nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Margaret Cash steals €300 worth of clothes from Penneys and aftermath/etc!

jjmcclure

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/homeless-mumofseven-margaret-cash-appears-in-court-over-stealing-300-worth-of-clothes-from-penneys-37434491.html

Where are RTE now?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Blazer

Hector Savage wrote: »

And that's 52k tax free, what would a PAYE worker have to be on to take home 52k clean ?

Jesus.

approx 87k.
So she basically gets 52k tax free into her hand.
We know she's not paying rent as its one of the reasons she was kicked out of previous houses,
She's obviously not buying childrens clothes since she's stealing them from penneys.
And she's not paying car tax or insurance.
So what is she doing with the 52k? oh we know..drinking, smoking, €250 pairs of nike shoes or trying to buy them, buying cars etc.
Now when her 7 and soon to be 8 kids grow up multiply that by 8 and add inflation and in 20 years time etc this family will be costing well over a million a year to support.
How in gods name can this keep going? Its not supportable long term.

lawred2

zurbfoundation wrote: »

social is only 1k per week for Mags. Do dem sums, about 50k per year, you would need to be on a 100k per year gig for that kinda coin to land into your pocket

ok as nuts as it is that someone so idle as herself shouls be trousering 50k per annum - you wouldn't need 100k for 50k take home.

Hector Savage

Blazer wrote: »

approx 87k.
So she basically gets 52k tax free into her hand.
We know she's not paying rent as its one of the reasons she was kicked out of previous houses,
She's obviously not buying childrens clothes since she's stealing them from penneys.
And she's not paying car tax or insurance.
So what is she doing with the 52k? oh we know..drinking, smoking, €250 pairs of nike shoes or trying to buy them, buying cars etc.
Now when her 7 and soon to be 8 kids grow up multiply that by 8 and add inflation and in 20 years time etc this family will be costing well over a million a year to support.
How in gods name can this keep going? Its not supportable long term.

Spot on, and people just don't wanna face up to this.
Child benefit is cancerous.
Totally unsustainable.

Hitman3000

I have no gra for Cash but she's not trousing 50 k off the taxpayer. She is getting an absence amount tax free but 16 k is HAP not hers paid to the landlord when she was renting. The rest is made up her SW claim and qualified children allowance. Also that figure includes child allowance and BTS allowance huge numbers in the state qualify for both these payments. Stephen Kearon posted the figures relating to Cash, curious thing is he's a FF hack ( even ran for election, fair play but a dismal vote) and most of the benefits she enjoys were put in place by an FF government.

Foweva Awone

There's an error in that table of her income earlier on in the thread, it says her HAP entitlement is €1,325. You multiply that by 1.5 to get the homeless rate - closer to 2 grand per month.

punisher5112

It wouldn't surprise me at all if she has a property owned.

It also wouldn't surprise me if the husband also has one or one at least between them....

He I'm sure has done quite well as a career criminal and terrorising the elderly.

What hope have these 7 kids and by the time her reproductive system gives up this figure could be very much higher.

How could anyone be defending such utter scum.

I would love to see someone actually question her and put all these facts to her.

It seems the legal system is going to be rolling in it for years to come as they can see she is breeding only more €€€€€€ for them to make.....

Cantona's Collars

Did anyone hear yer one on The Last Word yesterday,Matt Cooper brought it up about the theft and she pretty much chose to ignore the point and instead went on the attack against us that complain about the amount in handouts Margaret Cash gets and said the figures were skewed by HAP payments and children's allowance that "every parent gets".
Why are people still apologising for and championing this woman?

Foweva Awone

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I have no gra for Cash but she's not trousing 50 k off the taxpayer. She is getting an absence amount tax free but 16 k is HAP not hers paid to the landlord when she was renting.

Eh yeah it's still 16k (closer to 24k in fact) that she's saving by not paying it out on private rent. So she's financially better off by that amount per year, than someone earning that money and paying that rent.

punisher5112

Foweva Awone wrote: »

There's an error in that table of her income earlier on in the thread, it says her HAP entitlement is €1,325. You multiply that by 1.5 to get the homeless rate - closer to 2 grand per month.

Also as she has been evicted and was on that scheme she is now entitled to her forever home rent free.

What a fcuked up country

Uncharted

Margaret Cash is doing an interview on 98fm within the hour.
She's going to explain that she stole "for the sake of her kids".

This should be good.

tretorn

How dud she leave Penneys with that amount of clothed, thats what I want to know.
I know a teen who was stopped with one unpaid for bra and the security staff told her the whole shop is monitored. I saw this myself watching a programme one night about shop theft. The security staff in Penneys were glued to cctv footage covering the whole dhop bar changing rooms.
MC lifted trolley loads of clothes and yet she got out the door and none of the clothed were recovered, this is bizarre.

ThunbergsAreGo

I feel desperately sorry for her children, they have no hope at all

punisher5112

Uncharted wrote: »

Margaret Cash is doing an interview on 98fm within the hour.
She's going to explain that she stole "for the sake of her kids".

This should be good.

For the sake of the kids, how could anyone actually fall for that tripe..

Uncharted

punisher5112 wrote: »

For the sake of the kids, how could anyone actually fall for that tripe..

Culture,boss....

punisher5112

tretorn wrote: »

How dud she leave Penneys with that amount of clothed, thats what I want to know.
I know a teen who was stopped with one unpaid for bra and the security staff told her the whole shop is monitored. I saw this myself watching a programme one night about shop theft. The security staff in Penneys were glued to cctv footage covering the whole dhop bar changing rooms.
MC lifted trolley loads of clothes and yet she got out the door and none of the clothed were recovered, this is bizarre.

She had her kids so probably done a distraction take.

It's very easy when you have the numbers.

Over the years working shops they would come in fill the trolley, pull up in hiace or similar lift trolley into van and drive off.

If the one security guard was brave enough to try and stop them he would be up against a good number of them and be handed a beating so sometimes they would have to be let go.

Also the dogooders would get involved for those that were stopped screaming their rights etc etc.

[Deleted User]

sdraobs wrote: »

fake news. there isnt a penneys in tallaght afaik

Read the article.

Margaret Cash (28) stole more than €300 worth of clothing from Penneys in Nutgrove Shopping Centre, Rathfarnham in February this year.

punisher5112

Uncharted wrote: »

Margaret Cash is doing an interview on 98fm within the hour.
She's going to explain that she stole "for the sake of her kids".

This should be good.

Oh great Adrian will not even ask any hard questions and will defend her all the way.

He loves throwing out the auld race card too often also.

gmisk

naughtb4 wrote: »

I feel desperately sorry for her children, they have no hope at all

Thats the real issue I have as well, what chance do these kids (soon to be 8!?!) really have?
They are being dragged up and used as publicity (putting the poor bloody kids in school uniforms - when schools arent even opened) for this horrible thieving woman.

Uncharted

punisher5112 wrote: »

Oh great Adrian will not even ask any hard questions and will defend her all the way.

He loves throwing out the auld race card too often also.

Adrian Kennedy = a yellow pack Ray D'arcy

Effects

Blazer wrote: »

€250 pairs of nike shoes or trying to buy them,

What drugs are you on thinking a pair of Nike's cost that much?
Most expensive I've seen on people similar to Margaret is €165.

Snickers Man

NasserShammaz wrote: »

Eugenics is a movement that is aimed at improving the genetic composition of the human race. Historically, eugenicists advocated selective breeding to achieve these goals.

Just saying... we are reaching tipping point in this country soon there will be more of these junkie , useless , feral sc*m and it will be too late

Yes eugenics was a movement that was taken seriously by some well meaning people in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Including such humane intellectuals as George Bernard Shaw and John Maynard Keynes, not to mention Margaret Sanger, the American pioneer of birth control and advocate of greater freedom and responsibility for women over control of their own fertility.

Trouble is, we have been made to see only too vividly where that leads. And it's not a case of Godwin's Law (well maybe it is, but a justifiable one) to point out that the forced sterilisation of "mental defectives" (happened in the US and Scandinavia) the strict enforcement of "anti-miscegenation" laws, prohibiting marriage or sexual relations between people of different "races", which the majority of US States had in force in the first half of the 20th century and Germany famously had in the 1930s and 1940s, all lead to an arbitrary pecking order of humans. Some are destined to "survive and thrive" while those deemed unworthy are dispatched. As most famously demonstrated in 1940s Germany with its notorious "endloesung".

Shame on you for that post, and shame on anybody who "liked" it.

Yeah. Sure. Some of us are taking the piss out of a none-too-bright and unjustifiably indignant young crook for her inconsistency, inarticulacy and utter lack of irony. But at the end of the day, we'd still rather throw her a few bob than pack her off to a labour camp or worse.

vonlars

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I have no gra for Cash but she's not trousing 50 k off the taxpayer. She is getting an absence amount tax free but 16 k is HAP not hers paid to the landlord when she was renting. The rest is made up her SW claim and qualified children allowance. Also that figure includes child allowance and BTS allowance huge numbers in the state qualify for both these payments. Stephen Kearon posted the figures relating to Cash, curious thing is he's a FF hack ( even ran for election, fair play but a dismal vote) and most of the benefits she enjoys were put in place by an FF government.

She is though. €50k of tax payers money is going towards funding her life. Normal people who pay rent themselves also give money up to the landlord but it's still counted in their income.

I understand what you're saying but the simple fact is at the end of the day there's €50k of taxpayers money allocated to this woman who has contributed nothing to society. I have no problem with those who work getting child benefit. If you pay into the system, you should be rewarded for it. You shouldn't be able to live off it though. I couldn't afford half of the things that Cash has and I work full time.

DanMurphy

Guess who'll be a candidate in next years Council Elections?

Hitman3000

Foweva Awone wrote:

Eh yeah it's still 16k (closer to 24k in fact) that she's saving by not paying it out on private rent. So she's financially better off by that amount per year, than someone earning that money and paying that rent.

I'm going by the figures Stephen Kearon posted . He stated 16 k for HAP. She's not better off she doesn't have to spend as much on accommodation as someone who does not qualify for HAP.

Seth Brundle

DanMurphy wrote: »

Guess who'll be a candidate in next years Council Elections?

Cash?
Not a chance because she would have to do some work if elected!

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I have no gra for Cash but she's not trousing 50 k off the taxpayer. She is getting an absence amount tax free but 16 k is HAP not hers paid to the landlord when she was renting. The rest is made up her SW claim and qualified children allowance. Also that figure includes child allowance and BTS allowance huge numbers in the state qualify for both these payments. Stephen Kearon posted the figures relating to Cash, curious thing is he's a FF hack ( even ran for election, fair play but a dismal vote) and most of the benefits she enjoys were put in place by an FF government.

Which bit of the taxpayer is funding her lifestyle to the extent of 50k do you not understand? A normal working person earning 40k still has to pay rent out of their after-tax income.

What has the point about FF got to do with anything?

punisher5112

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I'm going by the figures Stephen Kearon posted . He stated 16 k for HAP. She's not better off she doesn't have to spend as much on accommodation as someone who does not qualify for HAP.

The thing is though she didn't spend anything that's why she was evicted for not paying her part.

She now qualifies for a house and will not have to pay a cent from our money towards it.
She will keep all her benefits and roll on.

Effects

Hector Savage wrote: »

Spot on, and people just don't wanna face up to this.
Child benefit is cancerous.
Totally unsustainable.

But aside from child benefit, personal responsibility just isn't there for a lot of people like this. They'll still get pregnant even if they aren't entitled to child benefit for the 3/4/5/6th kid. What state is that going to leave them in?

Effects

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I have no gra for Cash but she's not trousing 50 k off the taxpayer. 16 k is HAP not hers paid to the landlord when she was renting.

That's a bit like me saying I'm not trousering €18,000 a yer of my wages as I pay it to my landlord for the house I live in.

punisher5112

Effects wrote: »

But aside from child benefit, personal responsibility just isn't there for a lot of people like this. They'll still get pregnant even if they aren't entitled to child benefit for the 3/4/5/6th kid. What state is that going to leave them in?

Well for Cash she will do just fine as she has plenty of cash.

You only have to look at what she buys, looks to buy or is trying to sell.

If she was so down in the dumps how can she afford a car, caravan, mobile home, designer clothes, drink, 7 kids¿¿ Etc etc etc.