Peter Casey believes Travellers should not be recognised as an ethnic minority

Coillte_Bhoy

Rennaws wrote: »

God help any normal families who move in there. They’ll be hounded out by their nomadic neighbour’s.

That said they’re still getting free houses. Seems everyone wants a free house these days.

Sorry but who is getting a free house? You seem a little misinformed

anewme

anewme wrote: »

I never said you "must earn a lot'

I said I earn the same as Ms. cash...80k gross .only i put in 60 80 hours while she she does nowt.

This was started with another poster challenging me over "I must earn a lot". I challenged them to state, what was "a lot" in that income is all relative. And what point they were making, I've still to determine- they never replied and you hopped in then.

Saying that, I've no idea what this person you mention, "earns" or otherwise. My understanding is that she's a mother of 7 children. So she's entitled, by law, to receive 980 euro per month until her first child turns 18- as is every other mother in this state, who has 7 children.

What's your point?

Snotty

Delighted for Casey, didn't really want him to win, but I wanted him to be the strong second.

Also, the main stream media should he ashamed, kept every poll since last week very quiet, I'd say some could have put Casey ahead last weekend and that could have build some momentum, but they made sure that did not happen.

the-island-man

Elaina Gigantic RuleMGS wrote: »

the-island-man wrote: »

And are they also happy to see themselves be moved back down to the bottom of the waiting list?

Not actually how the waiting list works but carry on.

No, not exactly but the council can decide to deprioritise an applicant if they do not have good reasons for refusing accomodation (Refusing Offer - Citizens Information).

the-island-man

Elaina Gigantic RuleMGS wrote: »

the-island-man wrote: »

And are they also happy to see themselves be moved back down to the bottom of the waiting list?

Not actually how the waiting list works but carry on.

No, not exactly but the council can decide to deprioritise an applicant if they do not have good reasons for refusing accomodation (Refusing Offer - Citizens Information).

Coillte_Bhoy

Danzy wrote: »

Already on Twitter "the Jew" is being blamed for the proles voting the wrong way.

Sorry? Surely this kind of bs needs to be explained?

The Bishop Basher

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Sorry but who is getting a free house? You seem a little misinformed

Yes I know how the syatem works.

It’s a free house for life.

Try_harder

https://twitter.com/hazechu/status/1055851961927503872

Coillte_Bhoy

Snotty wrote: »

Delighted for Casey, didn't really want him to win, but I wanted him to be the strong second.

Also, the main stream media should he ashamed, kept every poll since last week very quiet, I'd say some could have put Casey ahead last weekend and that could have build some momentum, but they made sure that did not happen.

Sorry but this needs to be challenged, what polls are you talking about?

Coillte_Bhoy

Rennaws wrote: »

Yes I know how the syatem works.

It’s a free house for life.

Right, good luck to you

10000maniacs

10000maniacs wrote: »

Yeah that's the one. Glenroe, the last hurrah of the weekend before school on Monday morning. The second last being Murphy's Micro Quiz M.

Total fix of a show. They made the questions so hard for 5/6 episodes and then on the 6th episode..."who's the president of Ireland right now?" :P

Congratulations, this piece of crap car called an Orion will disintegrate before you can say "I'm Mike Murphy from RTE"

Snotty

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Sorry but this needs to be challenged, what polls are you talking about?

Irony aside. What polls were done? What polls were done in 2011 and the run up to every other election for that mater.

To spell it out, there was none this time and in 2011 I can find 5 in the 4 days before the election and that's just a quick look.

alan partridge aha

Snotty wrote: »

Irony aside. What polls were done? What polls were done in 2011 and the run up to every other election for that mater.

To spell it out, there was none this time and in 2011 I can find 5 in the 4 days before the election and that's just a quick look.

If that's the case it's a fooking disgrace. I'm like MD a poet.

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This was started with another poster challenging me over "I must earn a lot". I challenged them to state, what was "a lot" in that income is all relative. And what point they were making, I've still to determine- they never replied and you hopped in then.

Saying that, I've no idea what this person you mention, "earns" or otherwise. My understanding is that she's a mother of 7 children. So she's entitled, by law, to receive 980 euro per month until her first child turns 18- as is every other mother in this state, who has 7 children.

What's your point?

The answer is in your own posts.

The point is, as you have it in your own post are the words you use " earns" and "entitled".

That's why 20% of the turnout today supported Peter Casey.

Fed up with paying for the "entitled" who haven't "earned" anything.

When a worker has to earn a gross 80k salary, to break even with a freeloader with seven children who never worked a day in their life, then something is seriously wrong with the system.

markodaly

Bannasidhe wrote: »

We need a proper NHS (as it was pre-Thatcher) health service.

Agree, but do you propose to sack the 20,000 odd thousand wasters working in the HSE and willing to pay more tax for it?

There is plenty of money in the country, its just given out like candy to win votes, like the Christmans bonus or Children's allowance.

We as a nation spend our resources in a vote-getting centric way, not a service led way.
That is on us, as a nation. If someone is brave enough to point this out in the media, they get castigated as 'hating the poor' by the usual cretins in the media.

A classic example, Margaret Cash, tax-free income of over €50,000 yet demands a house for her kids.

Everyone talks about rights these days, yet no one talks about responsibility. It is not the states fault that she was taken out of school at 12 by her parents, she was married off at 15 and has 7 kids to support and that her and her husband are regularly in the courts for criminal behavior.

But but... racism or some other such nonsense is bandied about as a lazy persons retort to any complex argument.

So, yes we would like a NHS style health system, but are you willing to take a long hard look at 'the state books' so to speak and back measures to stop the awful spending habits we have as a nation? I doubt it!!

I guess you want your cake and eat it.

Try_harder

Coillte_Bhoy

Snotty wrote: »

Irony aside. What polls were done? What polls were done in 2011 and the run up to every other election for that mater.

To spell it out, there was none this time and in 2011 I can find 5 in the 4 days before the election and that's just a quick look.

What do you mean there were no polls????

Well again ill ask you, what polls are you on about? Yo seem to think there were properly conducted scientific polls which didnt see the light of day due to some sort of conspiracy? SErioulsy?

Redneck Culchie

Why are Traveller women not allowed have sex with settled men??

This is sexist and unfair on the traveller women, they are missing out :cool:

Coillte_Bhoy

Redneck Culchie wrote: »

Why are Traveller women not allowed have sex with settled men??

This is sexist and unfair on the traveller women, they are missing out :cool:

Just because thats what she told you doesnt make it a truism. Lucky escape on her part

Try_harder

On Late Debate - @bridsmithTD talking about Casey’s Traveller nonsense. “Last year the entire budget for Traveller Accommodation was €12m - we gave the horse racing industry €67m”

anewme

anewme wrote: »

The answer is in your own posts.

The point is, as you have it in your own post are the words you use " earns" and "entitled".

That's why 20% of the turnout today supported Peter Casey.

Fed up with paying for the "entitled" who haven't "earned" anything.

When a worker has to earn a gross 80k salary, to break even with a freeloader with seven children who never worked a day in their life, then something is seriously wrong with the system.

If you, anewme, sit at home with your 7 children around you, you can, at the very least, have 980 euro coming into your household income, every month.

I'm not sure what's wrong with that. It takes a lot to feed, clothe and look after 7 children.

If you have 2 children, you will receive, again, for sitting on your arse each day, 280 euro per month.

Again, I don't have a problem with that. Most people, who have children, don't "sit on their arse" each day- they're up and doing. Some work, some don't. But EVERBODY in the state, whether earning 200K a year, or zero, is entitled to this allowance if they have children of that number.
It's a UNIVERSAL Payment. What's your issue with this and the person you mention, and why are you comparing your salary to her income? DO you have 7 children?

Redneck Culchie

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Just because thats what she told you doesnt make it a truism. Lucky escape on her part

She told me she only rides her cousins

Roger Hassenforder

Balanced enough article on the traveller thing

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/presidential-election/john-downing-oneinfive-vote-for-peter-casey-is-a-major-alarm-call-for-all-national-authorities-37463815.html

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you, anewme, sit at home with your 7 children around you, you can, at the very least, have 980 euro coming into your household income, every month.

I'm not sure what's wrong with that. It takes a lot to feed, clothe and look after 7 children.

If you have 2 children, you will receive, again, for sitting on your arse each day, 280 euro per month.

Again, I don't have a problem with that. Most people, who have children, don't "sit on their arse" each day- they're up and doing. Some work, some don't. But EVERBODY in the state, whether earning 200K a year, or zero, is entitled to this allowance.
It's a UNIVERSAL Payment. What's your issue with this and the person you mention, and why are you comparing your salary to her income? DO you have 7 children?

my issue is very simple , don't have seven children if you can't provide for them as a parent.

Not sure if you know, but many working couples put off having children as they can't afford them with childcare. They have to Pay their way.

Having seven children and claiming single parents allowance while your partner is in remand in cloverhill as well as robbing people's homes when they are at work , as well as shoplifting Penney s,
That to me is pure ripping the piss,
That's the point of it all...

I think that's the point of the 20% voters.....

anewme

anewme wrote: »

my issue is very simple , don't have seven children if you can't provide for them as a parent.

Not sure if you know, but many working couples put off having children as they can't afford them with childcare. They have to Pay their way.

Having seven children and claiming single parents allowance while your isrtner is in remand as well as robbing people's homes when they are at work , as well as shoplifting Penney s,
That to me is pure ripping the piss,
That's the point of it all...

I think that's the point of the 20% voters.....

You heard what you wanted to hear.

Peter Casey talked about a "nation of people who expect - no, demand - that the State looks after them".
I don't consider myself one of those people. But he labelled the whole nation like that. I don't want him as my president.

What if Peter Casey said- "I want to abolish the children's allowance" ? Would you be so forthright in your views?

Thought not. But he essentially said that.

What would his poor mother think- bless her!

anewme

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What if Peter Casey said- "I want to abolish the children's allowance" ? Would you be so forthright in your views?

Thought not.

Ehhhhh stop asking questions and then answering for me in your own post.

I don't even know what children's allowance is as I've no children.

It's not on my radar.

No one I know uses their children as a pay check so your query on children's allowance shoud be to the likes of Margaret Cash who see children as an alternative income stream to work.

Try_harder

anewme wrote: »

my issue is very simple , don't have seven children if you can't provide for them as a parent.

Not sure if you know, but many working couples put off having children as they can't afford them with childcare. They have to Pay their way.

Having seven children and claiming single parents allowance while your partner is in remand in cloverhill as well as robbing people's homes when they are at work , as well as shoplifting Penney s,
That to me is pure ripping the piss,
That's the point of it all...

I think that's the point of the 20% voters.....

How much should people earn before they are allowed have children?

If it drops below a certain level do we take the children off them?

anewme

anewme wrote: »

Ehhhhh stop asking questions and then answering for me in your own post.

I don't even know what children's allowance is as I've no children.

It's not on my radar.

No one I know uses their children as a pay check so your query on children's allowance shoud be to the likes of Margaret Cash who see children as an alternative income stream to work.

So, what "allowances" do you claim then?

Oh and, BTW, I never said anyone uses childrens allowance as a pay check. In fact, you're the one who brought in Ms Cash, as you previously called her, into our conversation- not me.

anewme

Try_harder wrote: »

How much should people earn before they are allowed have children?

If it drops below a certain level do we take the children off them?

Surely that's their own decision?

We are all adults.

Once you can provide for them personally , it's no one else's business.

Try_harder

anewme wrote: »

Surely that's their own decision?

We are all adults.

Once you can provide for them personally , it's no one else's business.

And if you cannot? Do we let the children starve?