Ireland needs a taoiseach with this guys attitude

Sean Bateman

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

For someone living in the "real world" (i.e. where you've to pay for stuff yourself), your finances deteriorate when you've kids.

For these working class girls, this isn't the case - They're aiming to get pregnant because there's a financial reward. Ergo, these rewards need to be done away with.

As for the work / welfare conundrum, there should not be a disincentive to work. Someone earning the minimum wage (i.e. €8.65 x 40 hrs) should be better off financially than someone on social welfare. If that means cutting social welfare, then so be it.

ah yes all their fault, as those babies arive by the stork dont they no fellas at fault there :rolleyes::rolleyes:

This isn't the 1940s...women can take control of their own fertility.

The salient point is that for the majority of people, it costs money to have children. For those who scrounge, it's a money making exercise. That is wrong, plain and simple.

Varied

Sean Bateman wrote: »

Does being well educated, having wealthy / successful relatives and paying the correct amount of tax preclude someone from having an opinion?

Well yes. If he is running the country, he has a duty to cut and tax ALL revenue streams, not just the people on social welfare or earning peanuts.

gerryo777

Sean Bateman wrote: »

For these working class girls, this isn't the case - They're aiming to get pregnant because there's a financial reward. Ergo, these rewards need to be done away with.

As for the work / welfare conundrum, there should not be a disincentive to work. Someone earning the minimum wage (i.e. €8.65 x 40 hrs) should be better off financially than someone on social welfare. If that means cutting social welfare, then so be it.

Is it only 'working class' single parents who have kids for the 'financial reward'?

This thread is getting worse, all the holier-than-thou brigade are logging on.

Invader_Zimmy

Ireland needs something like a Pinochet or perhaps a Putin. An iron fist is necessary as the Irish have proved incompetent to rule themselves.

christmas2012

We have already taken cuts in social welfare why do we have to take them again????

PucaMama

Sean Bateman wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

The salient point is that for the majority of people, it costs money to have children. For those who scrounge, it's a money making exercise. That is wrong, plain and simple.

Having kids doesnt make money! They have to be fed/cleaned/dressed and educated. This costs. And still where is the blame for the absent fathers?

Sean Bateman

gerryo777 wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

For these working class girls, this isn't the case - They're aiming to get pregnant because there's a financial reward. Ergo, these rewards need to be done away with.

As for the work / welfare conundrum, there should not be a disincentive to work. Someone earning the minimum wage (i.e. €8.65 x 40 hrs) should be better off financially than someone on social welfare. If that means cutting social welfare, then so be it.

Is it only 'working class' single parents who have kids for the 'financial reward'?

This thread is getting worse, all the holier-than-thou brigade are logging on.

Who else does?

Middle class people don't have kids for the financial rewards.

The only people having babies for financial reward are the gurriers.

Nodin

Sean Bateman wrote: »

This isn't the 1940s...women can take control of their own fertility.

The salient point is that for the majority of people, it costs money to have children. For those who scrounge, it's a money making exercise. That is wrong, plain and simple.

...allegedly its a money making exercise. I'd say thats bollocks meself.

If hes that desperate to save cash, why doesn't he close off the various tax loopholes?

Toby Take a Bow

Overflow wrote: »

He is dead right, its an absolute must, its been going on for far too long now, the growth of our social welfare problem is almost exponential at this stage.

Cut social welfare and benefits and see the economy go even further down the tubes. The people who receive social welfare (in the vast, vast majority of cases) are the people who put all the money back in to society. Tax cuts for the (relatively) wealthy will lead to an increase in saving.

This is all regardless of the fact that Cameron's 'ideas' are simplistic nonsense aimed at pandering to the lowest intellectual point.

christmas2012

Sean Bateman wrote: »

Does being well educated, having wealthy / successful relatives and paying the correct amount of tax preclude someone from having an opinion?

He should show by example,if he didnt dodge paying his 'entitlements' on his inheritance tax which was a million pounds then i would say okay fine have your anti welfare rant...

My point is its too easy for him to sit there behind a bubble of what he earns and his inheritance,to judge the downtrodden and those who were laid off and other people on social welfare..

It should be mandatory for people like him to live at least one year on social welfare and see how he finds it.. Its not easy not one bit..Its a continous struggle,with bills household tax,etc,theres not even a tenner to spend on yourself after youre done family welfare or not..

Varied

Invader_Zimmy wrote: »

Ireland needs something like a Pinochet or perhaps a Putin. An iron fist is necessary as the Irish have proved incompetent to rule themselves.

Again, no. We just need a competent non-genocidy person.

christmas2012

here here ..

PucaMama

Sean Bateman wrote: »

gerryo777 wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

For these working class girls, this isn't the case - They're aiming to get pregnant because there's a financial reward. Ergo, these rewards need to be done away with.

As for the work / welfare conundrum, there should not be a disincentive to work. Someone earning the minimum wage (i.e. €8.65 x 40 hrs) should be better off financially than someone on social welfare. If that means cutting social welfare, then so be it.

Is it only 'working class' single parents who have kids for the 'financial reward'?

This thread is getting worse, all the holier-than-thou brigade are logging on.

Who else does?

Middle class people don't have kids for the financial rewards.

The only people having babies for financial reward are the gurriers.

What a load of bollox. Proof?? Sources???

bee_keeper

christmas2012 wrote: »

We have already taken cuts in social welfare why do we have to take them again????

because the economy has not picked up as hoped , public sector wages are protected under croke park and cutting the old age pension is a no no , that only leaves wellfare

hope that helps

gerryo777

Sean Bateman wrote: »

Does being well educated, having wealthy / successful relatives and paying the correct amount of tax preclude someone from having an opinion?

Google, David Cameron and how his father made his money...

Here,I'll do it for you.

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=david%20cameron%20inheritance&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CEgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2012%2Fapr%2F20%2Fcameron-family-tax-havens&ei=EdToT-28MIK4hAeLw4WVDQ&usg=AFQjCNH3Pg78HaY7WkrJ-tBOmLToyzAznw

Still think him and his family are so great?

Sean Bateman

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

The salient point is that for the majority of people, it costs money to have children. For those who scrounge, it's a money making exercise. That is wrong, plain and simple.

Having kids doesnt make money! They have to be fed/cleaned/dressed and educated. This costs. And still where is the blame for the absent fathers?

It does for those who scrounge.

Normal people have to save and budget for having a child.

For "da burdz", the prams and the cots and the bigger houses are all taken care of by the rest of us.

A f..king joke - This country is nuts. Common sense is suggested and bleeding heart liberals spring up spouting utter claptrap.

Social workers should be going around educating these people and offering them the pill for free. And for scroungers who do choose to have children despite not being able to afford to do so, they should be forced to live at a purely subsistence level - No socialising, no holidays etc etc.

Some people's mentality is astonishing - Life should be simple - You work to do stuff - You don't work and you don't get to do stuff.

Manco

gerryo777

Sean Bateman wrote: »

Who else does?

Middle class people don't have kids for the financial rewards.

The only people having babies for financial reward are the gurriers.

What financial reward?

Do you honestly believe people have kids to make money?

You should lay off whatever it is your smoking/drinking....

purplepanda

So what are they going to do when these single mothers become homeless? Take ther babies away & let the mother live on the street? :mad:

The cost of bringing up a baby in a childrens home or even adoption will still be at a substantial cost to the taxpayer & even more in many cases. :rolleyes:

Why not bring back the workhouses & old fashioned cruel orphanages? Why not abolish the mininum wage & continue the race to the bottom? Abolish employees rights & introduce more workfare?

This is another cynical idea by power hungry politicans, don't forget people we are all in this together!!!!!! :pac:

Sean Bateman

gerryo777 wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

Does being well educated, having wealthy / successful relatives and paying the correct amount of tax preclude someone from having an opinion?

Google, David Cameron and how his father made his money...

Here,I'll do it for you.

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=david%20cameron%20inheritance&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CEgQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fpolitics%2F2012%2Fapr%2F20%2Fcameron-family-tax-havens&ei=EdToT-28MIK4hAeLw4WVDQ&usg=AFQjCNH3Pg78HaY7WkrJ-tBOmLToyzAznw

Still think him and his family are so great?

What, his father arranged his affairs in the most efficient and legal manner possible?

Shame on him - Heaven forbid the people in charge manage their own affairs properly.

christmas2012

Ya the ignorance is astounding...Those who have fallen on hard times on welfare shouldnt be judged so harshly..

Nodin

Sean Bateman wrote: »

It does for those who scrounge.

Normal people have to save (........)get to do stuff.

Well said old chap. I say drive them off your estate and use the land for grazing.

gerryo777

Sean Bateman wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

It does for those who scrounge.

Normal people have to save and budget for having a child.

For "da burdz", the prams and the cots and the bigger houses are all taken care of by the rest of us.

A f..king joke - This country is nuts. Common sense is suggested and bleeding heart liberals spring up spouting utter claptrap.

Social workers should be going around educating these people and offering them the pill for free. And for scroungers who do choose to have children despite not being able to afford to do so, they should be forced to live at a purely subsistence level - No socialising, no holidays etc etc.

Some people's mentality is astonishing - Life should be simple - You work to do stuff - You don't work and you don't get to do stuff.

2 questions for you Sean.

Do you have young kids yourself?

Would you describe yourself as middle class?

PucaMama

Sean Bateman wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

It does for those who scrounge.

Normal people have to save and budget for having a child.

For "da burdz", the prams and the cots and the bigger houses are all taken care of by the rest of us.

A f..king joke - This country is nuts. Common sense is suggested and bleeding heart liberals spring up spouting utter claptrap.

Social workers should be going around educating these people and offering them the pill for free. And for scroungers who do choose to have children despite not being able to afford to do so, they should be forced to live at a purely subsistence level - No socialising, no holidays etc etc.

Some people's mentality is astonishing - Life should be simple - You work to do stuff - You don't work and you don't get to do stuff.

what planet are you on? think you have spent too much time on the internet listening to the ****e thrown about here as fact. a single mother should be forced to live in poverty when that bollox wallace in government owing millions in tax flounces around on a huge wage all funded out of your tax! take your eyes off the single mothers and you will see whats realy going on. unless you are afraid to look past your own silly predjudices.

Toby Take a Bow

bee_keeper wrote: »

because the economy has not picked up as hoped , public sector wages are protected under croke park and cutting the old age pension is a no no , that only leaves wellfare

hope that helps

It's a pity they haven't read the material that would suggest that cutting social welfare rates actually makes things worse.

christmas2012 wrote: »

It should be mandatory for people like him to live at least one year on social welfare and see how he finds it.. Its not easy not one bit..Its a continous struggle,with bills household tax,etc,theres not even a tenner to spend on yourself after youre done family welfare or not..

Agree. I'm always bemused when people talk about how you'd be better off on the dole and so on. I've been on minimum wage and I've been on the dole. There's no comparison where I'd rather be. Being on the dole was the biggest financial hardship I've ever experienced. Thankfully I got a place in college, but I'll be signing up again soon enough. And hopefully emigrating soon, because it's impossible to live on the dole.

Ave Sodalis

Sean Bateman wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

It does for those who scrounge.

Normal people have to save and budget for having a child.

For "da burdz", the prams and the cots and the bigger houses are all taken care of by the rest of us.

A f..king joke - This country is nuts. Common sense is suggested and bleeding heart liberals spring up spouting utter claptrap.

Social workers should be going around educating these people and offering them the pill for free. And for scroungers who do choose to have children despite not being able to afford to do so, they should be forced to live at a purely subsistence level - No socialising, no holidays etc etc.

Some people's mentality is astonishing - Life should be simple - You work to do stuff - You don't work and you don't get to do stuff.

Oh yeah, great idea! Especially for rape victims etc., they'll really love the whole 'no help at all' situation when they ''chose'' to make money from kids...
I see where you're coming from but generally, these people realize how difficult life is when raising children soon enough. Money or no, the child still has to be raised and that's no mean feat, especially when they're on their own.
You work to do stuff? T'is a recession m'dear, work isn't quite as simple as skipping off to the nearest employer and be employed the next day...

gerryo777

Sean Bateman wrote: »

What, his father arranged his affairs in the most efficient and legal manner possible?

Shame on him - Heaven forbid the people in charge manage their own affairs properly.

No, his father kept his funds in tax havens to avoid paying taxes in the UK.

Do you do that Sean?

Sean Bateman

gerryo777 wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

It does for those who scrounge.

Normal people have to save and budget for having a child.

For "da burdz", the prams and the cots and the bigger houses are all taken care of by the rest of us.

A f..king joke - This country is nuts. Common sense is suggested and bleeding heart liberals spring up spouting utter claptrap.

Social workers should be going around educating these people and offering them the pill for free. And for scroungers who do choose to have children despite not being able to afford to do so, they should be forced to live at a purely subsistence level - No socialising, no holidays etc etc.

Some people's mentality is astonishing - Life should be simple - You work to do stuff - You don't work and you don't get to do stuff.

2 questions for you Sean.

Do you have young kids yourself?

Would you describe yourself as middle class?

Yes - Two.

And yes, I would.

PucaMama

bee_keeper wrote: »

because the economy has not picked up as hoped , public sector wages are protected under croke park and cutting the old age pension is a no no , that only leaves wellfare

hope that helps

why the hell are the pensions so sacred??? everyone else has had cuts.

Sean Bateman

gerryo777 wrote: »

Sean Bateman wrote: »

What, his father arranged his affairs in the most efficient and legal manner possible?

Shame on him - Heaven forbid the people in charge manage their own affairs properly.

No, his father kept his funds in tax havens to avoid paying taxes in the UK.

Which is perfectly acceptable and perfectly legal.