nice_guy80 wrote: » Longford has the highest % of travellers Especially the town Casey got a huge vote in the county
tretorn wrote: » They would have high rates of infant mortality because they insist on marrying their first cousins so there would be a lot of genetic defects in that community. In fairness though no sensible woman would marry into that community so the men wouldnt have much choice. Who wouldnt recommend their daughters not to get involved with someone who would expect them to live in a caravan and have a baby every nine months.
Claw Hammer wrote: » Have travelers ever stolen your possessions or your granny?
tayto lover wrote: » Forget about the health issue, that will improve. The problem is with education. Educate people and everything else will follow. Now what is the Travellers agency, Pavee Point ,doing about education?
Cookie_Monster wrote: the education is provided. For some inexplicable reason though they don't have to addend like every one elses child does and there are no consequences to the parents if they don't, unlike every other child...
Rechuchote wrote: Traveller children do have to attend, and yes, the way they're often treated in schools does exacerbate the situation; I've been told by traveller kids that they're humiliated and dissed by teachers and other pupils. There's a lack of civility in our discourse.
freshpopcorn wrote: » Does John Connors?
tayto lover wrote: » Now what is the Travellers agency, Pavee Point ,doing about education?
Rechuchote wrote: » Think of it for a minute as if it were outside Ireland. Think of the poorest population in the United States, the "hillbillies" (so called because their ancestors were devotees of King Billy, and they moved to the poor hill country of the South). These are people who have a low level of schooling, a high level of suspicion of government, a high level of dependence on welfare, ignorance on nutrition with resultant malnutrition, a big problem with alcoholism and increasingly with other addictions, a high level of smoking, congenital diseases possibly caused by the custom of cousin marriage, etc. How would you solve the problems of this community? Remove welfare supports and leave them in their misery, or support them so each new generation is better nourished, better educated, less likely to marry close relatives, more likely to work and contribute and be part of the wider society?
Rechuchote wrote: » or support them so each new generation is better nourished, better educated, less likely to marry close relatives, more likely to work and contribute and be part of the wider society?
Rechuchote wrote: » How would you solve the problems of this community? Remove welfare supports and leave them in their misery, or support them so each new generation is better nourished, better educated, less likely to marry close relatives, more likely to work and contribute and be part of the wider society?
Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: » How is that working out in Ireland? Is welfare making Travellers better educated, less likely to marry close relatives, more likely to work and contribute, and more inclined to integrate into wider society? Not at all. Despite availing of the country's generous welfare supports for decades, just 8 percent of Traveller children sit the Leaving Cert, and fewer than 1 percent of Travellers have a third-level qualification. Around 40 percent of Traveller marriages are between first cousins, with many Traveller girls in particular married off while still in their mid to late teens. Travellers are not likely to work in the official economy, with around 85 percent of male Travellers claiming Jobseekers Allowance. And they show no signs of integrating into mainstream society. It could just as easily be argued that a culture of unlimited lifetime welfare benefits is only subsidizing and sustaining many undesirable aspects of Traveller culture. Look at Margaret Cash -- left school at 12, married at 15, pregnant at 16, and a mother of seven by 28, with no intention of ever working a day to support her ever-expanding band of children. If each additional child did not come with a new raft of welfare entitlements, she might have been forced to think about the implications of having so many children -- but she has no incentive to use contraception when she knows that the taxpayer is picking up the tab. If Travellers did not get everything handed to them in Irish society, they might be forced to keep their kids in school, get actual jobs, think about their reproductive decisions, and drop their hostility to the settled community. But as long as they continue to get hundreds of millions handed to them annually, they have no incentive to change.
malinheader wrote: » Couldn't agree more with you. The incentive for these people is the more kids you have the better rate of welfare entitlements you get. It doesn't seem to matter about rearing them. But we all know once you make a comment or complain about this your a racist.
Graces7 wrote: » so your answer is? starve the children?
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » I for one am sick of paying for the likes Margaret Cash and her clown car vagina.
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » I think the answer is to stop incentivising people dependant on the state from having more children, inceasing this dependancy. Existing kids shouldnt starve, but these people would have to take responsibility for their family planning. I for one am sick of paying for the likes Margaret Cash and her clown car vagina. I would love more kids but we cant afford them. Why should i be paying for her failure to be responsible.
whisky_galore wrote: » Will any of these kids go to college or university, get an apprenticeship or otherwise become a productive member of society?
Roger Hassenforder wrote: » I think the answer is to stop incentivising people dependant on the state from having more children, inceasing this dependancy.
