'Welfare scrounge' family fumes over benefits story

celticbhoy2009

No i do not get free heating oil ect i pay my bills like any other person..my internet is a simple o2 dongle €19 per month..as for child benifit .from IT to bank managers everyone is entitled to child benifit are they not..i do not complain about money i have never mentioned money to newspapers .is it down to me what the government pays ..a working family get child benifit as well as an unemployed family do they not??

Stark

celticbhoy2009 wrote:

A single bloke living at home with his mammy..no bills no food to buy..fed and found gets €203 per week i get over double that for a family of 8..yet you critisise me??

Only if the PRSI contributions that he was paying up to that point covered it. If he hadn't worked before or his contributions were insufficient, then his payments would be means tested and he would be getting **** all. €203 is the maximum you can receive, not what you'll actually receive.

jape

Also buying a laptop and €400 tv out of our (the tax-payers) money is what really angers people including me.

I actually have a job, and my tv is a crappy 21" bought in 1992, and my PC is a basic desktop bought in 2003 which does for browsing the net, email etc.

What entitles you to a better quality of life/better possessions than me?

celticbhoy2009

jape wrote: »

So you have been looking for a job since 2004 ?? It was easy to get a job from 2004 to mid-2008, this "recession" thing only really started hitting jobs from September 2008 to now. 5 years job-seeking? Personally I don't believe you.

If you just admitted you are not working because you earn more on social welfare, people would have more respect for you.

Mate are you not listening to what im saying??? i spent 4 years taking care of may family ..i am looking for work for the last few months..but its not easy ok..ffs i mean there are more unemployed right now than in the history of the state..yet its me who is victimised...my family comes 1st to me..and if any member of my family..wife or kids became ill to the point they could not take care of themselves..and i was working..id do it again ok..id stay home..i brought kids into this world i will look after them in everyway they need looking after..be that me at work or at home with them..ok i wont be making any more replies..i just wanted to say..its nasty to slag people off just because you read some shyte in the papers

ei.sdraob

celticbhoy2009 wrote: »

No i do not get free heating oil ect i pay my bills like any other person..my internet is a simple o2 dongle €19 per month..as for child benifit .from IT to bank managers everyone is entitled to child benifit are they not..i do not complain about money i have never mentioned money to newspapers .is it down to me what the government pays ..a working family get child benifit as well as an unemployed family do they not??

alot of people like me dont get any benefits and decide not to have children until i know i can afford them

is it the states (taxpayers) responsibility to pay for your kids or yours?

also you are getting free healthcare got forbid i have to endup in hospital or go to gp

and more importantly what sort of an example are yee setting to your kids?

i feel sorry that you and your family have come under spotlight, tho look at the brightside now you can claim disability benefit

grumpily yours

topper75

bobmeaney wrote: »

Would they though?

I mean, would they also force down the cost of living with it? how about all the financial committments those individuals had but could no longer afford as a result of the cuts? and what of all the property that was seized as a result of all those people no longer being able to service their loans? who would buy that? It sounds like it would be one big domino effect.

If the NAMA gamble pays off, we'll hopefully not find out. But to answer your very good question - yeah I think the IMF would go that far. The public servant would still face their same boomtime debts, but all luxuries would be off the menu. IMF would push so that more people are in work but earning less. The current Irish govt has no choice politically but to let the jobs bleed and keep the lucky ones still in employment on the same old high salaries. The IMF has no such political concerns. It would be bleak for a long time and only those who can keep things really trim would keep their noses over the water. So fingers crossed.

Quatre Mains

celticbhoy2009 wrote: »

No i do not get free heating oil ect i pay my bills like any other person..my internet is a simple o2 dongle €19 per month..as for child benifit .from IT to bank managers everyone is entitled to child benifit are they not..i do not complain about money i have never mentioned money to newspapers .is it down to me what the government pays ..a working family get child benifit as well as an unemployed family do they not??

child benefit(the €1000 per annum for under 5's bit) will be gone after the next budget for social welfare recipients imho - it was brought in because child care for working families was so expensive. Gerard I think you were foolish to go to the media in the 1st place and are paying the price for that. Posting on here to defend yourself is like throwing buns at an elephant, regardless of wether you are right or wrong.

Kradock wrote: »

He left work , because of his wife. Yes maybe he knew before hand the system is there to be milked ,but my point is that on the benefits side he has done nothing wrong , he has claimed what is due to him as layed out by the laws of the country.

Me I enjoy working and am thankful of having a job , but if ever the time came that I was as well off to not be working then I will go and claim whats there. That to me is a failing of the system to which I contribute by paying my taxes.

the problem is that most people don't think like that - just cos a system has flaws that can be legally exploited doesn't make it morally ok. This is why people are going mental about this whole issue. Last week I had to listen to a guy telling me he turned down work, saying that he wouldn't take a job for less than 600 a week in the hand cos of the benefits he'd lose.
Meanwhile, I have friends with kids who take home around the same as they would on social welfare, but they keep working because they are honest people, hoping to develop careers and maybe in the long term get promotions etc. besides, what example is it to raise kids in a house where nothing is earned and everything is free?

Roll on the IMF I say. No-one will die of hunger,but those of us working will know for certain that our taxes dont fund Sky HD subscriptions and nearly-new people carriers!

celticbhoy2009

Are you asking me why did i have kids?? are you really that sick of an individual..i have made it very clear..i worked and provided for 5 of my children..only when the 6th came did i have to quit working as i was needed at home..it is my right to have children how dare you suggest otherwise..mate i hope the day never comes that for some unforseen reason you cant work ..ive never read such bias crap in all my life..I DO NOT REGRET HAVING CHILDREN..and as i said i was able to meet their needs when we decided to have a family
Shame on you

Raskolnikov

I don't think the personal attacks on this chap are fair at all, he's doing nothing wrong.

However, the system is broke. It's clearly not fair that this family can have all the trappings of modern life while on state benefits. I don't even have all those trappings and I work full-time!

celticbhoy2009

Johnnycabs wrote: »

child benefit(the €1000 per annum for under 5's bit) will be gone after the next budget for social welfare recipients imho - it was brought in because child care for working families was so expensive. Gerard I think you were foolish to go to the media in the 1st place and are paying the price for that. Posting on here to defend yourself is like throwing buns at an elephant, regardless of wether you are right or wrong.



the problem is that most people don't think like that - just cos a system has flaws that can be legally exploited doesn't make it morally ok. This is why people are going mental about this whole issue. Last week I had to listen to a guy telling me he turned down work, saying that he wouldn't take a job for less than 600 a week in the hand cos of the benefits he'd lose.
Meanwhile, I have friends with kids who take home around the same as they would on social welfare, but they keep working because they are honest people, hoping to develop careers and maybe in the long term get promotions etc. besides, what example is it to raise kids in a house where nothing is earned and everything is free?

Roll on the IMF I say. No-one will die of hunger,but those of us working will know for certain that our taxes dont fund Sky HD subscriptions and nearly-new people carriers!

Yes i regret going to the media i did it as a last resort..i did not want or expect it to turn into a hatred campaign..i was only trying to look out for my family..mate it was a housing issue not benifits or money and it was totally blown out of proportion

Stark

I'm guessing you would still have been able to live in the house had you not gone to the media, just able to afford fewer of life's luxuries because you weren't getting it for free?

ei.sdraob

celticbhoy2009 wrote: »

Are you asking me why did i have kids?? are you really that sick of an individual..i have made it very clear..i worked and provided for 5 of my children..only when the 6th came did i have to quit working as i was needed at home..it is my right to have children how dare you suggest otherwise..mate i hope the day never comes that for some unforseen reason you cant work ..ive never read such bias crap in all my life..I DO NOT REGRET HAVING CHILDREN..and as i said i was able to meet their needs when we decided to have a family
Shame on you

you are entitled to have as many children as you want this is not china

the question is have yee ever taught about how you will pay to raise them?

why should the state and not you be paying for them?

and for the second time what sort of an example are you setting them?



i dont care how i come of, i am not personally attacking you but asking you honest simple questions

the fact that you cant answer these questions only makes it obvious that you didnt think of these question at the time and now found yourself in situation where the state has to support you


you are lucky that you are not living in just about every country in the world, like the US

and the way i see it im paying hard earned money so you can enjoy a huge house, a family, cars and tvs


and no i dont have a house (neither am i asking for a free one!), i have to pay rent for a small ****hole, i dont have kids as i know i couldnt afford one (never mind 6), i work 7 days a week, and i dont have a car at the moment, neither do i have a tv but only a computer mostly used for work, yet i had to pay 20k in direct taxes last year since i have feck all tax credits and that money went to pay you

rubadub

Kradock wrote: »

Me I enjoy working and am thankful of having a job , but if ever the time came that I was as well off to not be working then I will go and claim whats there. That to me is a failing of the system to which I contribute by paying my taxes.

The system has to be quite open and broad, just like many laws are. Of course with laws and benefits people will find loopholes and take advantage. Rather than a failing of the system I see it as people knowingly taking advantage of the system, not just point out flaws but taking advantage of them. It does of course need to be tightened up to stop this unscrupulous fleecing, and then there is a danger of people losing out who truly need benefit who may fall out of a certain "bracket". As I said before I know men entitled to the dole who do not collect on principle, and have heard of others who work while they could earn more at home. The choice is yours, you do not have to take advantage of loopholes that you truly know you should not be deserving of.

celticbhoy2009 wrote: »

i spent 4 years taking care of may family

Johnnycabs wrote: »

child benefit(the €1000 per annum for under 5's bit) will be gone after the next budget for social welfare recipients imho - it was brought in because child care for working families was so expensive

This is they type of thing that riles people, openly admitting you were in effect self employed as a child minder, and collecting such benefits.

celticbhoy2009 wrote: »

it is my right to have children how dare you suggest otherwise... as i said i was able to meet their needs when we decided to have a family

People dare to ask since they find it hard to understand. I have a mate who had a vasectomy at 30 after 2 kids, both parents working, they understood how difficult it would be. They were able to "meet the needs", but did not presume they had 100% stable jobs for life and so planned ahead. Many people feel responsible for themselves and do not feel they have the right to have as many children as they can and expect endless free support, they take responsibility themselves, they do not expect the state to have to enforce it upon them.

Kradock

Stark wrote: »

And you would be doing so illegally, regardless of whether or not you get caught, or they can be bothered checking up on your reasons for leaving. There is a question on the dole form which asks about the circumstances of you leaving your job, so you'd have to lie in this section in order to claim benefits.

It would not be illegal as I will have been let go , layed off , I may have manipulated the move but it wil be all above board. There is always a gray area . As I have said working is preferable but at what cost . Eating away at my life to stay off the live register, not for me. Thank fully things would have to get very bad in this country before I would take this action and as long as it is still economically more viable to work , I hope to stay in employment.

Stark

Kradock wrote:

It would not be illegal as I will have been let go , layed off , I may have manipulated the move but it wil be all above board. There is always a gray area .

That is a classic way in which criminals justify their behaviour to themselves. By convincing themselves that if they're sufficiently ingenious enough to beat the system, then they're entitled to their just rewards.

Kradock

rubadub wrote: »

The system has to be quite open and broad, just like many laws are. Of course with laws and benefits people will find loopholes and take advantage. Rather than a failing of the system I see it as people knowingly taking advantage of the system, not just point out flaws but taking advantage of them. It does of course need to be tightened up to stop this unscrupulous fleecing, and then there is a danger of people losing out who truly need benefit who may fall out of a certain "bracket". As I said before I know men entitled to the dole who do not collect on principle, and have heard of others who work while they could earn more at home. The choice is yours, you do not have to take advantage of loopholes that you truly know you should not be deserving of.

I agree but I am not talking about the loopholes , I am talking about what I am entitled to as per the laws of the state. Gerard has only done this and I also feel that it is wrong for anyone to have prejudged the situation. He has only claimed his entitlements . I work with a woman who earns €100k plus a year , she has 6 kids under the age of 7 , she was entitled to the 1k a year for each of these kids and her home care was her husband who took an early retirement package to be a house husband . Should she be lambasted for claiming her entitlements.

This is they type of thing that riles people, openly admitting you were in effect self employed as a child minder, and collecting such benefits.

His wfe was sick and having had partner who uffers from depression , I applaude his actions here , family first.

People dare to ask since they find it hard to understand. I have a mate who had a vasectomy at 30 after 2 kids, both parents working, they understood how difficult it would be. They were able to "meet the needs", but did not presume they had 100% stable jobs for life and so planned ahead. Many people feel responsible for themselves and do not feel they have the right to have as many children as they can and expect endless free support, they take responsibility themselves, they do not expect the state to have to enforce it upon them.

Your mate is obviously not a catholic , are we going to prejudge Gerards beliefs.

Sorry about the bolding , wanted to multi guote

Wertz

Johnnycabs wrote: »

child benefit(the €1000 per annum for under 5's bit) will be gone after the next budget for social welfare recipients imho - it was brought in because child care for working families was so expensive.

I think he's talking about children's allowance, the monthly payment, paid per child, up to a certain amount that is non-means tested and can be claimed by any and all parents in the country regardless of income or employment status.
In that regard he has a point.

Let's not turn this into a another rent allowance/rent relief mix-up.

Kradock

Stark wrote: »

That is a classic way in which criminals justify their behaviour to themselves. By convincing themselves that if they're sufficiently ingenious enough to beat the system, then they're entitled to their just rewards.

Fistly I am not a criminal , but maybe I am in the wrong career

ei.sdraob

a wallet falls out of the person walking in front of you (and they didn't notice)

1. do you take it for yourself
2. do you hand it to the person

you will not be breaking any laws by choosing #1 but ethically it might depend on what sort of a person you are

Kradock

ei.sdraob wrote: »

a wallet falls out of the person walking in front of you (and they didn't notice)

1. do you take it for yourself
2. do you hand it to the person

you will not be breaking any laws by choosing #1 but ethically it might depend on what sort of a person you are

I would choose # 2 , as it is not mine , therefore not my entitlement.

ei.sdraob

Kradock wrote: »

I would choose # 2 , as it is not mine , therefore not my entitlement.

now scale the example up to the thread subject

rubadub

Kradock wrote: »

It would not be illegal as I will have been let go , layed off , I may have manipulated the move but it wil be all above board.

Yes, above board legally, but not morally. As I said you have a choice to take it or not, you choose to take advantage. You spot the flaws and take advantage, you fully know it is wrong.

This reminds me of 2 weddings I have been at recently. An announcement was made that there is a free bar for 10mins, I go up to collect with another lad, we look around at peoples pints and one lad says
"actually I'll have a double jack daniels & coke",
I go "but you've been on guinness all night haven't you?",
"eh ye, but theres a free bar!?!", he was honestly saying it like "are you not going to take advantage". I was saying "it is not f**king free, Dave is obviously paying and you're getting a f**king guinness". Last wedding I saw the same thing, another prick I didn't know at my table on beer and getting some dirty big cocktail for the "free" toast drink. 2 of them thinking they are smart and thinking others are idiots are not for not taking advantage. While everybody was really looking at them thinking what a *unt.

Kradock wrote: »

Your mate is obviously not a catholic .

Dunno what religion has to do with it at all, my mate could have just decided not to have any more children without the vasectomy.

Kradock wrote: »

are we going to prejudge Gerards beliefs.

Lots of people already have prejudged his belief he is entitled to as many kids as he wants and expects others to support them. And from what he says it seems they judged correctly.

Kradock

ei.sdraob wrote: »

now scale the example up to the thread subject

I assume you are equating the wallet to benefits ?

Run_to_da_hills

Kradock wrote: »

Why let facts ruin a thread.

Its not worth talking about, basic minimum wage would be under e1200 a month in Spain, thats only e400 more than our dole. They would give their right arm for our social welfare system out there.

Stark

Kradock wrote:

I assume you are equating the wallet to benefits ?

The more people leave the workforce (by their own choice or through layoffs) and go on social welfare, the more the Government has to increase taxes to pay for their benefits. By engineering a situation where you get to go on benefits despite previously having a job, you'll be taking even more money out of the pockets of families who are genuinely on the breadline and struggling to pay for rent/mortgage and food.

irishvamp90

Celticbhoy2009 stop calling people "mate" we arent chav's or scobes here

celticbhoy2009

So every word i say and every phase i use is to be scrutinized? how childish

Kradock

rubadub wrote: »

Yes, above board legally, but not morally. As I said you have a choice to take it or not, you choose to take advantage. You spot the flaws and take advantage, you fully know it is wrong.

Legally to me outways morally everytime when it comes to life and survival. Is it wrong of me to think that working for little gain is wrong , then I accept that .

This reminds me of 2 weddings I have been at recently. An announcement was made that there is a free bar for 10mins, I go up to collect with another lad, we look around at peoples pints and one lad says
"actually I'll have a double jack daniels & coke",
I go "but you've been on guinness all night haven't you?",
"eh ye, but theres a free bar!?!", he was honestly saying it like "are you not going to take advantage". I was saying "it is not f**king free, Dave is obviously paying and you're getting a f**king guinness". Last wedding I saw the same thing, another prick I didn't know at my table on beer and getting some dirty big cocktail for the "free" toast drink. 2 of them thinking they are smart and thinking others are idiots are not for not taking advantage. While everybody was really looking at them thinking what a *unt.

That is a very good anaology , I commend you on looking out for your mate , in my case I would be looking out for my family , 40 / 50 more hours with them instead of working in a job that fails to provide me with a standard above the socal welfare system is preferable to me . Sorry if that seems morally wrong but to me it isn't. As i have said I work , I contribute but not at any cost.


Dunno what religion has to do with it at all, my mate could have just decided not to have any more children without the vasectomy.

Maybe it as a little leftfield of me to think like that , but a lot of presumsions are pevailant in this thread.

Lots of people already have prejudged his belief he is entitled to as many kids as he wants and expects others to support them. And from what he says it seems they judged correctly.

I think you'll find he has said he wants to work , family and other things are not helping with this . If he was a genuine scrounger woul he not give a fcuk what anyone thinks. Are we beoming a country where kids are not to be supported , only by there parents . I hope not co there will be a lot of children suffering as the recession continues to bite.

celticbhoy2009

Everyone on here bar one or two seem to take pleasure in attacking me..you condemn me for being unemployed at the moment yet you do not realise what you are doing with this "hate campaign" is only making things harder on my family..i know no body gives a fcuk but id like to tell you..we are now ileagally in this house pressured everyday to get out which we will have to in the next few days..we were promised a house in shannon but it has all fell through more than likely from all the negative feedback..so thats now another problem on my plate..you are all making me out to be a lazy dole dosser who doesnt care about the state of the enonomy and my country which is far from the truth..now any employer will be hesitant on giving me a job ..im down as a cant work wont work man..thats not how it is ,i only want my family to be ok and get my life back get back to work and feel good in myself..why cant you all just leave me and my family alone..you dont realise the damage thats been done..at this moment in time my wifes in bed crying her eyes out due to all this ..totally embarrassed and ashamed when in fact we have done nothing wrong so think about that please

irishvamp90

celticbhoy2009 wrote: »

So every word i say and every phase i use is to be scrutinized? how childish

If someone was having a debate with me,calling me "mate" i would class that as rude,its tacky and we are not in th U.K.No you will scrutinized over more serious things