Deebles McBeebles wrote: » Amazing what info you can find with the right surname and town, everything from rape to stoning the elderly in there. Dalton Park sounds like a great spot to live.
Tombo2001 wrote: » Ah the righteous working man :P Of course you'd never spend your day posting comments on a chat forum, because you work so hard isn't that right.
Deebles McBeebles wrote: » "Some of them even work, and they just can't afford a mortgage to put a roof over their head". Imagine! The mad b*stards!
Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: » With all due respect why should we give a fück about other people’s children when their own parents can’t even be bothered to worry if they’ll have a roof over their head? If I have the responsibility of kids I’d have my own
Vox Nihili wrote: » Over 80 percent of Travellers are unemployed. But according to CSO fertility statistics on women aged 40 to 49, half of Traveller women have five or more children, and 13.5 percent have 8+ children. Just one in 20 settled women in that age group has five or more children. You really think that if Travellers did not have the security of lifelong unemployment benefits and the added incentive of child benefit (€1,120 per month for eight children), they would be popping out so many kids? Margaret Cash was married at 15, pregnant at 16, and a mother of seven by 28. Is this the kind of "culture" the taxpayer should be funding -- a culture of uneducated child brides whose only way to increase their household income is to have more and more kids?
Deebles McBeebles wrote: » Even if you have no issue with people of any culture or ethnicity doing this, bigger picture, its really not helping the long term future of the planet. No person in this day and age should have 7 or 8 kids. Its irresponsible. When you can't pay for them yourself, its negligent.
end of the road wrote: » because the state deems quite rightly, that the children are entitled to a decent quality of life, regardless of one's opinions of the parents. because that is what you choose ultimately to do, i'd imagine. it's not "lefty liberal bs" to state the realities of why the systems we have exist, and to support the existence of those systems, in recognition that without them, there are likely going to be more problems then exist with the supports continuing to exist. you aren't paying taxes for "irresponsibility" but for supports and services. if you are sick of paying taxes for such supports (by the way your tax bill wouldn't be going down if they didn't exist) then imagine how sick of paying taxes you will be for the alternative when it quite likely doesn't work?
Rory28 wrote: » That is a load of sh1t Tombo. She has every right to be annoyed at freeloaders.
Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: » Sorry, but the "no debate welcome" attitude is exactly what you'll find in mainstream politics and on RTE, where anyone who dares to say anything critical about Travellers is immediately branded a racist. Look at the recent disgraceful treatment of Peter Casey, for instance. The prevailing mainstream narrative is that Travellers are a disadvantaged ethnic minority group whose many problems have been caused by discrimination, racism, and social exclusion. Everything that goes wrong in Traveller communities is somehow regarded as settled people's fault. People are right to call BS on this -- and the fact that Casey got 23 percent of the vote in the recent election shows that there are many in Irish society who are fed up of the pandering around Travellers. It's evident that their numerous problems are directly caused by the very "culture" that the mainstream politicians and media pundits tell us is valuable and worth protecting. If any settled person took his daughter out of school at age 12 and married her off to her first cousin when she was 16, our politicians and media would be up in arms protesting about it. It would be seen as utterly disgraceful treatment of a vulnerable young girl that should not be condoned in a civilized society. When Travellers do exactly this, words like "tradition" and "culture" get thrown about and everyone politely looks the other way. If you want to have a discussion about any of this, feel free.
blanch152 wrote: » I think that yourself and others are choosing to reply only to the most inflammatory posts. There are plenty of reasoned posts out there discussing the real issues with Traveller culture in a way that doesn't stigmatise all Travellers. There is plenty of room for an educated discussion about the aspects of Traveller culture that are incompatible with a modern equality-based, enlightened and tolerant society. A tolerant society doesn't have to tolerate criminality, misogyny and homophobia. Taking girls out of school and marrying them off at 16 to become baby factories is not something that anyone should condone. Margaret Cash is in some ways as much a victim of Traveller culture as those farmers who are burgled every second week. Similarly, strict observance of Ramadan, treatment of women, the wearing of the hijab are all issues that need to be discussed when considering the how Islamic culture translates into a modern society like ours.
Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: » While Margaret Cash herself is far from blameless, I do see her as a product both of Traveller culture (which is responsible for her being taken out of school at 12, married at 15, and pregnant by 16) and the misguided welfare policies of the Irish state, which steadily increased her monthly income and eligibility for social housing as she had more and more children. She is now caught in a poverty trap -- but there's no doubt that her entire life would have been different if she had continued on in school, got a job, and delayed marriage and children until she was more financially secure.
end of the road wrote: » no, someone having 7 or 8 kids is not automatically irresponsible. as for this supposed bigger picture and the long term future of the plannet, i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone. i'm going to speculate that the long term future of the plannet isn't the reason you have a problem with people having large families.
end of the road wrote: » capping child benefit is unlikely to work. remember, there are countries with no wellfare system whatsoever, and yet there are large families.
end of the road wrote: » ultimately you don't have to, but the reality is it's not about you or me or anyone else. you don't have to give a feck about anyone but you will need to come to terms with supports being availible to children where their parents qualify for such supports to be availible. yes, it is quite possible that some travelers would continue to have children without the supports in existence. something which would likely apply to non-travelers as well. no, someone having 7 or 8 kids is not automatically irresponsible. as for this supposed bigger picture and the long term future of the plannet, i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone. i'm going to speculate that the long term future of the plannet isn't the reason you have a problem with people having large families.
SusieBlue wrote: » Their flashy weddings, new cars and designer clothes don't really correspond with the poor mouth, misunderstood, poverty stricken charade they like to pedal to the media. They should have to prove where they are spending their social welfare. Instead of giving them cash, their welfare should come in the form of food stamps (that can't be used on alcohol/cigarettes), electricity voucher, fuel voucher, tv/internet voucher, etc. with a small cash payment to cover any extras they might incur. They could have quarterly vouchers for Penney's etc for kids clothes, which they would have to then provide receipts for. They already get rent allowance/HAP (if they aren't in caravans) and have medical cards. Its only fair, when I claim expenses in work I can't just go in with a figure, I need to provide receipts to prove it. If they are living their lifetime out of the public purse, they absolutely should have to account of their expenses and I'm sure that paying them via vouchers and stamps would see a reduction in the unexplainable wealth we frequently see in these families.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » +1 The CAB has a duty to investigate, it's their very raison d'etre.
Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: » It’s no secret, the dogs on the street know, a huge amount of heroin in the midlands is trafficked through travellers.
PlaneSpeeking wrote: » Here we go again, the ridiculous "pay up or they'll rob us blind" argument. I've had enough of it. No more. We need welfare reforms now, if it means putting that money into increased law and order so be it and if we need to bring in food stamps and workhouses then fine, I've no issue with that. I DO have an issue with the constant defending of these people who have no idea what it is like to go to work and have to pay for everything. Let's not forget the fragrant Ms Cash takes home roughly 3 times what someone on the average industrial wage takes home; still gets EVERYTHING for free and then steals on top of that! Well you might be fine and dandy with being bled dry but I'n not. And I doubt many others are too.
Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: » Of course it’s irresponsible, unless the kids that are born can survive on fresh air? kids cost money. If you have no money and you keep having kids, so many infact, that you have nowhere for them to live, then you’re irresponsible and the kids should be put into state care, and no I don’t care if it costs more, I’d rather contribute to a decent society than a lazy layabout one if I have to pay taxes. I DGAF about other people’s kids. They’re of no concern to me. Sure, I’ll stop one from running out onto the road if I have to, or I’ll help a child up if it falls, but I’m not responsible for anything that didn’t come out of me. If travellers are quite happy to have children without supports in place then that’s what they should do, they should support themselves. They’re capable enough. Two hands and two feet and a head like the rest of us. “Oh but you wouldn’t hire a traveller, would you?” Is it my fault they’re uneducated, and have a predisposition to helping themselves to items not belonging to them?? Society has tried to help them, they’ve had money thrown at them, they’ve been given houses, they aren’t expected to work, and nothing is working. Rural Ireland and the elderly that built this country from nothing are terrified of them. Padraig Nally was sleeping in his cattle shed because they had him tortured so much, and we only know about him because he had the good sense to blow one of them to kingdom come. Oh but I’m sure that was a motal sin to gbh shocking to say you can’t rob pilfer and terrorize people in their own homes without being pumped full of lead, shocking pavee point, shocking it’s a crying shame a motal sin that travellers can’t express their culture
end of the road wrote: » i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone.
KrustyUCC wrote: » Margaret doesn't seem to have an issue with the culture at all "Margaret also opened up about her life as a traveller and how she became a mother to seven children by the age of 28. "I got married at 15," she said. "That's when I had my own family then. [As a child] my aunty fostered me and I class her kids as my own brothers and sisters. "I went to school until the end of primary school. Being a traveller - it's hard to explain, if you don't understand it. "When you're a traveller and get married, you claim your coop and have kids. I love that, I love my kids. I wouldn't change any of them for the world. "I just don't have a home and I don't really care what people think."https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/homeless-dublin-ireland-15036222 Marry early check Have Kids early check Claim coop check Never work check
VinLieger wrote: » This might be the most uninformed ludicrous statement i think i've ever seen you make, is there any point in asking you to back up such a claim?
end of the road wrote: » so, you don't care if it costs more to put children into a system, which from my very very limited knowledge of it doesn't seem to have very good outcomes...
end of the road wrote: » because the state deems quite rightly, that the children are entitled to a decent quality of life, regardless of one's opinions of the parents.
end of the road wrote: » actually no, i'm not fine with being "bled dry" . however i recognise that there is a risk of me being "bled dry" even more with the type of reforms some would want. so, you don't care if it costs more to put children into a system, which from my very very limited knowledge of it doesn't seem to have very good outcomes, then it does to simply provide the supports for the parents and their children? how does throwing the children into this system if it is the case that outcomes of it aren't so good, contribute to a decent society, and how could it be considered any sort of value for money?
end of the road wrote: » i'd suggest that it's probably the opposite. vouchers and stamps can be exchanged for cash on the black market. sure, you could probably try to implement a system that would keep them to a person but no doubt there would be some way found around that. to me it sounds like a hugely expensive system to get up and running and to oversea, for which the money used could be better spent on more gardai and cab officers.
Lefty Bicek wrote: » The other side of that coin is the state's responsibility to sanction parents who do not play their part.
Lefty Bicek wrote: » The state being obviously unwilling to do so, has no business to waste my taxes on one-sided exploitation.
SusieBlue wrote: » Would you go away, the black market?! This is a voucher for Aldi we're talking about, not cocaine and elephant husks. Most people can just buy their own food with their own money so there would be little to no demand for exchanging food vouchers for cash on the "black market". It would be very simple actually. Instead of collecting their payment at the post office, they collect a book of stamps/vouchers. Its very clear the current system isn't working. I have seen, with my own eyes, a woman of traveller "ethnicity" arrive up to the SVdeP in a BMW, her backseat full of shopping bags, and cry and beg for food to feed her kids. She did it every single week without fail, she just saw it as free food. She took food that day that could have been given to a family that actually couldn't afford to eat that week. Its all take, take, take with them, and they contribute nothing. They're laughing at us for getting up and going to work every day while they live a comfortable life sponging off the tax payer. Its about time they were individually held accountable for their cost to the taxpayer, and I think giving them food stamps and vouchers instead of cold hard cash would be a good start.
end of the road wrote: » the state does sanction people where there are clear breaches and abuses of the rules. however, sometimes the state won't know that certain breaches and abuses are taking place, because people won't report such abuses to them. you may not support or like the sanctions either, but there are avenues open to you to challenge it, contacting your local td or raising the issue with local election candidates at election time. unfortunately, the state will spend your tax money on what it deems worth while for it to be spent on. should you have an issue with your taxes being spent on something, by all means raise it with your local td or your local election candidates when they come to the door at election time.
