down 3% in the year to September”. Your table shows that CPI for the lowest decile is at -3.95%.

Can you reconcile these figures and advise what you think HICP is down for the lowest decile if such a figure is readily available to you?

@Con

Is it a fair assumption that you have access to a car which enables you to shop around?

@Aedin Doris

Thanks for the link.

Changing the forecast from -8% in July to -7% in October might not seem that big a deal. But, in April it was -9%. And, in the same period, the consensus forecast for 2010 has been revised from -3% to -1%. So, the total change between 2008 and 2010 has been revised from -12% to -8%, which is quite significant. And, I predict that the process of revision of earlier gloomy forecasts has a lot further to run.

and you go on to say, Michael:

“People who brag when their forecasts burnish their claimed powers of prescience, usually lie low when the data doesn’t come up trumps.”

I really think we can do without this sort of personal attack on Morgan Kelly. Moderators, please!

In truth, the ESRI has no tongue. ESRI researchers do. While we generally have one spokesperson per area, and thus seem consistent, none of us ever speak for all of us.

The consumer price index for the year to September per income decile is
Lowest -3.95%
2nd -3.99%
3rd -4.21%
4th -4.02%
5th -4.10%
6th -4.13%
7th -4.28%
8th -4.47%
9th -4.74%
Richest -6.02%

It is misleading, so, to use the average HCIP, but prices are falling for everyone.

With more landlords prepared to accept Health Board tenants, and falling rents meaning the rent allowance thresholds looking more than adequate, those on Social Welfare get a second advantage from the downturn.

I’m still against cuts in the OAP, however, on two grounds. The first is that I believe money illusion exists, and that particularly those on low incomes make plans based on nominal rather than real prices. The second is that in a climate where departing bankers and FAS executives still get big payoffs and politicans expenses are headline news, reversing a €7 a week extra payment to the elderly looks mean!

It might just have been possible last April, for Minister Lenihan to admit a mistake and reverse it before individuals had adjusted to the new payment - but that is useless hindsight.

The bigger change in costs to the Exchequer has come from the dole payments and I worry a bit more about the JA of €204.30, up from €148.80 as recently as 2005. It may also affect the incentive to work - someone coming off JA would have to do 24 hours minimum wage work before being any better off.

Two and a half times the equivalent payment in the only country with which we have a land border seems excessive as well - though I think UK payments are low by international standards.

Anyone know if there has been any increase on those on minimum wage?