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

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 02:58PM

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Who dafuq is George?
You talking to me?

You are right I made a mistake ment Roger.

blanch152 · 18-01-2019 03:05PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

You dont have an issue with taking funding away from private schools but in the same post you say that they cost the taxpayers less money than public schools? WTF??

Private schools cost the taxpayers less money than public schools, yes, but my objection is to them being subsidised at all. I have no issue with someone paying €7k to have their child educated privately, I just don't think the State should contribute in that case. If that means fees going up to €10k or €12k or more, sure some people will stop paying it and revert to the public system, but plenty of them will pay the higher fee, so I don't think the state will be down money.

It only costs the State more money if every pupil in a private school subsequently transfers to a public school. I would guesstimate that if as few as 15% of pupils stay in private schools, then the State would be up money by abolishing the existing subsidy.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k · 18-01-2019 03:08PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Private schools cost the taxpayers less money than public schools, yes, but my objection is to them being subsidised at all. I have no issue with someone paying €7k to have their child educated privately, I just don't think the State should contribute in that case. If that means fees going up to €10k or €12k or more, sure some people will stop paying it and revert to the public system, but plenty of them will pay the higher fee, so I don't think the state will be down money.

It only costs the State more money if every pupil in a private school subsequently transfers to a public school. I would guesstimate that if as few as 15% of pupils stay in private schools, then the State would be up money by abolishing the existing subsidy.

Why? Anyone sending their child to a private school would pay quite a bit of tax into the public pot. Why shouldn’t their children avail of the tax that’s paid?

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 03:13PM

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Really?
Thats racist?
In that case i'd be a 5th Dan.
I abhor that stuff. You?

I answered your question. There is no point asking me again as I have answered. If you don't agree that means nothing other than you disagree but you will still be a racist. The question now is what level of racist are you? There are a series if question put to you.

Now are you going to answer the question put to you or just keep whinging that you don't agree with what I have said?

As for why my property is not suitable for travellers in the city centre, small accomadation, expensive, over HAP rates, small storage etc...I could actually rented to travellers I never checked. People from Athlone have a similar accent associated with travellers so could have.
No I wouldn't.live beside a halting site but that is because I like city living. Lived not far from travellers halting site growing up One guy was in my class for a while. Didn't like him personally but his brother was sound. Both dead now from ill health before reaching 45.

BattleCorp · 18-01-2019 03:13PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Private schools cost the taxpayers less money than public schools, yes, but my objection is to them being subsidised at all. I have no issue with someone paying €7k to have their child educated privately, I just don't think the State should contribute in that case. If that means fees going up to €10k or €12k or more, sure some people will stop paying it and revert to the public system, but plenty of them will pay the higher fee, so I don't think the state will be down money.

It only costs the State more money if every pupil in a private school subsequently transfers to a public school. I would guesstimate that if as few as 15% of pupils stay in private schools, then the State would be up money by abolishing the existing subsidy.

I don't understand your logic.

You are advocating taking money from private schools that save the State money.

So if you take money away from private schools, the State has to step in and spend more money.

Can you not see that the private schools are actually providing a good service and benefiting the State.

Why would you shoot yourself in the foot and penalise private schools that are actually saving you money?

Can't say I agree with your guestimate either.

punisher5112 · 18-01-2019 03:14PM

Please please start another thread the ramblings on in here are a method of getting this thread closed.

Wouldn't surprise me if pavee point has people set up on here to do so.

Keep this for Cash as it's annoying now trying to read through and no cash news at all.

Deebles McBeebles · 18-01-2019 03:18PM

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Anyone else waiting on something?

An alibi

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 03:20PM

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

Why? Anyone sending their child to a private school would pay quite a bit of tax into the public pot. Why shouldn’t their children avail of the tax that’s paid?

No,no,no
We have established you can't mention paying extra tax. Makes no difference to say how money should be spent.
It is a simple argument the state provides an education service, if you don't avail of it that is fine but you shouldn't take money from that budget if going private. Pay the entirety if you want private schooling.

KrustyUCC · 18-01-2019 03:28PM

Well in relation to the death of a homeless man in Belfast Margaret has posted "How many more people gonna did on the streets on the cold R.I.P'

Alos reposted that TRAVELLER FAMILIES WIN REPRIEVE FROM EVICTION

Five Traveller families threatened with eviction have won a reprieve to stop their removal from a site in Clondalkin.

This comes after local councillors called for a solution to the standoff between the families and South Dublin County Council.

The families, who have 28 children including two toddlers, have been living in caravans on an old school site in Balgaddy with no electricity or running water, for the last two months.

They were due to be evicted by South Dublin County Council on Friday 11th, but it was called off after the families refused to leave.

Martin Collins, Director of Pavee Point, called on Housing Minister Eoghan Murphy to help the families.

“Ongoing evictions by local authorities and other public landowners is causing Travellers unnecessary hardship and suffering,” he said.

“The Minister has a humanitarian responsibility here to intervene.

“Evictions get us nowhere and Travellers feel like they are being persecuted for simply trying to survive.

“It is not fair to punish individual Traveller families, who are just trying to survive, for the failures of the State and general society overall.”

https://dublingazette.com/news/west-dublin-news/travellers-eviction-23896/

Yeah cause the families are being persecuted for being able to pull up and enter a site which they don't own

They didn't abide the agreement they entered in

I fail to see how moving these families who have no rights to be there is is causing Travellers unnecessary hardship and suffering

All the fault of society overall

Deebles McBeebles · 18-01-2019 03:30PM

Will try the same thing so if it ever becomes necessary. If asked to leave I'll just refuse and it'll all be grand.

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 03:33PM

BattleCorp wrote: »

Why would you shoot yourself in the foot and penalise private schools that are actually saving you money?
.

The reason you are confused is because you think it saves money when it doesn't.
It costs public school funding because of economy of scales. It hoovers up funding and make public schools worse off. Less pupils in local schools restricts their access to facilities and teachers. It is going to be stopped but it should have happened sooner. Private school pupils don't really do that much better either anyway

robarmstrong · 18-01-2019 03:33PM

KrustyUCC wrote: »

“It is not fair to punish individual Traveller families, who are just trying to survive, for the failures of the State and general society overall.”

Haha yeah the overwhelming amount of travelers that represent the prison population and crimes committed is definitely down to "failures of the State and general society overall."

Everyone else's fault bar their own is it?

ohnonotgmail · 18-01-2019 03:40PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

The reason you are confused is because you think it saves money when it doesn't.
It costs public school funding because of economy of scales. It hoovers up funding and make public schools worse off. Less pupils in local schools restricts their access to facilities and teachers. It is going to be stopped but it should have happened sooner. Private school pupils don't really do that much better either anyway

the only word for that is bollix. they get the same grant per pupil as public schools. Economies of scale do not apply to schools.

punisher5112 · 18-01-2019 03:44PM

So basically let yourself onto any land or property and state you are a traveller.

You now have the best chance of getting away with whatever you want.

Amazing.

stuff.hunter · 18-01-2019 04:00PM

punisher5112 wrote: »

So basically let yourself onto any land or property and state you are a traveller.

You now have the best chance of getting away with whatever you want.

Amazing.

hell yeah, great idea

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 04:01PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the only word for that is bollix. they get the same grant per pupil as public schools. Economies of scale do not apply to schools.

economy of scale applies to everything. You are clueless on funding and resources. Try running a building for 500 pupils and only 100 pupils attending. Economy of scale doesn't apply right?

Deebles McBeebles · 18-01-2019 04:06PM

Economy of scale doesn't apply to the topic of this thread. If it did child number 7 would cost us next to nothing.

stuff.hunter · 18-01-2019 04:09PM

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Economy of scale doesn't apply to the topic of this thread. If it did child number 7 would cost us next to nothing.

true, unfortunately it costs us more than first 3 all together

KrustyUCC · 18-01-2019 04:13PM

punisher5112 wrote: »

So basically let yourself onto any land or property and state you are a traveller.

You now have the best chance of getting away with whatever you want.

Amazing.

Yeah pity the trespass law isn't being used as it should and the caravans confiscated off them

"When RTÉ Investigates first met Patrick McInerney in October, he had moved illegally onto a disused construction site in Tullamore. When we went back a week later, the family had already been moved on - the site was blocked up and a single security guard sat in a car outside the main entrance, to stop any further unauthorised entry. The Traveller families, ten in all, had relocated to a Retail Park not far away. They lasted four days there before receiving an eviction notice posted to their caravan doors. That notice warned them of prosecution under a provision of the so-called 2002 Trespass Act, which made trespass a criminal offence for the first time.

Under that Act Gardaí can evict without a written notice and if the trespassers refuse to leave they can confiscate their caravans or vehicles.

It is one of a number of laws that Councils can use to evict people and it is the most feared by Travellers, because it allows the State to confiscate a family home without going to court."

https://www.rte.ie/news/investigations-unit/2018/1217/1017612-travellers-in-local-authorities-data/

Local councils should move them on as soon as they know they are there

In the case in Clondalkin the family A planned eviction was postponed before Christmas to allow the families time to arrange somewhere to go.

The families said they would leave but now haven't

Stay somewhere you shouldn't should = caravan confiscation

stuff.hunter · 18-01-2019 04:17PM

..and cars confiscated as well, when you park your car on someones property, you'll get towed

KrustyUCC · 18-01-2019 04:17PM

Yeah true enough

ohnonotgmail · 18-01-2019 04:18PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

What a muppet, economy of scale applies to everything. You are clueless on funding and resources. Try running a building for 500 pupils and only 100 pupils attending. Economy of scale doesn't apply right?

So let me get his straight, you think the small number of private schools are causing public schools to lack pupils? Even if we ignore the bollixology of your ridiculous example this makes no sense. If you want a counter example how about a public school that is already at the limit of pupils in a class. Instead of sending their child to that school (which would require the hiring of an extra pupil for a very small increase in grant funding) the parents send little johnny to a private school. So as well as costing the state less the parents have also saved their local public school an expense.

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 04:30PM

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Economy of scale doesn't apply to the topic of this thread. If it did child number 7 would cost us next to nothing.

Yes it does, building a house costs so much and additional size is cheaper to build after the initial costs.
Seriously you all think I am some liberal idiot commie but you lot are proving yourselves to have very poor comprehension and understanding on basic stuff.

ohnonotgmail · 18-01-2019 04:31PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Yes it does, building a house costs so much and additional size is cheaper to build after the initial costs.
Seriously you all think I am some liberal idiot commie but you lot are proving yourselves to have very poor comprehension and understanding on basic stuff.

If you could come up with some kind of coherent argument that would be great.

Deebles McBeebles · 18-01-2019 04:35PM

Ray Palmer wrote: »

Yes it does, building a house costs so much and additional size is cheaper to build after the initial costs.
Seriously you all think I am some liberal idiot commie but you lot are proving yourselves to have very poor comprehension and understanding on basic stuff.

So you keep telling everyone, Ray. You must be very popular at parties.

Ray Palmer · 18-01-2019 04:38PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Ray Palmer wrote: »

What a muppet, economy of scale applies to everything. You are clueless on funding and resources. Try running a building for 500 pupils and only 100 pupils attending. Economy of scale doesn't apply right?

So let me get his straight, you think the small number of private schools are causing public schools to lack pupils? Even if we ignore the bollixology of your ridiculous example this makes no sense. If you want a counter example how about a public school that is already at the limit of pupils in a class. Instead of sending their child to that school (which would require the hiring of an extra pupil for a very small increase in grant funding) the parents send little johnny to a private school. So as well as costing the state less the parents have also saved their local public school an expense.

Yes every private school only takes in people when there are no spaces left in a public school. You are talking nonsense. I am not the only person who has said this nor made up. It doesn't matter they are going to cut public funds going to private schools. It is just late in coming. The same statement made for travellers, why am I funding their choice of lifestyle?
Want private schooling pay for it in its entirety that is my view and it is happening. If you think they will all suddenly go to public schools you are dreaming.

Deebles McBeebles · 18-01-2019 04:40PM

This is the cruellest bit on this whole thread Ray, talking about schools on a thread about travellers.

blanch152 · 18-01-2019 05:03PM

BattleCorp wrote: »

I don't understand your logic.

You are advocating taking money from private schools that save the State money.

So if you take money away from private schools, the State has to step in and spend more money.

Can you not see that the private schools are actually providing a good service and benefiting the State.

Why would you shoot yourself in the foot and penalise private schools that are actually saving you money?

Can't say I agree with your guestimate either.

Simple maths. My understanding (and I am open to correction if you have exact figures) is that the average private school receives about 85-90% of the funding that a public school does. Therefore the cost to the State of a private school pupil is less than that of a public school, as you have stated, and with which I agree.

If a private school closes and all of the pupils transfer to a public school, then the State pays more money for the education of those pupils, and in that, you are also correct.

However, there is a fundamental flaw in your logic and that relates to the assumption that all of those pupils will transfer to a public school. Some of the private schools will continue even if all State funding is withdrawn. Fees to private pupils will rise. So long as at least 15% of private pupils continue in private education, the State will save money from the removal of funding from private education. The scaremongering around cost increasing is just that.

blanch152 · 18-01-2019 05:05PM

blanch152 wrote: »

Given the standards by which you are judging what it is to be racist, can you tell me which of the following statements you agree with and which you believe to be racist?

1. The culture of criminality, misogyny and homophobia within the travelling community in Ireland should be condemned, particularly how it manifests itself in seeing young girls being taken out of school at 12/13, married off a few years later to close relatives, being turned into baby factories and occupying a disproportionate share of women's refuges (All of these are facts, backed up in census statistics and independent reports).

2. The culture of criminality within the Mafia community in Italy should be condemned.

3. The culture of misogyny within certain African tribes which sees young babies subject to FGM should be condemned.

4. The culture of misogyny and homophobia within certain Islamic societies and cultures should be condemned, particularly how it results in prosecutions for sodomy and adultery.

5. The culture of expansion of the state of Israel in order to oppress Palestinians should be condemned.

You can just list 1-5 and whether you agree or disagree with the statements. It will help me classify where you fit in to the type of racist you are.

Ray, in all the discussion about schools, you may have missed this post which gives you the opportunity to identify which type of racist you are.

end of the road · 18-01-2019 05:20PM

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

Why? Anyone sending their child to a private school would pay quite a bit of tax into the public pot. Why shouldn’t their children avail of the tax that’s paid?

quite rightly they do via whatever public services they do use. however if the parents decide to send them to a private fee paying school which is ultimately a business then i don't see why that should be subsidized in any way given realistically itt's not up to the state to be subsidizing private industry where such industry is clearly financially viable and capible of supporting itself

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

Comments