**MOD NOTE UPDATED**Limerick woman complains about living in 3 bed house with 4 kids

allibastor

Felexicon wrote: »

So nobody on Social Welfare should go on holiday?

Hi Felex,

i think the point here is that she has spent money on a luxury holiday which most people who work, and work bloody hard i might add, count not go on.

she then moans that the house is not fit to live in with monoxide problems, a problem that could have been fixed with the money she spent on the holiday.

she also moans about having too many kids in a small house, yet is unable to use contraception. she has also had a wedding which adds to the costs that have to be paid for out of the governments annual budget.

that is what people are giving out about, she seems to moan about one problem yet is unwilling to do anything about it herself. ergo she is a leech as she wants someone to fix her problems, while doing noting to fix them herself.

Thrill

Daisy M wrote: »

If people on social welfare can afford to go on holidays paying for them using social welfare then that is not acceptable. The IMF has control of our finances we face austerity for the foreseeable future and you really think its ok that the exchequer funds holidays for welfare recipients? Services in this country are been cut, our healthcare system is under immense pressure, people with disabilities are been forgotten do you have any idea how bad things are? The government is borrowering money to keep us afloat things have to change and every euro couunts especially if it is a borrowered euro with huge interest rates attached.

The people on welfare are not the ones that caused the current troubles but people who took out Celtic tiger mortgages would like these people to suffer for it. The poor, who had nothing to do do with the bubble bursting, are the ones being singled out to suffer the most for those who put themselves into massive debt.

toexpress

Thrill wrote: »

The people on welfare are not the ones that caused the current troubles but people who took out Celtic tiger mortgages would like these people to suffer for it. The poor, who had nothing to do do with the bubble bursting, are the ones being singled out to suffer the most for those who put themselves into massive debt.

What a load of old left nonsense! For goodness sake you can surely see that leeching off the state instead of supporting yourself does nothing for the economy?

How can anyone really justify this sort of thing? I mean does anyone really believe that by virtue of the fact that she chose to have children she could not support on her own, and continuing to have more children, she is entitled to a bigger house? I mean honestly just sit down in a quiet place and think about it.

golden lane

Thrill wrote: »

The people on welfare are not the ones that caused the current troubles but people who took out Celtic tiger mortgages would like these people to suffer for it. The poor, who had nothing to do do with the bubble bursting, are the ones being singled out to suffer the most for those who put themselves into massive debt.

so the poor can afford holidays.....bloody amazing really......when ordinary working people cannot.........a new definition of rich......

El Weirdo

mikom wrote: »

So what would you say she is receiving in social welfare a week outside the exempted payments like child benefit?

I'd only be speculating, tbh.

Did she say what she was receiving in any of her radio interviews? Didn't she get married fairly recently? Is the husband living with her? To be fair, I'd find it hard to believe that the Social would have her as a lone parent if she's not long married and is being public about it.

There is a lot of variables. I only used the figure of €600 as it was used in an argument earlier in the thread.

working fool

Is there any mention of the lucky fellow who sired all theses children ?
Call me old fashioned but surely he has a part to play here .
Or has she had a serious run of bad luck with durty toilet seats ?

mikom

El Weirdo wrote: »

I'd only be speculating, tbh.

Did she say what she was receiving in any of her radio interviews? Didn't she get married fairly recently? Is the husband living with her? To be fair, I'd find it hard to believe that the Social would have her as a lone parent if she's not long married and is being public about it.

There is a lot of variables. I only used the figure of €600 as it was used in an argument earlier in the thread.

This the husband supposedly driving the 2008 car?
Drive a 99 myself (not the ice cream).

All speculation of course....

toexpress

working fool wrote: »

Is there any mention of the lucky fellow who sired all theses children ?
Call me old fashioned but surely he has a part to play here .
Or has she had a serious run of bad luck with durty toilet seats ?

you assume they all share the same father ... I wouldn't make such an assumption in this particular case.

Daisy M

Thrill wrote: »

The people on welfare are not the ones that caused the current troubles but people who took out Celtic tiger mortgages would like these people to suffer for it. The poor, who had nothing to do do with the bubble bursting, are the ones being singled out to suffer the most for those who put themselves into massive debt.

Welfare is meant to be a short term fix not a longterm lifestyle. Your blaming people who aspired to own their homes for the recession? Let me tell you if it were not for people having aspirations we would never have had a celtic tiger it would have been just one long recession. Welfare rates would never have had the dramatic increases that happened during this time and people like Serinna would know the true meaning of struggling. Lots of people are poor in this country some work some are on welfare. You seriously cannot believe that a family of 6 living on 600e a week is poor. As the house isnt their own they are not responsible for the maintainance of it, they have no costs associated with going out to work like petrol, lunches, smart clothes childcare. 600e a week to them will go a lot further than 600e a week to working parents.

token101

hairyprincess wrote: »

Yes the welfare system is a joke. Absolutely.

But what this lady spends her money has got nothing to do with anyone else.

So you acknowledge it is a joke? Fair enough. But this woman doesn't think that. She thinks she's entitled to more. So what she's getting to this point isn't enough, she wants more. That's why people feel she is a parasite.

And I'd be willing to bet (and no I can't provide evidence as it's a personal opinion), that whatever she gets still won't be enough.

LittleBook

allibastor wrote: »

yet is unable to use contraception

Which, ironically, is free with a medical card *

* Ironic assuming she has one

howamidifferent

Felexicon wrote: »

So nobody on Social Welfare should go on holiday?

Not at my expense no! Social Welfare is supposed to be a safety net to keep you from destitution, not a lifestyle choice!

hightower1

hairyprincess wrote: »

Yes I agree. But it is the Government peoples anger should be directed towards, not one woman.

About five years ago I went back to work after a period of unemployment. Along with my wages which were pretty good, I also received back to work allowance. It was completely unnecessary and I would say I was probably earning more than most others who were higher up the ladder then me in the company.

There is more than enough anger to go around for both the broken system and the scum who will clearly ride that system for all they can get.

toexpress

LittleBook wrote: »

Which, ironically, is free with a medical card *

* Ironic assuming she has one

Seriously?

The amount I spend on condoms and that one can have them for free ... bloody hell

Thrill

Daisy M wrote: »

Let me tell you if it were not for people having aspirations we would never have had a celtic tiger

...and the austerity we are currently having to go through because of it.

allibastor

LittleBook wrote: »

Which, ironically, is free with a medical card *

* Ironic assuming she has one

hahaha how true, forgot about that. i suppose it could have failed five times though.

oh and yeah, the two older kids were from a different guy, FYI. not that having previous children from a relationship is a bad thing, just pointing it out.

working fool

toexpress wrote: »

working fool wrote: »

Is there any mention of the lucky fellow who sired all theses children ?
Call me old fashioned but surely he has a part to play here .
Or has she had a serious run of bad luck with durty toilet seats ?

you assume they all share the same father ... I wouldn't make such an assumption in this particular case.

A little tongue in cheek of me
Apologys

LittleBook

toexpress wrote: »

Seriously?

The amount I spend on condoms and that one can have them for free ... bloody hell

Citizensinformation.ie Family Planning Services

Don't know about condoms but for women:

If you have a medical card, you are entitled to free GP services including contraceptive advice and prescriptions for contraceptive drugs and devices.

micropig

working fool wrote: »

Is there any mention of the lucky fellow who sired all theses children ?
Call me old fashioned but surely he has a part to play here .
Or has she had a serious run of bad luck with durty toilet seats ?

He fell, they were accidents

LittleBook wrote: »

Citizensinformation.ie Family Planning Services

Don't know about condoms but for women:

Why is it the section of society with free contraception that seem to pro-create the most?

Felexicon

allibastor wrote: »

Hi Felex,

i think the point here is that she has spent money on a luxury holiday which most people who work, and work bloody hard i might add, count not go on.

she then moans that the house is not fit to live in with monoxide problems, a problem that could have been fixed with the money she spent on the holiday.

she also moans about having too many kids in a small house, yet is unable to use contraception. she has also had a wedding which adds to the costs that have to be paid for out of the governments annual budget.

that is what people are giving out about, she seems to moan about one problem yet is unwilling to do anything about it herself. ergo she is a leech as she wants someone to fix her problems, while doing noting to fix them herself.

I understand this. I'm not saying this woman is right or wrong in what she's doing/demanding. It's the mob mentality of people focusing thier attention towards one person while ignoring the obvious flaw in our SW system that allows someone to think they have a right to make these demands.
I couldn't care less where this woman and her kids went on holiday, what car they drive, etc. Thats personal stuff and as said previously whatever she decides to spend her SW on is her business.

EMTFlynn

She would get the pill for free on a medical card and that can't fail unless
She 'forgot' to take it. :rolleyes:

allibastor

Felexicon wrote: »

I understand this. I'm not saying this woman is right or wrong in what she's doing/demanding. It's the mob mentality of people focusing thier attention towards one person while ignoring the obvious flaw in our SW system that allows someone to think they have a right to make these demands.
I couldn't care less where this woman and her kids went on holiday, what car they drive, etc. Thats personal stuff and as said previously whatever she decides to spend her SW on is her business.

but as you have said it is personal, so she should have kept it personal. she chose to air this on the public airwaves hoping we would feel sorry for her. she chose to do this, the paper didnt go around moyross looking for someone to talk to, she felt she should put her life situation forward, and as it enters the public eye she must be able to cope with what the public say.

micropig

EMTFlynn wrote: »

She would get the pill for free on a medical card and that can't fail unless
She 'forgot' to take it. :rolleyes:

She could have the implant and wouldn't even need to remember to take it

Felexicon

howamidifferent wrote: »

Not at my expense no! Social Welfare is supposed to be a safety net to keep you from destitution, not a lifestyle choice!

Again its a flawed system. That she has the money to go on a "luxury holiday" is not her fault. Its the system

EMTFlynn

micropig wrote: »

She could have the implant and wouldn't even need to remember to take it

True

micropig

Felexicon wrote: »

Again its a flawed system. That she has the money to go on a "luxury holiday" is not her fault. Its the system

System is wrong, but so are her priorities, surely as safe place to live is more important than a holiday?


I don't care who is supposed to pay for it, if my family are in danger and I have the money, I would fix it myself, not go on holidays


I pay for workmen to work in my house
She does not even have this expense

EMTFlynn

She said her son has ADHD and severe behaviour problems.

She should be thankful her son is not Autistic and requires 24hr care

Parents out there with kids with real disabilities who had their carers allowance cut! :mad:

suicide_circus

Should people on welfare be able to go on hols?

howamidifferent wrote: »

Not at my expense no! Social Welfare is supposed to be a safety net to keep you from destitution, not a lifestyle choice!

+1
Its a ****ing joke of a system which this piss taking leech is milking. And when I say system, I mean tax payer. And when I say tax payer, I mean all of us ****ing gob****es paying for the lifestyle choices of utter wasters like this woman. Her deluded sense of entitlement is truly sickening. Not only does she choose not to work (any healthy person not in work during the boom CHOSE not to work, any fool could get a job) she chooses to squeeze out 5 ****ing kids!!! And us drones will pick up the tab!!! I work my fooking bollox off in a crap job which has had a bad effect on my physical and mental wellbeing, rented in crap accommodation at great expense, commuted, worked awful hours and generally broke my bollox just to pay for these entitled ****ers!!!!!!!! AAAARRRGGGGHHHH

Daisy M

Thrill wrote: »

...and the austerity we are currently having to go through because of it.

As already pointed out in the part of my post you choose not to quote,
We had austerity before the celtic tiger so if it hadnt have happened we would have had just one long period of recession.

Dubit10

poldebruin wrote: »

~In this case all of her income comes from the state. She is paying the (modest) rent with the states money. So in effect it is free

Once again, she is paying for her house so in effect it's not free.

Thrill

Daisy M wrote: »

As already pointed out in the part of my post you choose not to quote,
We had austerity before the celtic tiger so if it hadnt have happened we would have had just one long period of recession.

Without the massive dept everyone has to now pay for.

howamidifferent

Felexicon wrote: »

Again its a flawed system. That she has the money to go on a "luxury holiday" is not her fault. Its the system

If that be so, then surely Social Welfare can ask her to repay in full the cost of the holiday to top up the coffers since social welfare was not intended for foreign trips to Disney land. Or at the very least dock her payments going forward to recoup it. Its a blatant misuse of tax payers money no matter how its painted.

mikom

Dubit10 wrote: »

Once again, she is paying for her house so in effect it's not free.

Mammy give little johnny a tenner.
Little johnny buys a choc ice with the tenner and receives change back.
Who paid for the choc ice?

Mammy give little johnny a tenner every week for numerous years even though there were years when everybody his age were earning their own money.
Little johnny buys many choc ices with the tenners and receives loads of change back.
Who paid for the choc ices?

Epilogue:

Little johnny goes to Disneyland and has a choc ice with Mickey mouse.

Daisy M

Felexicon wrote: »

Again its a flawed system. That she has the money to go on a "luxury holiday" is not her fault. Its the system

Absoloute crap!! There are plenty of people who can take advantage of the system but choose not to because they have morals. I have a long term illness which I have been told I can claim sick benefit for but I choose not to because I can go out and work part time. There are many people like me who want to miniminse the amount of time they spend on welfare, who want to provide for their families and who want their children to see them doing just that. There are times in most peoples lives where they need welfare to survive but most want to get off it and become independant as soon as possible. There is something lacking morally in people who are able to work and make no effort to do so.

You are making this woman and people like her out to be blameless when they are not. She chooses to be a leech, she isnt happy with what is given to her she wants more, she seems to be totally unaware that she is responsible for the position she is in. She wants more and wont stop until she gets it. If she gets a new house she will want a grant to furnish it and on and on will her demands go.

poldebruin

Dubit10 wrote: »

Once again, she is paying for her house so in effect it's not free.

?? You'll have to explain to me how she is paying for her house - I'm not getting it.

not only is her house effectively free (to her) but so is everything else she has, clothes, food, holidays, electricity, whatever she has left to save at the end of the week - all of it essentially free (from her perspective at least)

Daisy M

Thrill wrote: »

Without the massive dept everyone has to now pay for.

Ok I will spell it out for you. Yes it would be without the debt not dept as you wrote. But it would also be without the larger welfare payments encouraged by the celtic tiger, it would be without the larger civil service and pension bill we currently have.

Also do you have any idea of just how poor Ireland was before the boom? It was dirt poor no exaggeration. If you think infastructure is bad now there is no comparrisment to how it was up until the 90s most people had nothing.

token101

Thrill wrote: »

The people on welfare are not the ones that caused the current troubles but people who took out Celtic tiger mortgages would like these people to suffer for it. The poor, who had nothing to do do with the bubble bursting, are the ones being singled out to suffer the most for those who put themselves into massive debt.

It's got f*** all to do with any recession! She's on welfare, supposedly a stop gap, and wants to fund her life with it. That's fundamentally wrong!

Daisy M

poldebruin wrote: »

?? You'll have to explain to me how she is paying for her house - I'm not getting it.

not only is her house effectively free (to her) but so is everything else she has, clothes, food, holidays, electricity, whatever she has left to save at the end of the week - all of it essentially free (from her perspective at least)

Whats to not get????? She is obviously paying for her rent with the money we give her in social welfare. :rolleyes:

Its apparently none of our concern where a large proportion of our hard earned wages goes to we should put up and shut up and serinna should move house, have more babies and holiday!!

token101

Felexicon wrote: »

So nobody on Social Welfare should go on holiday?

Are you serious now in fairness? Do you get what the concept of welfare is?

hightower1

So?......... how about a counter facebook campaign?


"Out the welfare leechers and left wing PC brigade"?????

Felexicon

micropig wrote: »

System is wrong, but so are her priorities, surely as safe place to live is more important than a holiday?


I don't care who is supposed to pay for it, if my family are in danger and I have the money, I would fix it myself, not go on holidays


I pay for workmen to work in my house
She does not even have this expense

So would I. But who are we to judge if her priorities are different

billybudd

mikom wrote: »

Mammy give little johnny a tenner.
Little johnny buys a choc ice with the tenner and receives change back.
Who paid for the choc ice?

Mammy give little johnny a tenner every week for numerous years even though there were years when everybody his age were earning their own money.
Little johnny buys many choc ices with the tenners and receives loads of change back.
Who paid for the choc ices?

Epilogue:

Little johnny goes to Disneyland and has a choc ice with Mickey mouse.

Yeah and not to mention little johnny turning into a big fat obese ****er who costs the state loads of money in free medical health care all because he ate to many free choc ices.:pac:

poldebruin

Thrill wrote: »

The people on welfare are not the ones that caused the current troubles but people who took out Celtic tiger mortgages would like these people to suffer for it. The poor, who had nothing to do do with the bubble bursting, are the ones being singled out to suffer the most for those who put themselves into massive debt.

A big leap here - how do you know what position any of the people complaining about this case are in? Most of these people you are blaming for the current crisis are working hard to pay back the mortgage they took out - whilst no doubt looking after the rest of their responsibilities.

Blame some young people who bought a house, with a deposit they worked hard to save for and sign a mortgage with a bank (based on future incomes etc) to buy a house at market value, so they had a place they could call their own and maybe start a family. The nerve of some people eh?

Why didn't they jack their jobs, have several kids they could not afford, head to Disneyland in their 08 car and let the state pick up the tab?

Thrill

token101 wrote: »

It's got f*** all to do with any recession!

I was replying to this post, which thinks it does.

If people on social welfare can afford to go on holidays paying for them using social welfare then that is not acceptable. The IMF has control of our finances we face austerity for the foreseeable future and you really think its ok that the exchequer funds holidays for welfare recipients? Services in this country are been cut, our healthcare system is under immense pressure, people with disabilities are been forgotten do you have any idea how bad things are? The government is borrowering money to keep us afloat things have to change and every euro couunts especially if it is a borrowered euro with huge interest rates attached.

Felexicon

token101 wrote: »

Are you serious now in fairness? Do you get what the concept of welfare is?

Don't need to get the concept of what welfare is as its an actual thing.
If someone chooses to save the money the state pays them and go on holiday so be it

kylith

Is she looking for a room each for her kids, and she has 4 and one on the way, and presumably a room for herself? Does she think you can just trip over 6 bedroom houses in this country or something?

Daisy M

Last year I returned to work after a number of years as a stay at home mum. As previously stated I have a long term illness and was told I would be entitled to disability allowance. I choose not to claim as I was not planning on returning to work in the near future and felt that as my illness was not at that time the reason for me not working it would not be right to make a claim. Fast forward to 2011 when I returned to work parttime on a contract covering maternity leave, the contract finished at the end of 2012. I went to the welfare office to see where I stood on making a claim and as my credits were in 2011 I was not entitled to JB as they were working on 2010 credits. Now heres the interesting part the company I worked for offered me a seasonal contract starting April 2012. I would work parttime for them for 6mths of the year. This would mean that come 2013 I could work for 6 months and claim as much if not more in JB for the other 6 months of the year. Obviously I said yes to the offer of employment as I want to work and any work is better than none. However I kept looking for parttime work and was successful so now I will work 12 mths of the year for the same money as if I was working 6.

What is the difference between me and people like Serinna? Why do I want to work for my income, would it not make more sense to take the easy way out and only work the minimum? I am not saying I am some kind of saintly caracter but it is pride that makes me want to work and I would not feel pride signing on, most people dont they see it as a needs must situation. Iwant to work for numerous reasons, self fulfilment, to set a good example to my children, to not allow my illness to take over my life, to take some of the financial burden from my husband and hopefull to develope my skills further.

Sorry for such a long rant, dont mean to bore you all to tears!!

token101

Felexicon wrote: »

Don't need to get the concept of what welfare is as its an actual thing.
If someone chooses to save the money the state pays them and go on holiday so be it

Well the concept of welfare is vastly different to the reality in this country. The state shouldn't be giving them that money then! They're obviously being overpaid! It's supposed to be for the bare essentials. You want a holiday, get a job. Not possible? Tough sh*t. That's welfare.

tonysea

Just read the article for the first time and cant help but wonder. If mayor Jim Long was unwell, would he be Jim Long Ill?

poldebruin

Felexicon wrote: »

Don't need to get the concept of what welfare is as its an actual thing.
If someone chooses to save the money the state pays them and go on holiday so be it

I think you're being obtuse. Welfare is supposed to be a safety net in the event of a loss of income or being unable to earn. Some people are using it as a hammock.

If this is truely your position, that someone on Welfare could take a family of 6 to Disneyland for a holiday, whilst the people that fund it could not, then you have a badly skewed sense of what is right and decent.