Family of seven sleep in Garda station Mod note post one

ShaneC93

BBFAN wrote: »

A mother raises children and looks after a home which is a very valuable contribution to society, of course she has contributed. Not so long ago no mothers would be working outside the home. Maybe even your own mother? Did all those women contribute nothing to society?

You were the one who said someone who never works deserves nothing. There are pensioners who have never worked believe or not. All the "scroungers" don't die at 64 believe it or not.

But she didn't have any kids when she went on the housing list at 17/18 (If not 17, not sure if that is/was possible, it would have had to have been the moment she turned 18).. Her eldest is 11 and she's 28 now.

That would have been about a year before the financial crisis too so there was still plenty of jobs about to be had - unemployment under 5% and lower than it is right now.

The majority of mothers in this country are now working mothers and it was never the norm for women to be stay-at-home mothers and to keep having children when they knew the family couldn't afford it, there has always been the idea of only having as many kids as you will be able to care for financially.

One eyed Jack

Ronin247 wrote: »

They're contributing to society by their very existence !! What a dose of horse5hit. People like the one that caused this thread contribute absolutely nothing to society.

Yes! And as I clarified, whether they are a positive, or negative contribution to society is literally a matter of opinion based upon the type of society that each and every one of us would want to live in.

Secondly, with so much yak about personal responsibility flying about, Ms. Cash herself isn’t responsible for starting any thread. For that you’ll have to have the OP take personal responsibility for their actions rather than seeking to hold Ms. Cash responsible for something she had nothing to do with whatsoever.

Anthracite

BBFAN wrote: »

If you don't understand the contribution stay at home mums make I'm sorry I can't help you.

If you can't understand that stay-at-home mums are usually funded by non-stay-at-home (or in prison) Dads, then I can't help you either.

BBFAN

ShaneC93 wrote: »

But she didn't have any kids when she went on the housing list at 17/18 (If not 17, not sure if that is/was possible, it would have had to have been the moment she turned 18).. Her eldest is 11 and she's 28 now.

That would have been about a year before the financial crisis too so there was still plenty of jobs about to be had - unemployment under 5% and lower than it is right now.

The majority of mothers in this country are now working mothers and it was never the norm for women to be stay-at-home mothers and to keep having children when they knew the family couldn't afford it, there has always been the idea of only having as many kids as you will be able to care for financially.

Bless, you must be very young and naïve because it was absolutely definitely the norm for stay at home mothers to have very large families whether or not they could afford them so you need to go downstairs and ask your parents or grandparents about that.

Or maybe just read a book or two.

Ronin247

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yes! And as I clarified, whether they are a positive, or negative contribution to society is literally a matter of opinion based upon the type of society that each and every one of us would want to live in.

Secondly, with so much yak about personal responsibility flying about, Ms. Cash herself isn’t responsible for starting any thread. For that you’ll have to have the OP take personal responsibility for their actions rather than seeking to hold Ms. Cash responsible for something she had nothing to do with whatsoever.

Goalposts moving..... the contribution to society can be positive or negative now.... the whole thread was about positive contribution

I said Ms Cash was the cause of the thread starting but again try twisting my words to suit. If you don't know the difference between cause and responsibility this may not be the thread for you.

One eyed Jack

ShaneC93 wrote: »

The majority of mothers in this country are now working mothers

They’re not, and the number of women leaving the labour market when they become mothers is actually increasing, for a number of different reasons, whether it be that they want to raise their own children, that the cost benefit analysis between childcare and employment shows that it just isn’t economically either feasible nor justifiable in their circumstances, or a whole multitude of other reasons. This isn’t just happening in Ireland btw but it’s happening in many developed countries in Western society.

and it was never the norm for women to be stay-at-home mothers and to keep having children when they knew the family couldn't afford it, there has always been the idea of only having as many kids as you will be able to care for financially.

Actually it was, and still is. The idea of having only as many children as one can care for financially is just that - an idea. It doesn’t actually reflect the reality of human nature, let alone Irish society.

ShaneC93

BBFAN wrote: »

Bless, you must be very young and naïve because it was absolutely definitely the norm for stay at home mothers to have very large families whether or not they could afford them so you need to go downstairs and ask your parents or grandparents about that.

Or maybe just read a book or two.

It was not near as common to rely solely on the state to fund a large family is what I was implying, the number of people on unemployement benefits in this century exceeds how many received it during the previous centry by a large margin.

While it may have been the case that familes with a stay-at-home mother and working father would forego richer lifestyles in other to have more kids, it was not a widespread practise to have and continue to have kids expecting the state to pay for them.

One eyed Jack

Ronin247 wrote: »

Goalposts moving..... the contribution to society can be positive or negative now.... the whole thread was about positive contribution

I said Ms Cash was the cause of the thread starting but again try twisting my words to suit. If you don't know the difference between cause and responsibility this may not be the thread for you.

The whole thread has actually been about attempting to portray Ms. Cash’s contribution to society as a negative contribution to society, and pointing out time after time that she is contributing nothing to society.

And I’m not twisting your words either. Your claim that Ms. Cash is the cause of this thread existing is taking the responsibility away from the person who actually started the thread! I’m not misunderstanding cause and responsibility at all. You just want to put responsibility where it doesn’t belong instead of acknowledging that the actual cause of this thread was the poster who started it. Ms. Cash didn’t start this thread.

One eyed Jack

ShaneC93 wrote: »

It was not near as common to rely solely on the state to fund a large family is what I was implying, the number of people on unemployement benefits in this century exceeds how many received it during the previous centry by a large margin.

While it may have been the case that familes with a stay-at-home mother and working father would forego richer lifestyles in other to have more kids, it was not a widespread practise to have and continue to have kids expecting the state to pay for them.

It was, and that’s why throughout history there have been various eugenics movements (and particularly around Darwin’s time, and in the last century) which have attempted to address the issue of those they deemed unfit for or unsuitable for society, or a drain on society, or holding society back from progressing and costing the State money to keep them.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Ms. Cash didn’t start this thread.

What's the saying we didn't land on Mrs cash ,Mrs cash landed on us


Welcome to living in the public eye in 2018 her actions and lies have gotten her into the world of public discussion

One eyed Jack

Gatling wrote: »

What's the saying we didn't land on Mrs cash ,Mrs cash landed on us

Welcome to living in the public eye in 2018 her actions and lies have gotten her into the world of public discussion

Never heard of that saying, and it isn’t even true in this case either as all I’ve seen in this thread has been posters combing through her social media and posting her posts in this thread. If I wanted to read her social media posts, I’d go read them on her page, I’m not nearly so interested in doing so as other posters here are though, so she hasn’t landed on me, but plenty of posters from here appear to be descending on her social media for any tidbits they can pick up.

All that being said, no matter what she is personally responsible for, she isn’t personally responsible for whether or not people choose to want to talk about her. That’s entirely their responsibility.

Gatling

.

Ronin247

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The whole thread has actually been about attempting to portray Ms. Cash’s contribution to society as a negative contribution to society, and pointing out time after time that she is contributing nothing to society.

And I’m not twisting your words either. Your claim that Ms. Cash is the cause of this thread existing is taking the responsibility away from the person who actually started the thread! I’m not misunderstanding cause and responsibility at all. You just want to put responsibility where it doesn’t belong instead of acknowledging that the actual cause of this thread was the poster who started it. Ms. Cash didn’t start this thread.

I will make it easier so

If Ms Cash hadn't posted her attention seeking pictures.....

1.This thread wouldn’t exist

2.This thread would exist

Choose only one answer.

Fr_Dougal

BBFAN wrote: »

If you don't understand the contribution stay at home mums make I'm sorry I can't help you.

Cash is making zero contribution to Irish society.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

All that being said, no matter what she is personally responsible for, she isn’t personally responsible for whether or not people choose to want to talk about her. That’s entirely their responsibility.

Not their ,my ,our , responsibility

But our choice to discuss

And for the majority of this thread that's exactly what being happening , she chose to make a hoohah trying to jump the housing list and got caught in lie after lie ,
Remember this isn't a poor person she just wants a forever home

BBFAN

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Cash is making zero contribution to Irish society.

In your opinion.

Gatling

BBFAN wrote: »

In your opinion.

Can you prove otherwise ?

Jimmy.

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Cash is making zero contribution to Irish society.

She is increasing the population.

Graces7

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Cash is making zero contribution to Irish society.

Please define "contribution to Irish society"? Gets thrown about like some meaningless mantra.

AlekSmart

BBFAN wrote: »

If you don't understand the contribution stay at home mums make I'm sorry I can't help you.

Indeed,however it has already been established that this person was in the habit of NOT staying at home.

With several young children "at home" to look after,it can hardly be said to be setting a good example to then be arrested and charged with car based criminal activity,and then not attend the subsequent Court hearing.

By all means laud the "Stay at home Mum",but perhaps seek to find somewhat more genuine examples,who'se unsung contributions can be recognised.

One eyed Jack

Ronin247 wrote: »

I will make it easier so

If Ms Cash hadn't posted her attention seeking pictures.....

1.This thread wouldn’t exist

2.This thread would exist

Choose only one answer.

I’ll make it even easier for you. This thread only exists because of the choices made by the person who chose to start the thread. It’s that simple. That’s exactly where the responsibility for the existence of this thread lies.

BBFAN

Gatling wrote: »

Can you prove otherwise ?

Can I prove that she contributed anything to society?

Well she has created 7 humans, whether or not you dismiss them as write offs or not is more to do with your awful attitude towards humans in general.

Can you prove that any of these 7 innocent children will not provide any contribution to our society.

Gatling

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’ll make it even easier for you. This thread only exists because of the choices made by the person who chose to

To take the proverbial Mickey out of the People supporting her lifestyle choices in every which way she chose to do what she did ,she chose to put herself out there as some kind of saviour fighting the robbing guberment

Gatling

BBFAN wrote: »

Can I prove that she contributed anything to society?

I take it that's a no

BBFAN

Gatling wrote: »

I take it that's a no

I take it you decided you couldn't argue the rest of my post so you just decide to ignore it.

Hilarious. :D:D

Gatling

BBFAN wrote: »

I take it you decided you couldn't argue

No i just knew what the answer was.

which was No

BBFAN

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

I see some of the usual apologists for this craven, bone idle, work shy, parasite are now attempting to derail the thread by dwelling on the fact the she has produced a large number of children which is a contribution to society in their minds.

Stay at home mothers provide a hugely important role in society when the go-to- work father is out contributing to society on the family’s behalf.

It serves the thread no purpose by dwelling on such idiotic notions that this person has ever contributed to society and in reality all these particular posters are actually doing is trying to bait their fellow posters into saying something derogatory about the children so that they can then report them to the mods.

Poor show, but what should we expect from such people.

So what about stay at home mothers who don't have a go to work father?

That's not baiting, that's a genuine question.

Btw if you read back on my posts I have never defended the most nefarious actions of Ms Cash, I just don't believe that she deserves the gutter abuse she has gotten in this thread.

Ronin247

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I’ll make it even easier for you. This thread only exists because of the choices made by the person who chose to start the thread. It’s that simple. That’s exactly where the responsibility for the existence of this thread lies.

And yet again putting a different argument forward

"People like the one that caused this thread contribute absolutely nothing to society."
This is exactly what I said. You answer with a diversion about who is responsible for the thread and still hide behind straw man arguments and diversions.

Anyway I must go to bed because I have to get up early in the morning to go to work to pay taxes to support other peoples lifestyle.

BBFAN

Ronin247 wrote: »

And yet again putting a different argument forward

"People like the one that caused this thread contribute absolutely nothing to society."
This is exactly what I said. You answer with a diversion about who is responsible for the thread and still hide behind straw man arguments and diversions.

Anyway I must go to bed because I have to get up early in the morning to go to work to pay taxes to support other peoples lifestyle.

If that's what you go to work for you need to look at your life.

Gatling

BBFAN wrote: »

have never defended the most nefarious actions of Ms Cash, I just don't believe that she deserves the gutter abuse she has gotten in this thread.

None which has been proven despite multiple reports ,

The same person who didn't want anyone mention the cash kids seems to have No issues talking about her kids .


Lol gimme me a H
gimme me a y

Should I keep going