New TV3 Programme 'The Estate' in Ballybeg

Finnbar01

Smiley Burnett wrote: »

from my own experience, i feel we really need to look to the education system in this country....

1--We need to drill it in to young people's heads that they need to work hard in school, in order to fulfill their TRUE potential...we need to point out that if they are lazy in their approach to schoolwork etc, then they will be on the scrapheap by the time they are in their mid-twenties. The days of walking into the same factory that your factory worked in, and having a well-paying job for life are over...

2--We need MORE parents to start acting responsibly and they must ensure that their children get involved in sport/drama/scouts etc

3--We need to teach people how to budget their money...I find that people's inabilty to budget for a week/fortnight, is more often than not the problem, rather than lack of money....i think this was obvious in the programme on monday night...

4--WE NEED GREATER PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AND LESS LOOKING TOWARDS THE STATE TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING AND WE NEED TO STOP BLAMING THE STATE FOR EVERYTHING!!!

SB, I agree with what you're saying.

One of the problems we have are politicians. Seeking office, they will tell people what they want to hear. This gives people the impression that the state is responsible for their lives and exists solely to give them everything.

Smiley Burnett

Finnbar01 wrote: »

SB, I agree with what you're saying.

One of the problems we have are politicians. Seeking office, they will tell people what they want to hear. This gives people the impression that the state is responsible for their lives and exists solely to give them everything.

agreed!!

marysirish

Thewife wrote: »

If you researched your facts you would know
A that was not his house where the animals were .
B those were not he's kids ..


My next question is .
Why from the look of those kids do you Assume they would bleed the system dry ?

And

How can you be sure that man has never ever worked ?

I wouldn't bet my house of I was you .....

I know for sure he never worked a day in his life, but by saying that, that man is one of the nicest men you could ever meet.

marysirish

iamaiamai wrote: »

So basically, make people destitute and homeless. Where do you think they are going to find the means to survive?

That's a strange way of empathising with kids.

Well then you would have to lock all your doors and windows. But I do agree that the should get more help, it just isn't necessary for kids to be having kids.

marysirish

mcko wrote: »

If you can't afford kids then don't have them, single parent families will always be trouble.
I agree they live in poverty and misery nut we all have choices in life I had kids so I pay for them if I could not then I would have no kids.

I agree with you, but then you also have people who get married and have kids and then they spilt up and one of the parents run of with someone else and never pay for the kids.

marysirish

Thewife wrote: »

Oh my what a ignorant person .....

I really and truly sincerely hope that your
Life is always as perfect as it is now , I hope you should never fall on difficult times when god forbid you may need to "bleed the system dry"
I hope your children enjoy their private school , it sure will make them better people .

I do agree with mcko in some way, it is not necessary for kids to be having kids, if the government makes the pill free for kids under 21 years of age then maybe it will help, oh wait it is free.

mcko

If a girl has a kid then fair enough it can happen to anyone,but any kids after that should be their responsibility the same as married couples who have kids.

marysirish

iamaiamai wrote: »

I wish we could all live in a world that was so perfect and so simple.

1) Contraception does not work perfectly, and not everyone has access to free contraception in this country.

5) Some people, through no fault of their own, may no longer be able to work. This could be due to an accident in the workplace, a life-threatening condition or long term illness. These people can also be parents.

You're lucky if you've never fallen on hard times, but it's a measure of your privilege if you are blind to how easily it can happen.

Moreover, the road back to employment is not easy. There is a lot of temporary and part-time work out there, but for a parent in particular, the risk of losing benefits in favour of unpredictable and unstable wages is hardly attractive.

Contraception is free if you have welfare.
Yes your right some people can't do anything about it.
Also if you are a working single parent you also get benefit because you go out and work, so you get benefit for both.

iamaiamai

marysirish wrote: »

I do agree with mcko in some way, it is not necessary for kids to be having kids, if the government makes the pill free for kids under 21 years of age then maybe it will help, oh wait it is free.

Kids under 16 aren't allowed access to the pill without parental consent and they aren't entitled to apply for a medical card themselves until they are over 18 and financially independent from their parents.

No one is saying that it's necessary for kids to be having kids.

What I'm saying is that it happens, and it's hardly constructive to seek to punish the kids themselves.

And while everyone pokes around looking for someone to blame, the kids go without the support they need. It's no surprise that it's a cycle that repeats itself.

spankmemunkey

marysirish wrote: »

I know for sure he never worked a day in his life, but by saying that, that man is one of the nicest men you could ever meet.

Hes probably the nicest man in the world cos he doesnt have to worry about anything in life his house is paid his food is paid everything for him is paid, hes doesnt have to worry or stress about anything in life making him a happy man!

marysirish

iamaiamai wrote: »

Kids under 16 aren't allowed access to the pill without parental consent and they aren't entitled to apply for a medical card themselves until they are over 18 and financially independent from their parents.

No one is saying that it's necessary for kids to be having kids.

What I'm saying is that it happens, and it's hardly constructive to seek to punish the kids themselves.

And while everyone pokes around looking for someone to blame, the kids go without the support they need. It's no surprise that it's a cycle that repeats itself.

If kids under 16 aren't allowed access to the pill then there parents can bring them.No one is blaming the kids but be honest, the girl on that show just needs a kick up her backside.Also it is not a cycle because her aunt is doing really good for herself.

iamaiamai

marysirish wrote: »

If kids under 16 aren't allowed access to the pill then there parents can bring them.No one is blaming the kids but be honest, the girl on that show just needs a kick up her backside.Also it is not a cycle because her aunt is doing really good for herself.

and what if their parents don't? who will you blame then?

it doesn't work in absolutes - it's not that simple.

and there was a lot of focus on the kids if you read back a few pages - kids of people on the show and "kids having kids".

Fair play to that girl's aunt, but what I was referring to was the cycle of poverty and welfare-dependence in one generation being passed down to another.

We actually fare better than the UK and the US in terms of the statistics available for social mobility, so some people do actually get on in life and get out of hardship, but there's still evidence to suggest that being born to a single parent who got pregnant early increases the likelihood that that child themselves will go on to become a young parent too. And if I'm not mistaken, the girl in the programme said her mother didn't want the same for her, but it still happened.

I'm not so much concerned as everyone else is about who to blame because I don't see that as being constructive when there are a lot of factors involved. I'm more worried about how quick to judge people are and more tellingly - slow to do or say anything constructive. That girl got pregnant young and was obviously expected to grow up fast. How many rich kids blow their allowances on frivolous expenses while in college? How many politicians claim expenses for frivolous expenditure?

The difference (as I see it) is that this girl doesn't have a plan B and has to take responsibility, or else she suffers. She can't fall back on her education, or her parents. She won't get bailed out like rich kids, bankers and politicians do. It will be her and her child that suffers. And that concerns me.

I think other posters are right in pointing to education. The way things are going education and emigration are the best options for anyone in a position to avail of them. It's not that easy for young parents who have other responsibilities and more than themselves to think about. My heart went out to Tommy who was trying to make a go of it and just kept meeting obstacle after obstacle. It would be hard not to feel disheartened.

Cabaal

iamaiamai wrote: »

and what if their parents don't? who will you blame then?

it doesn't work in absolutes - it's not that simple.

Fine, we change the law ala http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22044790

Its clearly evident some parents can't parent so we allow 16 year old to get the pill themselves...just like a 16 year old can buy condoms if they wish.

Teenagers have sex, I'd rather they know the ups and downs and have enough cop on to protect themselves and have self respect for themselves.

Its a better situation then parents choosing to believe their teenager doesn't have sex so they don't bother to educate them or teach them self respect and just choose to ignore such a important topic.

Media999

DupsTheKid wrote: »

I'm wondering this myself. I'm thinking either two reasons for it.

1 - I actually know a kind of ex scumbag (guy that has done some scummy stuff in his life but looking to change after being in rehab etc) and strangely he sounds alot like the jailbird. This guy is living in Waterford all his life. I'm thinking this is an accent that certain people develop to seem tougher maybe??

2 - Being in prison for 8 years hanging around guys with various accents has changed his own accent??

Just some thoughts. :-)

You forgot to mention Heroin, Burglaries and being a knacker.

At least people know now that if they see a halfcast knacker hanging around theyre about to get robbed. Hes still robbing anything that he can.

mcko

Look at RTE1 now another no hoper with 11 kids and has been in prison, is it time to start sterilising people.

sparkling sea

mcko wrote: »

Look at RTE1 now another no hoper with 11 kids and has been in prison, is it time to start sterilising people.

Nasty.

mcko

That they are looked at the programme nasty angry kids,they won't listen no respect, their language is appalling , ashamed to be Irish the way the acted in Paris.
What hope for society, one girl can't wait to go on the dole as it pays you to stay in bed.
I fear for my kids I really do.

PTH2009

Education is good but some just go to college for the piss up. being a student means going out every night ,drinking , causing trouble etc

Im a student and i rarly do what students should be doing (drinking, acting the bolexe etc). i have a job thats get me over but college can be a hard/tough place, just finished a 12000 word assignment a few hours ago and have another 25 page project to do :mad::).

If there were no fees for third level many people would go but some cant simply afford to go to college

Some of the teens on that show really need anger management or some sort of thearpy. Some people loose there heads over the smallest things

mcko

Well done you and you are a credit to your parents but we need to address these people who take and take all the time, what use are they to the country always sponging, causing trouble, getting free legal aid ect. Scum beget Scum.

Am Chile

I only watched the estate earlier on tv3 player-judging by the reaction by some comments on social media sites/threads it seems (The haves ) are giving out about (The have nots)- to me it looked like the producers of the show picked out the participants very carefully-the fellow after being in jail/the single mother/the long term unemployed fellow/the fellow struggling to get into college-by only using participants in those circumstances it kinda creates an sterotypical impression of an entire estate-there were no participants from other groups interviewed or shown in the episode-but overall yeah great way to distract people from other issues get (the haves) complaining about the unemployed and single mothers.

amber69

Am Chile wrote: »

I only watched the estate earlier on tv3 player-judging by the reaction by some comments on social media sites/threads it seems (The haves ) are giving out about (The have nots)- to me it looked like the producers of the show picked out the participants very carefully-the fellow after being in jail/the single mother/the long term unemployed fellow/the fellow struggling to get into college-by only using participants in those circumstances it kinda creates an sterotypical impression of an entire estate-there were no participants from other groups interviewed or shown in the episode-but overall yeah great way to distract people from other issues get (the haves) complaining about the unemployed and single mothers.

Spot on boy.

Ennio Morricone

Apparently the producers knocked on a lot of doors and asked a lot of groups to participate, most of them refused on the spot.

After the 2nd episode i think people will be a lot more angry about Ballybeg has been portrayed.

Speak Now

Calling the show "The estate" in misleading, it's about about the individuals on the show and nothing else.

mike65

I've not watched it and have no intention of doing so.

I take it the format is of narrated "point and shoot" so-called reality rather than a programme which is framed by a presenter who is trained in sociology.

wellboytoo

As per above comments I have not watched it nor do I intend to, I knew what the content would be before it was aired, typical dumbed down reality sh1te , lowest common denominater stuff,
But it is what people watch .......

7upfree

iamaiamai wrote: »

I wish we could all live in a world that was so perfect and so simple.

1) Contraception does not work perfectly, and not everyone has access to free contraception in this country. Furthermore - not everyone believes in contraception. Let's not forget that we live in a Catholic country.

2) People from all walks of life have unplanned pregnancies.

3) Without abortion in this country - unplanned children will automatically become the responsibility of the state if the mother cannot provide for herself or her child.

4) If you fell on hard times tomorrow (touch wood) you would still have those kids. People may have been in a better position to provide for themselves and their kids before the recession. If you look at the current economic climate, where unemployment is high and jobs are scarce - it only stands to reason that there would be parents who have become the unwilling victims of the recession and of austerity. How do you expect those parents to find the means to support their kids when they have lost their jobs and there are scant jobs to be found??

5) Some people, through no fault of their own, may no longer be able to work. This could be due to an accident in the workplace, a life-threatening condition or long term illness. These people can also be parents.

You're lucky if you've never fallen on hard times, but it's a measure of your privilege if you are blind to how easily it can happen.

Moreover, the road back to employment is not easy. There is a lot of temporary and part-time work out there, but for a parent in particular, the risk of losing benefits in favour of unpredictable and unstable wages is hardly attractive. There's also the issue of child care. Unfortunately social welfare offers a measure of stability in uncertain economic times and there are few supports to help low income families move from social welfare to financial independence. In that sense, choosing to be on welfare as opposed to diving into an employer-ruled job climate can actually be the most rational decision. And as many people discover the hard way - low income employment can put a family worse off than they would be on social welfare. I'm not saying our social welfare system is perfect or ideal - but it has developed alongside a wider faulty economy - one that went bust because of how it disproportionately favoured the rich.

Do you think anyone is sitting around discussing bankers reproductive rights? No.

Just throwing this out there:

1. Do people think that it is right that an unmarried mother gets a three-bedroomed house (or equivalent rent allowance) free gratis while young married couples struggle with a mortgage?

2. Do unmarried mothers qualify for a medical card?

3. Do they qualify for free travel?

4. Are they given additional allowances?

5. Do people agree with unmarried mother's allowance for subsequent children?

6. Why are the fathers not paying their share - or being made to do so?

7. Is it a form of discrimination in itself to pay for almost everything for one person (unmarried mother) while another (a married woman) gets little in comparison?

Over to you........

mcko

Completely agree with you, married people are getting feck all and the wasters get looked after.Kids from married couples will almost always turn out better.

dark crystal

mcko wrote: »

Completely agree with you, married people are getting feck all and the wasters get looked after.Kids from married couples will almost always turn out better.

That's a steaming pile of bullsh!t.

dashboard_hula

mcko wrote: »

Completely agree with you, married people are getting feck all and the wasters get looked after.Kids from married couples will almost always turn out better.

Please do say that to the woman in my family who is currently putting her 3 sons through UCC on her own. I'd be standing a bit away from her when you say it though, she gets tetchy when people piss all over her parenting skills.

Sully

Lets stick to the topic at hand folks. Thanks