Family forced to squat in house....

Eric Cartman

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A very dear friend called her daughter Rhiannon after the Fleetwood Mac song. She’s a midwife now so don’t tar all Rhiannon’s with the same brush!

Rhiannon is a different name ha, rihanna is the name of a black US pop singer particularly popular with lower socio economic groups.

Deebles McBeebles

Yeah you don't tend to get many Rhiannon's down the dole office with 3 kids in a buggy. Just passed a Rihanna and her absolute scumbag OH on the street. He was on the phone to someone laughing about how the judge said he wouldn't believe the lords prayer out of his mouth. Absolute waste of skin.

Great tune too, Rhiannon.

Boggles

Jaysus 12 week old called Levi and Wangler all ready on the way.

She should just staple a mattress to her back.

Jupiter Mulligan

na1 wrote: »

Do you think leaving these children with their parents will do any good? Will they grow up educated and hard working citizens?

I think that lots of Irish kids haven't got particularly good parents. But why pick on these ones just because their parents have shown a bit of initiative?

Deebles McBeebles

Can you be forced to squat?

Jupiter Mulligan

Deleted User wrote: »

Every house has to be renovated before being given to someone else. Stripped back to bare walls. Painted. New kitchen and bathroom. These have to be ordered.

Aw now don't go upsetting the kneejerkers with your common sense and logic! It plays havoc with their ranting apparatus which, in extreme cases, may even need to be recalibrated.

El Tarangu

myshirt wrote: »

You talk about decency. This young couple haven't as much as a washer in their pocket

Was genuinely unsure if this post was a joke, but working on the assumption that it was in earnest:

The father of this little menagerie is still on the scene. While granted he may not have the same benefit of education as some of the posters on this thread, he is young, able-bodied (one part of him certainly is), and is a native English-speaker.

He already has an immeasurable leg-up on the many thousands of people who come here from Brazil (for example), who don't speak English especially well, whose educational qualifications may not be recognised, and who yet still manage to find jobs, earn money & provide for themselves, and maybe send some money back home.

The fact that a young man in the prime of his life has decided that a better course for him is to stay at home and beg off the state for his needs, rather than going out and providing for his family himself, is an indictment of the perverse incentives that our welfare system provides.

InTheShadows

Jesus Christ some of the comments posted here wouldn't be out of place in 1930's Germany also judging people because of what they call their children???

DEFTLEFTHAND

It's the culture they're brought up in more than anthing. They're stuck in a cycle.

Generations of bad lifestyle choices and failure. Nobody in the family is in a position to give out good advice.


I was a bit of a waster when my son was conceived. Early 20s and had Arsed around in college for too long. I lacked proper direction and drive.


It would have been very easy for us to go down the route of welfare dependence but both our families would not have stood for it. I was told to get my arse in gear or there'd be hell to pay.


I needed that boot up the backside.

Deebles McBeebles

InTheShadows wrote: »

Jesus Christ some of the comments posted here wouldn't be out of place in 1930's Germany also judging people because of what they call their children???

Are you suggesting Adolf for the third?

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I needed that boot up the backside.

Give us a loan of that boot and lets do a tour of the country.

Jupiter Mulligan

InTheShadows wrote: »

Jesus Christ some of the comments posted here wouldn't be out of place in 1930's Germany also judging people because of what they call their children???

So then grandad, how well do you remember 1930's Germany?

Nevin Parsnipp

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

It's the culture they're brought up in more than anthing. They're stuck in a cycle.

Generations of bad lifestyle choices and failure. Nobody in the family is in a position to give out good advice.


I was a bit of a waster when my son was conceived. Early 20s and had Arsed around in college for too long. I lacked proper direction and drive.


It would have been very easy for us to go down the route of welfare dependence but both our families would not have stood for it. I was told to get my arse in gear or there'd be hell to pay.


I needed that boot up the backside.

Early twenties should not need mammy to boot them in the backside ! Fair play for your candidness though !

James Brown

InTheShadows wrote: »

Jesus Christ some of the comments posted here wouldn't be out of place in 1930's Germany also judging people because of what they call their children???

I find there's more whinging about bleeding hearts than actual bleeding hearts.

LirW

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Not to have a go at you, but this is exactly the problem. Why should they get an education, work etc. when the PAYE mugs will bail them out?

Ok, so they wont be living in Dalkey or Shanakiel but they'll have their beer money, fag money, kid gets a cough and off to the GP, never put their hands in their pocket for a shekel they earned.



Its getting like a pyramid scheme

I'm aware that this is the problem. But what is the solution?
Should we turf every long term doler out on the streets?
The reality is that there are no actions from the official side. They get to live in the same nice house as everyone else but others are in debt for 30 years. Housing policies are micromanaged among councils, ie there is no moving to another part of the country because it is policy to be housed within your own council area.
The welfare structure is complicated and adds up because as of now they qualify for a myriad of small payments.
They're just playing a game that shouldn't be there in the first place.

Again, what's the alternative? Basic accommodation (say apartment blocks without anything fancy) doesn't exist. Welfare won't be reduced because they're not engaging with the services. No motivation to get going and do better for yourself because they already have what they wanted: house, 3bed, garden.
This is the status quo. We all have an idea how it SHOULD be. But it's not and nobody of the guys up there does anything about it.

freshpopcorn

It's a hard situation to fix to be honest.
Education is important but I can see how some people can get lost because it's either to academic or they've no support at home.
If the state was to get strict on matters they'd just high light children being forced to live in more poverty and mental health issues.

Gatling

I think they should look into setting up mobile home villages ,for temporary housing for medium to short term use and restrictions on on bigger homes ,it should be a case of a two bedroom property and if people decide to have 5/6 children they should face the consequences of living in cramped accommodation and not panderer to by giving them bigger and bigger accommodation

Gatling

Gatling wrote: »

I think they should look into setting up mobile home villages ,for temporary housing for medium to short term use and restrictions on on bigger homes ,it should be a case of a two bedroom property and if people decide to have 5/6 children they should face the consequences of living in cramped accommodation and not panderer to by giving them bigger and bigger accommodation

The problem is that social housing guidelines dictate the number of children per bedroom. These guidelines don’t apply to us who foolishly buy our own homes.

freshpopcorn

Deleted User wrote: »

The problem is that social housing guidelines dictate the number of children per bedroom. These guidelines don’t apply to us who foolishly buy our own homes.

I think the issue would be if anything happened the state know they'll probably get sued for forcing a family to live in such un suitable conditions.

gctest50

Gatling wrote: »

I think they should look into setting up mobile home villages....

Need to move away from all that

Better : From say next year on, childrens allowance for the first child only

Leave the existing ones alone, it'll take 17 years to take full effect

Boggles

gctest50 wrote: »

Is that "car" the mobile homes black box?

Not a scratch.

gctest50

Boggles wrote: »

Is that "car" the mobile homes black box?

Not a scratch.

No, no, easy mistake to make though -

it marks where one of the five children burned to death*

That was their favourite toy, that little green car





(*because someone wouldn't buy an electronic deep fat fryer)

LirW

Gatling wrote: »

I think they should look into setting up mobile home villages ,for temporary housing for medium to short term use and restrictions on on bigger homes ,it should be a case of a two bedroom property and if people decide to have 5/6 children they should face the consequences of living in cramped accommodation and not panderer to by giving them bigger and bigger accommodation

The issue is that a large number of people living in social housing genuinely depend on it. They might be disabled, ill, have disabled or I'll children, don't earn enough money.
All the above is in the same pool with the couple this thread is about.

Generally I like the idea that if anyone hits hard times they won't have to worry about their entire existence. It could be every single one of us losing everything overnight and depending on help.
Unfortunately you do have people gaming the system that would then press for the same treatment: suddenly one of their children is disabled or they're disabled and can't work etc.

I don't know what the solution is to be honest. Maybe a lease based system that effectively assesses individual need and how someone is engaging with services. Comes with its own problems.
Just shows how difficult the whole social housing situation is.

James Brown

gctest50 wrote: »

No, no, easy mistake to make though -

it marks where one of the five children burned to death*

That was their favourite toy, that little green car





(*because someone wouldn't buy an electronic deep fat fryer)

Jesus that's pretty dismissive for dead children.

gctest50

No .... this is though :

Boggles wrote: »

Is that "car" the mobile homes black box?

Not a scratch.

Atoms for Peace

Berserker wrote: »

Are you talking about forced abortions? If not, what happens when baby arrives and they don't have the deposit/savings?

Sell them to the Yanks, it was a profitable sideline for the nuns, so why not for the state.

Jupiter Mulligan

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

Sell them to the Yanks, it was a profitable sideline for the nuns, so why not for the state.

Human trafficking regulations have tightened up a bit since the halcyon days when nuns and priest were enthusiastic participants in the baby trading marketplace.

Spanish Eyes

FORCED to take over a house? Yeah right. Sorry now, this rubbish has to be nipped soon.

But it sells papers or is clickbait, take your pick.

Guy:Incognito

InTheShadows wrote: »

Jesus Christ some of the comments posted here wouldn't be out of place in 1930's Germany also judging people because of what they call their children???

I will absolutely judge people on what they call their children. I include famous people in that too.

Guy:Incognito

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I think the issue would be if anything happened the state know they'll probably get sued for forcing a family to live in such un suitable conditions.

Youre confusing forcing with "being generous and giving them a free house"

They are free to buy their own house with as many bedrooms as they desire should they choose to........

Guy:Incognito

gctest50 wrote: »

No, no, easy mistake to make though -

it marks where one of the five children burned to death*

That was their favourite toy, that little green car





(*because someone wouldn't buy an electronic deep fat fryer)

"dont give them cost effective homes because they are idiots and will set first to them" isnt a valid reason.

FFS we cant absolve grown adults of all responsibility. They have to be expected to be able to do something for themselves and if not, then its time to take the children off them and cut them loose to fend for themselves (the adults)