Family of seven sleep in Garda station Mod note post one

hawkelady wrote: »

You must be some clown if you believe what you say there !!! Cash gets evicted cause she and her offspring trash places they’re put because they have no respect. She must be a bad one when the halting sites from where she came from won’t have her !!

I really hope she’s put next door to where you live .. you’ll get on great I’d say

I just know what I’m talking about is all. The people responsible for her during her tenancy are the service providers who put her in the accommodation. It’s they who receive funding and it’s they who are meant to collect the rent and regularly visit their clients, or service users (their fancy terms, not mine), with the aim of supporting them to better themselves. The woman in this particular case has claimed she has been on the housing list 11 years, and during that 11 years, it’s likely she would have had her case passed to various support organisations which are funded by various Government departments.

The woman in question in this particular case is but one example of many thousands whom these organisations are receiving funding from Government for providing their services to them. In 2016 it was €96m, in 2017 it was €120m, and that’s just in Dublin alone, distributed among the various homeless services providers. That’s not taking any account of all the other Government funded organisations who are receiving funding from Government to provide their services.

Whatever the woman in question in this particular case is or isn’t receiving in welfare payments or any other support payments is but a drop in the ocean of the vast amounts of money being spent on services that not only are they not being provided, but the ‘homeless crisis’ is actually costing even more money, and I suspect that the funding for 2018 will easily top €150m, in just Dublin alone.

Then we have people in this thread going after the easiest and most visible target, and for what? This one particular woman will still receive the same welfare payments she is entitled to while she qualifies for them, that’s not going to change. She will still receive support from all the various organisations funded by Government, that’s not going to change either. Nothing anyone actually says here is going to impact on her life in any way whatsoever, so who are the clowns exactly? The people who’s lives will continue as before, the people who produce shiny annual brochures full of graphs and fluffy language who have the funds to employ professional fundraisers and financial managers, or the people who imagine that their competitive outrage poured out on these pages is going to make one blind bit of difference to a system that’s rotten to it’s very core with all the pigs at the trough making sure the funding keeps coming in because they’re not even coming close to providing an efficient and effective service that provides value for money for what the State is funding?

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Said before, there are none so blind as those so entrenched in their pathetic liberalism that they will not see.

That’s bollocks PS, frankly speaking. I’m certainly not either economically or socially liberal by any measure, quite the opposite, I’m not a supporter of the Welfare State at all, I believe it keeps poor people poor and actually hinders social mobility. But my personal politics has nothing to do with pointing out that the woman in question in this particular case is but one of many, many thousands of examples who are being treated as perpetual service users on housing lists in every city and county in Ireland that aren’t shrinking, and in fact are growing exponentially as even the term ‘homeless’ itself is redefined to include people on the list who wouldn’t have qualified before, and the funding is being provided by various Government departments and funnelled into various housing schemes and homeless services providers, and your continued protestations on the Internet aren’t going to make one blind bit of difference to them. They’ll continue to receive funding and the ‘homeless crisis’ will continue to worsen, because it serves their interests to keep people like the woman in question in this particular case on their books, she and her family and many thousands more like them are their cash cows. What one person is receiving in welfare payments from the State is only a pittance in comparison to the funding that homeless services providers are receiving from the State for doing not much more than publishing shiny annual reports full of fancy graphics and fluffy language in order to receive even more funding than the €200m they’ve received in Dublin alone in the last two years already.

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

Tina from charleville is the next homeless poster girl.

Another "stay-at-home parent", "never went" to school, "never worked" for a job. At least she seems to have a better understanding of the English language, makes things much easier to read through.

Hitman3000 wrote: »

So you're disappointed i'm not going to join in the demonizing of her? There's plenty here already at it. As an aside if it wasn't Cash it would be someone else. You think it's only her that's gaming the system. That's incredibly naïve of you.

It doesn't matter whose "gaming the system", the issue is that the media are using these people to attack the government which they shouldn't be.

sightband wrote: »

The problem is her...if you are going to ride the absolute f*ck out of the system, literally and figuratively in her case, then realise what a good thing you are on and shut the f*ck up for your own good.

It’s all well and good to say that, but when you’re ten years on a housing list and still in dire poverty, then it’s entirely plausible that one is likely to start thinking that it is in their own interests to speak up for themselves rather than being dependent upon other people who claim to speak for them. That absolutely does tend to put a spotlight on the service providers who claim to be providing a service, which they clearly aren’t providing if someone is still on the housing list 10 years later. There should be no way anyone should be on a housing list for that length of time and still not have their shìt together. Something really is fundamentally wrong there.

The problem is that this useless good for nothing idiot is too thick to realise this much and is at government doorsteps shouting and roaring about how unfortunate things are for her. Wandering streets picking out boarded up housing saying “gimme that”...have any of these idiots any understanding that these properties are most likely tied up in courts with all sorts of conveyancing issues.

Well, no. I don’t expect people who lack the education to know and understand concepts that they couldn’t possibly be aware of like conveyancing and so on, actually would understand concepts like conveyancing and so on. That doesn’t make them idiots, it just means they lack the knowledge to understand what they couldn’t possibly be expected to understand in the first place.

Nobody walked out of houses and threw the keys in the letter box and said f*ck this, whoever wants it can have it.

Nobody, or nobody that you’re aware of? Because I’m aware of plenty of people who did just that, and plenty of people who walked away from tenancies too owing thousands in mortgage and rent arrears.

Can you not for one second comprehend how difficult it is for hardworking people who are struggling just as much as her if not more so to listen to her nonsensical ranting bile?

I have no doubt but that the feeling is mutual. I’m just going to acknowledge that you work harder than I do, but that doesn’t make your nonsensical ranting bile any easier to listen to. I don’t see how one is related to the other. Nonsensical ranting bile is tough for anyone to have to listen to regardless of their circumstances.

People who choose not to have an additional child, like ourselves because we can’t afford it.

The choice of whether or not to have children and whether or not one can or cannot afford them is an entirely personal choice that you really can’t, or at least shouldn’t, be attempting to suggest is something that can be compared to anyone else’s circumstances. People’s motivations and decision for themselves whether or not to have children and how many children they will have are based on a number of different factors according to their own standards, and if you tend to view children in financial terms, then it stands to reason that you would be more likely to have none or less children than someone who doesn’t view children in financial terms. Being pissed off because someone has more children than you isn’t likely to change your perspective. I’d be rather surprised if it did, so I don’t see how the number of children anyone else has is in any way relevant to your circumstances.

For me this conversation is not about travellers or governance of the system, it’s about the brass neck of this disgustingly horrible thick pig ignorant tit who has no understanding of the real world and economics. For this she needs some semblance of intelligence which she has none and also some basic level of education which she voluntarily dropped out of...so now we have this mess.

Your own understanding of the real world and economics is fairly sketchy there horse, and that’s in spite of your claim to some basic level of education and implied intelligence. Given that, it’s easy to understand why you feel hard done by as you do when you see other people speaking up for themselves. In spite of all your education and intelligence, you still feel you’re in a worse position than she is, in spite of her lack of education and intelligence. That’s something you may want to think a bit more on before you start referring to anyone else as an idiot.

hawkelady wrote: »

Why do you believe that mrs cash is in dire poverty ?? F^#? Off with your ****e ....

Gatling wrote: »

Well in this one particular case the person is not in abject poverty and happily telling us all she's not actually poor ,
And she's is not on the housing list 10+ years as claimed but 9

She doesn’t strike me as someone who has the means to support either herself or her family without assistance from the State, and would therefore be someone I would consider an example of someone in dire poverty.

And whether it’s nine years or ten years Gatling I think you still get the point - nobody should be on the housing list that length of time. I know a good many families who are on the housing list ten years and they’re still living the same or similar lifestyles as they were when they first applied to be placed on the housing list. That’s wrong, and it’s something that should be looked into to examine where exactly is all the funding that housing organisations are receiving being spent, because it isn’t being spent on providing services for people on the housing list to get them off the housing list as quickly as possible and giving them the means and the ability to stay off the housing list.

Why is that, if it’s not for the benefit of organisations who claim to be providing these services that Government have chosen to outsource to them?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The problem is actually that public funds are wasted on outsourcing and administration and whatever is left is then used to provide an inadequate service to ‘service users’ (fancy term for people who are homeless).

The woman in question in this particular case isn’t taking anything from you or I personally, nor is she and her like dragging you or I out of prosperity, and I don’t know about you but I’m not in a shìt pit of an existence nor would I ever claim to be. If you are, then you may be entitled to avail of services to get you out of the shìt pit, as is anyone else who qualifies for any assistance they receive from the State.

To that end, it doesn’t matter how much I earn, or how much I pay in tax, it doesn’t matter how much you earn or how much you pay in tax either. We’d be paying it anyway regardless of how many people there were like the woman in question in this particular case, because most of it isn’t going to provide for services, it’s going to provide for salaries, and they aren’t minimum wage punks either. Why even hire minimum wage punks when there are all sorts various Government employment schemes that service providers can avail of to meet their staffing requirements that cost them nothing?

In fact the only thing you got right in that post is that I have nothing to lose by the woman in question in this particular case carrying on as she does. That’s not to say I approve of either her attitude or her behaviour, but certainly I can understand what has driven her to the point where she chose to take matters into her own hands rather than continue to be dependent upon service providers who continue to provide a sub-standard service funded by the State.

Your understanding of mathematics shows a lack of basic intelligence. It does matter how much I earn because every euro I make above 34000 is taxed at 50+%. And that’s before I spend any money. If people like her could fund their own lifestyles then your point would hold some validity. I am funding her along with thousands of other tax payers. If she an her like didn’t exist, less taxes would be required. Unfortunately this lifestyle choice is growing. It’s growing because nobody in government has the balls to cap or tax welfare like earned income. Why should somebody like Cash not pay income tax on welfare payments far in excess of the average wage?

As for a **** pit of an existence, if you’re not there, you will be. The welfare bill was €20 billion at 14% unemployment. It is still €20 billion at 6 % unemployment. Something is not right here and too many scruffs are sucking off the government tit. The State (you, me and the rest of the country) has income of about €60 billion. What happens during the next downturn? We’ll very quickly have one half paying for the other half.

You seem to have a thinly veiled hard on for civil/public service bashing. In fact you seem to blame everything else except the problem. The problem is people like you and her. Offended by everything. Ashamed of nothing.