Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Lone-parent allowance may be cut, says Hanafin

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    Joe1919 wrote: »
    I think the use of the word 'scammer' here is both unnecessary and insulting and goes against the guidelines in terms of not showing respect to the poster concerned.
    What more, it devalues the original objective argument that you may be making (that low paid married workers are sometimes worst off than people on social welfare) which is a pity because I do happen to agree that this can sometimes be the case.

    Well if she's claiming lone parent allowance (which she hasn't denied, she in fact says she needs it) she is indeed scamming the system.

    If you can think of a better word to use, I'll use that instead.


  • Options
    #93
    Joe1919
    Registered Users Posts: 1,153 ✭✭✭Joe1919


    AARRRGH wrote: »
    Well if she's claiming lone parent allowance (which she hasn't denied, she in fact says she needs it) she is indeed scamming the system.
    If you can think of a better word to use, I'll use that instead.

    You are letting yourself down here by making a personal attack on the poster. There may some case for changing the welfare system to make it more equatable and to increase work incentive but the way to go about this is with objective argument and not personal attack.

    However, rearing and looking after children is also hard and important work and of course mothers have the mention in the constitution. 'mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home'.
    So we do have to be reasonable, consistent and fair.
    http://www.constitution.ie/current-study/default.asp?UserLang=EN


  • Options
    #94
    AARRRGH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,382 ✭✭✭✭AARRRGH


    Joe1919 wrote: »
    You are letting yourself down here by making a personal attack on the poster. There may some case for changing the welfare system to make it more equatable and to increase work incentive but the way to go about this is with objective argument and not personal attack.

    However, rearing and looking after children is also hard and important work and of course mothers have the mention in the constitution. 'mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home'.
    So we do have to be reasonable, consistent and fair.
    http://www.constitution.ie/current-study/default.asp?UserLang=EN

    Sorry, I still don't get how I am attacking the poster.

    Scamming is not an insult. That is the name of the action she is doing.

    Seriously, if you can think of a better word I am happy to use that instead.


  • Options
    #95
    ynotdu
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,817 ✭✭✭ynotdu


    irish_bob wrote: »
    your obviously dont know what extreme right is

    I will ask Your friend Ghenghis Khan ok?


  • Options
    #96
    bmmck
    Closed Accounts Posts: 43 ✭bmmck


    at last a thread that makes sense! if you have kids pay for them yourself dont expect the state to. also I think 'lone parents' are entitled to the allowance even if they are working part time and getting maintenence from the other parent, if they are getting maintenence surely they are not lone parents then?


  • Advertisement
Advertisement