normanoffside wrote: » Not sure what the Soviet flag is about or why people think it is left wing/Communist policy to subsidise travellers and terminally unemployed. Marx had a word for the likes of traveller 'Lumpenproletariat' and according to his writings they should not be helped: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat Under Communist regimes such as Soviet Union or Castro's Cuba, people who did not work were left on the street and given nothing.
Goldengirl wrote: The halting site did not meet any safety standards, because DLRCC deemed it emergency accommodation. So they circumnavigated safety regs, squashed a few caravans together in a corner of a field , and left them there , without coming back to the site to try to ensure that safety standards would be upheld. That was their job and their responsibility as paid and accountable employees .The man who was a drunk and cooking chips had no hope as did none of the rest of the family. Four working fire extinguishers are not much good if everyone who might be able to lift and use them is asleep or unconscious. This is not something to be proud of and certainly complacency is as much a factor as the burning chip pan in these deaths. Would ye be so cool about it if it had happened in a row of terraced houses? There would be marches on the capital streets in protest , and rightly so.
Ray Palmer wrote: » How would you get paid? Nobody would work in banking in that situation. SO in this dystonia future how are the elderly and disabled cared for?
tretorn wrote: » The bankers though for all their misdeeds did work all the hours God sends and would have paid over 50% of their income in taxes. The travellers dont work at all and instead of your wan doing the PHD on racism towards travellers maybe she could have studied why travellers dont want to send their children to school. Is it because the brighter traveller child might get themselves an education and say feck this, I have seen my mother being thumped black and blue and I am not going to marry some good for nothing who will do the same to me. Maybe she could do a peer to peer chat with Ms Cash and ask her what she is doing with all the benefits she is getting into her bank account every month. She could ask her why she has to steal clothes from Penneys when surely with all those children there must be plenty of clothes that could be handed down. She could ask what are Ms Cashes intentions regarding her housing and what are the chances of herself and her huge family renting somewhere rural where she could fund the rent herself out of the 50 thousand in taxpayers money she is living on. She could ask her what she thinks is going to help set a good example to those seven children so they dont end up sponging off society in the future. She could also ask the Rathkeale revellers why a triage medical unit was being proposed to deal with the fall out from their tendency to enage in feuds with their rellies. She could ask the travellers in Longford how come news of a funeral means plans have to be drawn up to bring armed Gardai in such is the threat to life in the Town. Finally Ms PHD could examine crime statistics in rural Ireland and explain why so many young strong male travellers engage in identifying and burglaring elderly pensioners. She could ask how come so many travellers are engaged in fraudulent insurance claims. This is all just so the PHD work is balanced because seriously if the whole pHD is about how hard life is for travellers because of the actions of settled people it really wasnt worth the effort of getting this qualification at all. The PHD will more than likely lead to employment in Pavee Point and there is no point to this organisation at all. I mean Goldengirl is probably employed by Pavee point and the uselessness of that organisation is evident every time one of their spokepeople opens their mouth.
tretorn wrote: » Even if you tax them 95% it isnt going to make the slightest bit of difference to the travellers. If you gave the travellers the bankers salaries they would go through all the money spending it on drink and they would still want everything provided free of charge. Its not finance thats the problem with travellers, you only have to Look at Ms Cashes facebook page to see where the money is going.
Goldengirl wrote: » Are you talking about me? No I don't work for Pavee Point...just don't like to see sxxt like this go unchallenged. Why ? Am I annoying your little racist, rightwing ,love- in, cos it's not debate. It's a whole load of nasty, horrible, hate churning round and round. Today its Margaret Cash, tomorrow it's people with disabilities . Next day, some woman who is clever enough to have done a pHD in something that might make a difference. Not me, unfortunately, but good for her , getting up your nose !
rafatoni wrote: » Aye. Have to agree with this. Imagine cash and her lot over in North Korea, Russia or China. They would be long gone to the Gualgs. They wouldnt be pandered to over there, not in a million years.
Ray Palmer wrote: » I have rented to people on social welfare payments and taken rent allowance. My properties are all above the limits so no longer do. You called me a liberal and are just wrong and have failed to understand a word I said. I can assure the way you speak I am fully aware you don't earn more than me. I pay a lot of taxes as a landlord and am not so protective about being proud of buying my own house as some massive achievement to lord over people like you have.Have you got kids?
Deleted User wrote: » You're not a distinguished student of history, they left in their droves.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » How come none of the four fire extinguishers onsite were not used? A smoke alarm that would have alerted the victims was changed to a heat sensor on request of the resident. Sometimes you just have blame those that are responsible. In this case some of the deceased are the culpable parties. Although already a few of the extended have told a few lies, future claim in the pipeline I think. Do you expect the council to provide "carers" for when these people are incapable of acting as responsible adults?
Goldengirl wrote: » So would it suit you to move over there? Be right at home .
Ruraldweller56 wrote: » More tripe. I don't care about their culture. What even is their 'culture'? We've already established that the seasonal farm work and hammering pots and pans is a thing of the past. Can they speak their own language anymore is there anything at all left. All that aside. They can do what they like as far as I'm concerned. I just don't see why I should have to pay for it. I've done it my whole life (and will until the day I die) and get nothing only grief in return. As for me being the same as the British I'll refer you to my previous point. I'm not trying to destroy anything. I'm actually all for them travelling the countryside, minding horses and nana instead of going to school getting an education and spending their lives in a 9-5 cubicle. Who's going to pay for it though Ray?
rafatoni wrote: » your lot at it again in the UKhttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6599255/Sex-attacker-molested-83-year-old-woman-tried-kidnap-girl-15.html
rafatoni wrote: » Goldengirl wrote: » So would it suit you to move over there? Be right at home . your lot at it again in the UKhttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6599255/Sex-attacker-molested-83-year-old-woman-tried-kidnap-girl-15.html
Goldengirl wrote: » Fire extinguishers were useless as they were already un conscious except for the young lad who tried but couldn't use them. Fire hydrant had no water pressure. The person who changed the smoke alarm to a heat sensor was wrong, and the council should have checked the site after it became obvious it was no longer emergency accommodation but a settlement with families.I can't accept the blasé attitude that says this is " all the travellers fault" , and that's being charitable. Provision of emergency accomodation for anyone in the country,needs to meet safety standards. I do not think this is negotiable. It is not negotiable if you or I are building a house , so why is it ok for a halting site?
blanch152 wrote: » Why should the council have checked the site? Personal responsibility is the key. The council didn't get rid of the smoke alarm. The council didn't take their eye of a chip pan with burning oil. No fault of the council. I have found some of the testimony and blaming of the council to be deeply disturbing. It seems some people want to profit wrongly out of the death of their relatives.
Filmer Paradise wrote: » 12 years on the housing list? She's 28 now. That means that she's on the housing list since she was 16! What's going on here? I mean WTF is going on with these people?
Goldengirl wrote: Fire extinguishers were useless as they were already un conscious except for the young lad who tried but couldn't use them. Fire hydrant had no water pressure. The person who changed the smoke alarm to a heat sensor was wrong, and the council should have checked the site after it became obvious it was no longer emergency accommodation but a settlement with families.I can't accept the blasé attitude that says this is " all the travellers fault" , and that's being charitable. Provision of emergency accomodation for anyone in the country,needs to meet safety standards. I do not think this is negotiable. It is not negotiable if you or I are building a house , so why is it ok for a halting site?
suicide_circus wrote: » First traveller woman to get a PHD does her doctorate in traveller victimhood.
Goldengirl wrote: » The halting site did not meet any safety standards, because DLRCC deemed it emergency accommodation. So they circumnavigated safety regs, squashed a few caravans together in a corner of a field , and left them there , without coming back to the site to try to ensure that safety standards would be upheld. That was their job and their responsibility as paid and accountable employees .The man who was a drunk and cooking chips had no hope as did none of the rest of the family. Four working fire extinguishers are not much good if everyone who might be able to lift and use them is asleep or unconscious. This is not something to be proud of and certainly complacency is as much a factor as the burning chip pan in these deaths. Would ye be so cool about it if it had happened in a row of terraced houses? There would be marches on the capital streets in protest , and rightly so.
ShaneC93 wrote: »
ShaneC93 wrote: » Before today it looked like she was confident of getting a house this month, must have had some bad news recently. The having a lot of kids choice is probably the thing that's actually done her bad in the end because unlike 10-years ago, the councils don't tend to build bigger council homes anymore. Even 4-beds are a rarity, usually only when they're gotten through compulsary purchases of new-build developments. From the many comments on furniture posts from the past couple of weeks, it seems she actually has a lot to her name that she was planning to use to satisfy a very expensive taste in furnishings! Again, spending loads on anything but accomodation appears to be the goal!
Ray Palmer wrote: » I have rented to people on social welfare payments and taken rent allowance. My properties are all above the limits so no longer do. You called me a liberal and are just wrong and have failed to understand a word I said. I can assure the way you speak I am fully aware you don't earn more than me. I pay a lot of taxes as a landlord and am not so protective about being proud of buying my own house as some massive achievement to lord over people like you have. Have you got kids?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/892f365931e5cb4ba5c9d4ce2c7da299.svg)
