Fuel Poverty

[Purple]

I understand where you are coming from. But there would be definition problems.

On the one hand, I might buy my dream house than I can just about afford. Most of my income goes to service the mortgage, LPT, maintenance, etc. so that I can scarcely afford utility costs.

On the other hand, with the same income, I buy a house more suited to that income, then I have no problems in meeting fuel or other bills.

In other cases, my income might have reduced or I lost my job, or I became seriously ill since I bought the house.

How does one legislate?

I agree, it's not easy. That's why we should stop with the nonsense definitions thrown around by left wing propaganda outfits like Social Justice Ireland or the Trade Union body The Nevin Institute. Looking at income and ignoring wealth is a nonsensical way of trying to measure need in the context of social transfers.

 

[Purple]

Almost half the people applying for disability benefit are turned down but the number getting it is still massively higher than in other European countries. I wonder if this might be because it's easier to administer for social welfare offices (they don't have to pretend that they are encouraging recipients to look for work and recipients don't have to pretend either).

I've no idea but in general terms our Civil Service is under staffed so it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Almost half the people applying for disability benefit are turned down but the number getting it is still massively higher than in other European countries.

Might that be because disabled people experience greater difficulty in obtaining employment in Ireland than in other European countries?

 

[Sophrosyne]

That's why we should stop with the nonsense definitions thrown around by left wing propaganda outfits like Social Justice Ireland or the Trade Union body The Nevin Institute. Looking at income and ignoring wealth is a nonsensical way of trying to measure need in the context of social transfers.

I don't know what you mean in the context of my post #119.

 

[Purple]

I don't know what you mean in the context of my post #119.

I agree with you that there are personal choice factors in whether someone is in net income poverty or not but ignoring net income and wealth and only looking at gross income is an even more flawed way of quantifying poverty. The politically and ideologically motivated groups like Social Justice Ireland know this but chooser to ignore it in order to further their ideological agenda. In other words they are not really interested in helping poor people, rather they are there to further their ideological agenda.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Ok.

I was thinking more of how looking at net income would work.

Having a very low gross income leaves one with little discretionary choice.

However, when the income scales are ascended it becomes more difficult to define who needs help.

There would have to be a set of criteria in order to apply the fuel allowance.

 

[tomdublin]

Might that be because disabled people experience greater difficulty in obtaining employment in Ireland than in other European countries?

Not sure about that. In my experience people are quite keen to include those with disabilities and there is a lot of public goodwill. Also, at the moment a lot of businesses are so desperate for staff that they will hire pretty much anyone.

 

[Purple]

Having a very low gross income leaves one with little discretionary choice.

Housing is a need, not a choice. The cost of putting a roof over your head is not a descressionary income.
When you own your own home (have wealth) then a much high proportion of your income is descressionary.

However, when the income scales are ascended it becomes more difficult to define who needs help.

Not really if people just make a tax return or fill in a form.

There would have to be a set of criteria in order to apply the fuel allowance.

There would, so give it to everyone. There's plenty of people on higher incomes who need to as much or more than wealthy people on lower incomes.

 

[Sophrosyne]

We have circa 1.9 million households. The fuel allowance for the year 2022 is €914.

 

[Purple]

We have circa 1.9 million households. The fuel allowance for the year 2022 is €914.

We don't have to give everyone €914.

What I'd really like to see is the government telling people that there's a war on our doorstep and we are facing into a recession and things are going to be tough and we already have the highest levels of social transfer in the EU and the government won't be able to do any more. Things are going to be hard and we'll all just have to live with it.

The government isn't your Mammy.

That's what I'd really like to see but the government are afraid of the populist opposition and a sufficient proportion of the electorate are thick enough to vote for the Shinners and swallow the utter nonsense they are promising so the government are right to be afraid of them.

So we'll have more sweeties handed out and the moaning classes will get the most and those who work will get least.

 

[Sophrosyne]

@Purple, - in a way I agree with your points about the cash poor – not all of them, of course. However, with the economy and limited funds, one has to tactically pick one’s battles.

How things change in a few short years. These days, anything could happen, besides fuel poverty, we could have for instance, food and water shortages. We will have to re-think everything.

I think the pandemic lockdowns were a test of the nation’s resilience. Some coped; some definitely did not.

 

[Purple]

@Purple, - in a way I agree with your points about the cash poor – not all of them, of course. However, with the economy and limited funds, one has to tactically pick one’s battles.

I agree but we have to change the narrative about what groups are poor and what constitutes poverty.

How things change in a few short years. These days, anything could happen, besides fuel poverty, we could have for instance, food and water shortages. We will have to re-think everything.

We do.

I think the pandemic lockdowns were a test of the nation’s resilience. Some coped; some definitely did not.

I think there's a deeper issue that was highlighted. The Lockdown was done mainly to protect the old as they were overwhelmingly the group that were at risk from Covid. The impact of the lockdown on younger people was mainly ignored or reacted to with indignation that such a point should even be raised. The impact of the local and international response to the 2008 crash was an unprecedented transfer of wealth from the young to the old, QE being the biggest driver of that. The inflation we are seeing now is an inevitable consequence of that. So we weren't all in it together; young people sacrificed more even though they were at a much lower risk.
Now we need some social solidarity, we really do need to all be in this together. The social solidarity we need is from the rich to the poor, but we need to realise that overwhelmingly the old are the rich and the young are the poor. If we keep treating income as if it was wealth and ignoring actual wealth we are going to end up with a seriously dysfunctional society and an equally dysfunctional economy. We need a larger proportion of the wealth we create to be retained by those who create it, the people who work, and if anyone thinks that the best way to do that is with pay rises they really don't know what they are talking about.

 

[Silversurfer]

In any system there will be abuse. That's the price of providing help to people who need it. I don't think we are particularly bad when it comes to welfare fraud. I'd rather tolerate that then see people living in real poverty or for them to have to live with the indignity of an American style Food Stamps system.
My issue with statistics around poverty, and this discussion about Fuel Poverty in particular, is that it only looks at gross income and excludes wealth. If we want real comparisons then we should be looking at after tax income less the cost of housing provision.
As I detailed in this post a working couple with two children and a mortgage with a household income of €130k can be significantly worse off than a retired couple who own their house with an income of €40k.

Who is the decider in what mortgage is allowed? A couple on €130,000 might be living in a home that is too much house (mortgage) for them. Perhaps they should move to somewhere more affordable. Likewise should you have children you can’t afford? Should they go to state or private schools? What car should you drive and how many for your household? How many holidays should you take? A retired couple may be housebound so require more heating. They could have contributed 40 years tax. They might have sacrificed a lot to buy their home and have not gone on holidays. Also held back on buying expensive cars.

 

[Purple]

Who is the decider in what mortgage is allowed? A couple on €130,000 might be living in a home that is too much house (mortgage) for them. Perhaps they should move to somewhere more affordable. Likewise should you have children you can’t afford? Should they go to state or private schools? What car should you drive and how many for your household? How many holidays should you take?

I agree, it's complex. That's why I said that after tax incomes net of the cost of housing provision should be the benchmark.

A retired couple may be housebound so require more heating. They could have contributed 40 years tax. They might have sacrificed a lot to buy their home and have not gone on holidays. Also held back on buying expensive cars.

Absolutely, but the opposite may also be true. They might have had lots of kids and been net recipients from the State, they might have too much house for their needs (more likely than in the case of a young family) and they should move somewhere more affordable and appropriate to their needs, they are almost certainly drawing a State pension that is way beyond the contributions they made would fund and they almost certainly didn't sacrifice as much to buy their house as people do now.
I'm closer to the finishing line than the starting line but it takes a special kind of self delusion to think that it was harder "back in my day".

 

[Silversurfer]

I agree, it's complex. That's why I said that after tax incomes net of the cost of housing provision should be the benchmark.

Absolutely, but the opposite may also be true. They might have had lots of kids and been net recipients from the State, they might have too much house for their needs (more likely than in the case of a young family) and they should move somewhere more affordable and appropriate to their needs, they are almost certainly drawing a State pension that is way beyond the contributions they made would fund and they almost certainly didn't sacrifice as much to buy their house as people do now.
I'm closer to the finishing line than the starting line but it takes a special kind of self delusion to think that it was harder "back in my day".

The ‘ Marriage Bar’ was only lifted in 1977 so any woman who is retired and has a child 45+ certainly had it harder ‘back in the day’. The whole family would have had one income. Childrens allowance

I agree, it's complex. That's why I said that after tax incomes net of the cost of housing provision should be the benchmark.

Absolutely, but the opposite may also be true. They might have had lots of kids and been net recipients from the State, they might have too much house for their needs (more likely than in the case of a young family) and they should move somewhere more affordable and appropriate to their needs, they are almost certainly drawing a State pension that is way beyond the contributions they made would fund and they almost certainly didn't sacrifice as much to buy their house as people do now.
I'm closer to the finishing line than the starting line but it takes a special kind of self delusion to think that it was harder "back

was only increased within the past 25 years to be of any real help to families. Interest rates were so high lenders added them on to the principle borrowed. Social housing was available but in areas nobody wanted to live in. Kids left school at 14 to get apprenticeships in trades. People from the country lived in bedsit land usually in one room and got a bus in Dominick Street home every Friday. Half the houses in the countryside had no indoor plumbing. There was no employment in the ‘80s and mass immigration. I do not suffer from any kind of ‘special self delusion’ nor ‘revisionism.

 

[Purple]

The ‘ Marriage Bar’ was only lifted in 1977 so any woman who is retired and has a child 45+ certainly had it harder ‘back in the day’. The whole family would have had one income.

Yes, a family could buy a house and have a stay and home parent. Something that is only the stuff of dreams for most young families now.

Childrens allowance was only increased within the past 25 years to be of any real help to families.

So people who are in their 60's now got it when their children were at school. They didn't have childcare costs either so they didn't really need the children's allowance anyway.

Interest rates were so high lenders added them on to the principle borrowed.

Yes, buyers back then were very lucky, not only did inflation eat the real cost of their mortgage but high interest rates kept capital prices low. The best time to buy a capital item is when the cost of borrowing is high.

Social housing was available but in areas nobody wanted to live in.

But there was enough of it.

Kids left school at 14 to get apprenticeships in trades.

I left at 17 to get a trade. I was very lucky and could buy an apartment when I was 23.

People from the country lived in bedsit land usually in one room and got a bus in Dominick Street home every Friday.

Now they house share, or even room share and can only dream of a bed-sit. The going rate for bed-sits in the "Pre-63" buildings in Dublin is +€1250 a month.

Half the houses in the countryside had no indoor plumbing.

In the 80's? Nonsense.

There was no employment in the ‘80s and mass immigration.

Yes, that was terrible but if you had a job and could buy a house you were much better off than young people with equivalent jobs now who will probably never be able to buy a house.

I do not suffer from any kind of ‘special self delusion’ nor ‘revisionism.

Great, you agree with me so.

I remember the 80's. I don't remember people cycling around with Deliveroo bags on their back who could only aspire to their own room in a bed-sit.