Blatant taking advantage of services - why do we support it?

tails_naf

This post is not targeting any particular group of people, but instead is about a behaviour of some people.

A recent case in my local town - a family that were given a free house a few years ago reported on the conditions in the house now, and how it is unsuitable for living in. Broken windows all over, internal doors hanging off or missing entirely, holes in walls, and filth everywhere.

The thing is, when the house was given to them a few years ago, it was just fine - so any damage has been self inflicted.

They are now looking for a new, nicer place. This same group are locally known to be petty thieves and not people to cross, etc.

So the questions really have to be asked:

Who supports the system we have where they will in all likelihood be given a new house, with zero effort or cost to them?

What political motivation do we have to spend money in this way, which is actually encouraging the behaviour, and means the next generation will likely be worse and feel more entitled than the last?

Especially given the crime element too - surely at the very least, being involved in crime should see a reduction or modification of hand-outs?

Granted this is an extreme case, but surely if this cannot be tackled properly then the example it is giving is a poor one.

So any ideas why this is allowed?

Fr_Dougal

People like that should be left to their own devices, let them live in their own filth.

Taltos

Scared politicians or bleeding heart liberalists.
IMO - if they are found guilty of committing a crime or destroying property these and all services should be withdrawn from them. I think we have an onus to support the unfortunate few in our society but I do not agree that my/our taxes should be used to fund a lifestyle that negatively impacts our society.

If they are unhappy with this let them get a job or emigrate or failing that if they turn to crime we have a nice cushy cell waiting for them. Thats pre-supposing that our judges will actually incarcerate and not just release again to plague the rest of us.

Fromthetrees

The kids in that house are still innocent and are not guilty of their parents crimes. The state has an obligation to house them.

If you start taking children off people more regularly then we create more problems.

What we have now is an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

shar01

Taltos wrote: »

Scared politicians or bleeding heart liberalists.

This. In particular county councillors. A handful of votes could make the difference between getting onto the Council gravy train or not.

Certain people know the system inside out. Let's face it, the type of people the OP describes are probably into their third or fourth generation of unemployment (not that they want to work anyway).

TGi666

sometimes I feel like a fool for working
when you see the prsi, usc, paye etc being wasted on these people

Taltos

Fromthetrees wrote: »

The kids in that house are still innocent and are not guilty of their parents crimes. The state has an obligation to house them.

If you start taking children off people more regularly then we create more problems.

What we have now is an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

Never said the children were guilty - but if we want to break this cycle - lets take them from this "family", place them into care, give them an education and shape them into valuable members of society.

Just wish there was some way to stop people like this having children who really lets face it have next to no chance with parents like this.

Jester252

People should respect any handout they get. A failure to do that should have them taken off the list.

tails_naf

Fromthetrees wrote: »

The kids in that house are still innocent and are not guilty of their parents crimes. The state has an obligation to house them.

If you start taking children off people more regularly then we create more problems.

What we have now is an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

I agree, which is why more intelligent intervention is needed - not just hand-outs.

For example:
- Ensuring crime, even petty crime by people on dole/handouts is dealt with - consequences for actions should be visible by both adults and children as they grow up. Seeing the opposite really must mold a child's mind in the wrong way.
- Ensuring that after N years on benefits that a person is given a few days a week community service - showing you have to work (even a bit) for what you get.
- Damage to any provided accommodation must be fixed by the occupier.

Failure to meet this means the step to taking the children out of that environment must be considered - as that is not a safe/healthy upbringing.

NinjaTruncs

Most people will never respect anything they are given for free, you see it every day in life, why else do companies start charging or requiring deposits for services they previously gave for free. Look at supermarkets, only once you needed coin to release a trolley did people start to put them back, how many garages do you go to and see the compressed air hose on the ground usually in a place where it can be driven over.

For the people saying think of the children, what about the fact that these children are going to grow up knowing they can get what they want for free, trash it and just have it replaced, is that a lesson we want to be enshrining into our future generations?

mattjack

tails_naf wrote: »

This post is not targeting any particular group of people, but instead is about a behaviour of some people.

A recent case in my local town - a family that were given a free house a few years ago reported on the conditions in the house now, and how it is unsuitable for living in. Broken windows all over, internal doors hanging off or missing entirely, holes in walls, and filth everywhere.

The thing is, when the house was given to them a few years ago, it was just fine - so any damage has been self inflicted.

They are now looking for a new, nicer place. This same group are locally known to be petty thieves and not people to cross, etc.

So the questions really have to be asked:

Who supports the system we have where they will in all likelihood be given a new house, with zero effort or cost to them?

What political motivation do we have to spend money in this way, which is actually encouraging the behaviour, and means the next generation will likely be worse and feel more entitled than the last?

Especially given the crime element too - surely at the very least, being involved in crime should see a reduction or modification of hand-outs?

Granted this is an extreme case, but surely if this cannot be tackled properly then the example it is giving is a poor one.

So any ideas why this is allowed?

Are they Jehovahs Witness or Mormon , I cant quite figure it out .

shar01

Taltos wrote: »

Never said the children were guilty - but if we want to break this cycle - lets take them from this "family", place them into care, give them an education and shape them into valuable members of society.

Just wish there was some way to stop people like this having children who really lets face it have next to no chance with parents like this.

Social workers are slow to take kids away from failing parents and IMO this approach has not worked. I agree with Taltos. Maybe the time has come for a different approach to break the cycle of deprivation.

And I know I'm talking through my ar$e, I'm not at the coal face. I don't see what the social workers are truly faced with. But I see the kids in buggies on Talbot St, Dublin and on Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire and your heart would go out to them.

token101

The solution.

"Repeat offenders should be forcibly removed from their neighbourhood and sent to a village for scum," he suggested last year. "Put all the trash together."
Whilst denying that the new projects would be punishment camps for "scum", a spokesman for the city mayor stressed that the special residential units would aim to enforce good behaviour.
"The aim is not to reward people who behave badly with a new five-room home with a south-facing garden. This is supposed to be a deterrent," he said.

suicide_circus

People using their children as a shield dont deserve to be parents. People who destroy their tax payer funded homes need to be cut off. People who get stuff for free on the back of the hard work of others will never appreciate it. The entitlement-culture we have in Ireland and the UK is unjust and morally corrupt.

CAB (the criminal assets bureau) is one of the few state institutions that i believe needs to have its funding increased and mandate strengthened.
If a family, business or individual cannot account for, or legitimately explain the origin of, monies or assets in their possession - seize it and add it to state coffers.

Bullseye1

Local authorities providing houses should carry out a dilapidation report on the house before the tenant moves in. On moving in the tenant should be provided with the report and both parties sign that they are satisfied with its contents. The process should then be repeated when the tenant is moving out.

Nodin

Taltos wrote: »

Never said the children were guilty - but if we want to break this cycle - lets take them from this "family", place them into care, give them an education and shape them into valuable members of society.

Just wish there was some way to stop people like this having children who really lets face it have next to no chance with parents like this.

To the best of my knowledge, the state hasn't the infrastructure or resources to put children in care on a wider scale.

looking_around

move the family into a bedsit if they cause trouble like this. Do it to a couple of families and the rest will soon cop on.

stevedublin

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Local authorities providing houses should carry out a dilapidation report on the house before the tenant moves in. On moving in the tenant should be provided with the report and both parties sign that they are satisfied with its contents. The process should then be repeated when the tenant is moving out.

Sounds reasonable.

xLexie

Fromthetrees wrote: »

The kids in that house are still innocent and are not guilty of their parents crimes. The state has an obligation to house them.

Um, no. The Parents have an obligation to house them.

When the parents are unwilling, then the state will step in and house them, which they've already done. They have a home, albeit a wrecked home. I'd be leaving them in it, and if it isn't suitable for the kids, then the state should find them nicer homes with nicer people.

mattjack

Taltos wrote: »

Never said the children were guilty - but if we want to break this cycle - lets take them from this "family", place them into care, give them an education and shape them into valuable members of society.

Just wish there was some way to stop people like this having children who really lets face it have next to no chance with parents like this.

shar01 wrote: »

Social workers are slow to take kids away from failing parents and IMO this approach has not worked. I agree with Taltos. Maybe the time has come for a different approach to break the cycle of deprivation.

And I know I'm talking through my ar$e, I'm not at the coal face. I don't see what the social workers are truly faced with. But I see the kids in buggies on Talbot St, Dublin and on Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire and your heart would go out to them.

If you've concerns about who you feel are at risk , you are obliged to report it.

Stopping people having children ? because there's a perceived risk or chance the any child may have next or no chance in society ?

Grand Moff Tarkin

Fromthetrees wrote: »

The kids in that house are still innocent and are not guilty of their parents crimes. The state has an obligation to house them.

If you start taking children off people more regularly then we create more problems.

What we have now is an Irish solution to an Irish problem.

Oh lord more of the "Won't someone think of the children" rubbish. From an very early age the kids are trained in the family business and you can be sure when the bleeding hearts are pleading the case for the "poor" children that they are checking the back pockets for any cash they can rob.

Pumpkinseeds

Maybe those sorts of people should just be housed in trailer parks, like the yanks do with them. There is a huge problem with scumbags in this country and they know that if they have kids, no matter what they do, they have a constitutional right to social housing. If they finally do lose entitlement to council housing, they are then entitled to rent allowance. So long as there is no consequence to their actions they have no reason to behave like decent human beings.

I'd say that faced with the choice of having to behave like decent people in order to keep the house or spending the rest of their lives in a caravan would sort the problem out fairly rapidly.

Irish Steve

Seen a thread recently about converting 40 Ft containers into environmentally acceptable low energy housing. Maybe a variation on that theme is the answer to such families. In some more extreme cases, the conversion might be somewhat minimal, the less there is to break, the easier and cheaper it is to fix.

amacca

tails_naf wrote: »

This post is not targeting any particular group of people, but instead is about a behaviour of some people.

A recent case in my local town - a family that were given a free house a few years ago reported on the conditions in the house now, and how it is unsuitable for living in. Broken windows all over, internal doors hanging off or missing entirely, holes in walls, and filth everywhere.

The thing is, when the house was given to them a few years ago, it was just fine - so any damage has been self inflicted.

They are now looking for a new, nicer place. This same group are locally known to be petty thieves and not people to cross, etc.

So the questions really have to be asked:

Who supports the system we have where they will in all likelihood be given a new house, with zero effort or cost to them?

What political motivation do we have to spend money in this way, which is actually encouraging the behaviour, and means the next generation will likely be worse and feel more entitled than the last?

Especially given the crime element too - surely at the very least, being involved in crime should see a reduction or modification of hand-outs?

Granted this is an extreme case, but surely if this cannot be tackled properly then the example it is giving is a poor one.

So any ideas why this is allowed?

the solution is quite simple imo

crime should be punished and punished harshly and the punishment should be for the individual(s) that commit the crime

when its proven you have deliberately or through negligence damaged a house (beyond normal wear and tear or an accident) given to you by the state you should be punished....as things stand youare rewarded

this is allowed because it suits a large section of the current system to be excessively lenient towards it......if we actually punished crime there would be a lot less work/money for a whole industry that has grown up around low life scum

Gatling

Irish Steve wrote: »

Seen a thread recently about converting 40 Ft containers into environmentally acceptable low energy housing. Maybe a variation on that theme is the answer to such families. In some more extreme cases, the conversion might be somewhat minimal, the less there is to break, the easier and cheaper it is to fix.

I believe there's a development in Holland that's made from connex containers

suicide_circus

I like the converted 40 ft lorry containers for those who chose to damage housing provided by the state. Perspex windows, rudimentary furniture welded to the floor etc. And they can stay there until the full cost of repairing the damage has been repaid via weekly deductions from SW payments. Sick of those who suckle at the udder of the tax payer being dickheads and not being held to account.

strangel00p

shar01 wrote: »

Social workers are slow to take kids away from failing parents and IMO this approach has not worked. I agree with Taltos. Maybe the time has come for a different approach to break the cycle of deprivation.

And I know I'm talking through my ar$e, I'm not at the coal face. I don't see what the social workers are truly faced with. But I see the kids in buggies on Talbot St, Dublin and on Marine Road, Dun Laoghaire and your heart would go out to them.

Agreed, saw a nice young lad aged about six or seven waiting patiently for his parents to finish their deal on Talbot street. Heart breaking stuff, he will get no chance in life if he stays in that situation.

Death and Taxes

Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »

Oh lord more of the "Won't someone think of the children" rubbish. From an very early age the kids are trained in the family business and you can be sure when the bleeding hearts are pleading the case for the "poor" children that they are checking the back pockets for any cash they can rob.

Yes we should think of the kids, and if they are being trained in criminality then a stop must be put to that, if we allow that to continue we,as a society are failing in our duty.

Shelflife

The problem is that they get everything soft and dont appreciate it.

A family local to me destroyed their house and were moved to another, destryed that house too and moved to another, why would they bother changing their ways if there is no incentive to do so.

The state have fulfilled their obligation by providing them with a house, if they destroy it or make it inhabitable then that is their problem and they should be left to deal with it.

Its not going to happen because those in the system havent the balls to tell them to feck off and clean up their own mess. Ive seen first hand SVP delivering hampers to people whos only problem was that they were too lazy to scratch themselves.

Ive seen situations where a family went on holidays for a week to spain and on return demanded and recieved money to feed the children and pay the esb and rent because it was all gone.

theres too much of this crap going on in the country, where people in authority wont make the hard decisions, if someone spends their food money on a trip to spain then they should go without and the kids taken off them. this wont happen because the easy route is to throw them a few euros.

then you have muggins down the road working two jobs to keep himself and his family above water, watching literally every cent and trying to do the right thing and does he get any help? you must be joking.

Why would these people bother cleaning their house or stop destroying it? no charges will ever be brought against them and they will get a new house because the one that they "broke " is no longer fit to be lived in. all we do is to reinforce and reward bad behaviour.

Then relevant authorities need to clamp down on this crap, but they wont because they dont care about the money that they hand out and will always take the easy option.

Madam_X

They should be told **** off and clean it up themselves.

Btw they're charged rent, the house isn't "free". I understand the anger but making stuff up is unnecessary.

foggy_lad

strangel00p wrote: »

Agreed, saw a nice young lad aged about six or seven waiting patiently for his parents to finish their deal on Talbot street. Heart breaking stuff, he will get no chance in life if he stays in that situation.

I have seen a girl of about 10 with a buggy on the luas with her little brother and also trying to console her obviously drug affected mother who was in a state of depression/intoxication and basically unable to function. the child was the mother. heart wrenching indeed but this is happening daily and nobody in power wants to acknowledge it or do anything about it.