Margaret Cash steals €300 worth of clothes from Penneys and aftermath/etc!

KrustyUCC

Even RTE has dropped her since the Penneys story

donkeykong5

KrustyUCC wrote: »

She's busy enough with Just for Tallaght

Shes busy with the angles as well.

normanoffside

mikemac2 wrote: »

Going back to when all this began last August her local TD Paul Murphy said the situation of the Cash family should “haunt this government”

Fianna Fáil spokesman on housing Darragh O’Brien said it was a “collasal failure of the state”

Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald slammed Fianna Fáil and wanted an immediate election

Not of one of these parties stuck with Mrs Cash and looking at it now they never cared in the first place.

Maybe Mrs Cash thought she had friends in high places but she was just a pawn used to score points

Murphy is organising today’s protest apparently.

normanoffside

normanoffside wrote: »

Murphy is organising today’s protest apparently.

He’s been very quiet lately.

normanoffside

I make it 6 adults at the protest and about 20 angles.

Margaret didn’t even turn up

https://www.facebook.com/paulmurphytd/videos/3098716776821014/

tuxy

So about these hubs, I watched a video about one and it seemed nice enough with good facilities and support for families that are in a bad situation.
I see this crowd are totally against them but what are the hubs really like?

punisher5112

normanoffside wrote: »

I make it 6 adults at the protest and about 20 angles.

Margaret didn’t even turn up

https://www.facebook.com/paulmurphytd/videos/3098716776821014/

She is the mouth piece screaming and all the kids are hers......

Who in their right mind would go anywhere near her...

normanoffside

punisher5112 wrote: »

She is the mouth piece screaming and all the kids are hers......

Who in their right mind would go anywhere near her...

I don't think that's her and that they're not her angles.

Odelay

normanoffside wrote: »

I make it 6 adults at the protest and about 20 angles.

Margaret didn’t even turn up

https://www.facebook.com/paulmurphytd/videos/3098716776821014/

Fantastic that the children can see how to get a home is earned. Stand outside some building roaring your hole off.

punisher5112

normanoffside wrote: »

I don't think that's her and that they're not her angles.

It is her, the mouth piece....

Edenmoar

I am just so far removed from this attitude she has. Like demanding a big house, and you've never contributed anything to society, quite the opposite actually, you've been involved in crime.
I mean she must just have zero self awareness. I wonder why she feels she's entitled to a house?

punisher5112

Edenmoar wrote: »

I am just so far removed from this attitude she has. Like demanding a big house, and you've never contributed anything to society, quite the opposite actually, you've been involved in crime.
I mean she must just have zero self awareness. I wonder why she feels she's entitled to a house?

Because it's how she was brought up and how pretty much all of them are.

Why work when you have a better life style and not actually have to slave for hours and get up early to do it to then actually have nothing.

Edenmoar

Edenmoar wrote: »

I am just so far removed from this attitude she has. Like demanding a big house, and you've never contributed anything to society, quite the opposite actually, you've been involved in crime.
I mean she must just have zero self awareness. I wonder why she feels she's entitled to a house?

Because AAA/PBP pals tell her so!

tuxy

tuxy wrote: »

So about these hubs, I watched a video about one and it seemed nice enough with good facilities and support for families that are in a bad situation.
I see this crowd are totally against them but what are the hubs really like?

Who shot the video? Some independent source, or a Government Agency?

There was a woman on RTÉ Radio 1 recently describing her young daughter witnessing a resident being rescussitated after an overdose in one of those hubs. They're certainly an improvement on hotel rooms, but children need to be raised in homes where they are not exposed to drug abuse, or other anti social behaviour.

We are kidding ourselves if we fail to recognise that this is harming children, because it is society which will end up paying more in the long run.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades!

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Who shot the video? Some independent source, or a Government Agency?

There was a woman on RTÉ Radio 1 recently describing her young daughter witnessing a resident being rescussitated after an overdose in one of those hubs. They're certainly an improvement on hotel rooms, but children need to be raised in homes where they are not exposed to drug abuse, or other anti social behaviour.

We are kidding ourselves if we fail to recognise that this is harming children, because it is society which will end up paying more in the long run.

So, you’re saying that there’s no drug taking in houses or apartments?

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So, you’re saying that there’s no drug taking in houses or apartments?

I'm saying that, taking the population as a whole, living in single-family-occupancy housing minimises the risk of exposing children to that kind of distress on a day-to-day basis.

tuxy

Deleted User wrote: »

So, you’re saying that there’s no drug taking in houses or apartments?

Homeless shelters are well know for drug issues. I'd still need to find out more about these hub to try to decide if they have many of the same issues other temporary homeless accommodation has. So fair I can only find official videos that paint them in a good light.

punisher5112

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Who shot the video? Some independent source, or a Government Agency?

There was a woman on RTÉ Radio 1 recently describing her young daughter witnessing a resident being rescussitated after an overdose in one of those hubs. They're certainly an improvement on hotel rooms, but children need to be raised in homes where they are not exposed to drug abuse, or other anti social behaviour.

We are kidding ourselves if we fail to recognise that this is harming children, because it is society which will end up paying more in the long run.

If the parents were responsible and watching their children they would not have to see this but unfortunately a lot of these kids are in unstable family circumstances as it is.

Cash and any like her couldn't give a rat's a#s about their angles apart from the money coming in.

If she cared for them she would have had a home and the same for the scum bag husband whom goes around thieving and beating up the elderly.

What a role model he is oh and cash herself wow what a super mother she is..... Will ya ever go and.....

punisher5112

punisher5112 wrote: »

If the parents were responsible and watching their children they would not have to see this but unfortunately a lot of these kids are in unstable family circumstances as it is.

Cash and any like her couldn't give a rat's a#s about their angles apart from the money coming in.

If she cared for them she would have had a home and the same for the scum bag husband whom goes around thieving and beating up the elderly.

What a role model he is oh and cash herself wow what a super mother she is..... Will ya ever go and.....

Shouting epithets from the sidelines isn't going to solve the homelessness crisis. We can judge people all we want for what we consider to be poor choices and irresponsibility, but the children are here now; how do we protect them and provide them with some basic stability?

By providing them with a stable home, and incentivising their education. Failing to execute the former is bound to create serious social problems in the future, and then you'll really know the cost of doing nothing but shouting epithets.

normanoffside

punisher5112 wrote: »

It is her, the mouth piece....

Sorry, on reflection, I think you're right.

punisher5112

normanoffside wrote: »

Sorry, on reflection, I think you're right.

I think someone may have helped her rant as it wasn't de gubernment is Robbin us and childer and her angles.

punisher5112

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Shouting epithets from the sidelines isn't going to solve the homelessness crisis. We can judge people all we want for what we consider to be poor choices and irresponsibility, but the children are here now; how do we protect them and provide them with some basic stability?

By providing them with a stable home, and incentivising their education. Failing to execute the former is bound to create serious social problems in the future, and then you'll really know the cost of doing nothing but shouting epithets.

A stable home, your having a laugh right?

They pull their kids out of education and they pop kids out as it's meant to be their culture.

I am tired of paying for it.

punisher5112

punisher5112 wrote: »

A stable home, your having a laugh right?

They pull their kids out of education and they pop kids out as it's meant to be their culture.

I am tired of paying for it.

What's your solution?

Do nothing, don't intervene, keep things as they are and it will fix itself in a way that it never has?

Edenmoar

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Who shot the video? Some independent source, or a Government Agency?

There was a woman on RTÉ Radio 1 recently describing her young daughter witnessing a resident being rescussitated after an overdose in one of those hubs. They're certainly an improvement on hotel rooms, but children need to be raised in homes where they are not exposed to drug abuse, or other anti social behaviour.

We are kidding ourselves if we fail to recognise that this is harming children, because it is society which will end up paying more in the long run.

Well in an ideal world these people wouldn't be having children, because they're not in a fit state to raise kids. You can't really blame the state because all kinds of people who shouldn't, are having children and exposing them to horrible stuff.
Really what are we supposed to do? If you were guaranteed a house as soon as you knock out a baby surely every low life would have a kid for that reason?
There needs to be some kind of responsibility taken on by the parent, like Margaret should have to make sure all her kids finish school if she's being given a house. They won't though, and no doubt they'll go on the housing list themselves. How do you stop the cycle?

punisher5112

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

What's your solution?

Do nothing, don't intervene, keep things as they are and it will fix itself in a way that it never has?

I would enforce our laws that are already there.

I would make sure all kids are given the right education.

This would not go down well in that community though.

It's in no way sustainable to continue in the path it's going.

Cash will have more kids so just say 8 but could well be more how many of these will contribute to society if she hasn't shown them how to as all they see is the mouth shouting abuse and getting her way.

The dad should be locked up and never let out as he is a drain on society and inflicting pain on others.

What real hope have these angles got.....


I would love to see a change and get them actually giving back and actually work for anything they want.

normanoffside

normanoffside wrote: »

Sorry, on reflection, I think you're right.

Yes. She’s had her hair bleached. 7 adults and as many kids. And we’re led to believe that there’s a homeless crisis!

tuxy

punisher5112 wrote: »

I would enforce our laws that are already there.

I would make sure all kids are given the right education.

Lets assume the kids stop going to school a few months after starting second year. What should be done?

NIMAN

tuxy wrote: »

But the gobberment is robbing them blind!
The people that hold these protest have no understanding of economics nor do they want to understand.

They sure don't understand that it's easier to get housed if you have a manageable amount of kids, rather than a football team full.

In a crisis like this, Cash would likely to have been offered her ideal home if she had, for example, 3 kids. Cos the government would only have to get her a 3 or 4 bed house.

But when you have 7 kids, you automatically need a much bigger house which are obviously in shorter supply.

Maybe a few of the layabouts on the dole will have second thoughts about having that 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th child.

Credit Checker Moose

They should be encouraged not to have large families.

tuxy

Credit Checker Moose wrote: »

They should be encouraged not to have large families.

But it's their culture and the church also approves.

tuxy

tuxy wrote: »

But it's their culture and the church also approves.

Then, let their culture and church support them.

tuxy

Deleted User wrote: »

Then, let their culture and church support them.

Their culture involves thievery so no problem there boss!

punisher5112

tuxy wrote: »

Lets assume the kids stop going to school a few months after starting second year. What should be done?

They will be lucky to be still in education at 12.

They need to at least finish their leaving cert.

If they don't then they should be given the opportunity to do an apprenticeship.

tuxy

punisher5112 wrote: »

They will be lucky to be still in education at 12.

They need to at least finish their leaving cert.

If they don't then they should be given the opportunity to do an apprenticeship.

And if they turn down that offer to find their future cousin.... I mean partner

Pronto63

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

What's your solution?

Do nothing, don't intervene, keep things as they are and it will fix itself in a way that it never has?

The solution is tough love.

Programme on RTE 1 at the moment about fertility time bomb. Basically as a society we're not having enough kids.

Cut back on child benefit and transfer it to a tax credit. This might encourage workers to have kids that will then become productive members of society.

Long term we've lost a generation as in Cash's angles will never be productive. They need to look around and see that families that work are better off than those that don't work. Unfortunately that isn't the case at present.

KrustyUCC

punisher5112 wrote: »

It is her, the mouth piece....

That's def her

Paddy Cow

Edenmoar wrote: »

I am just so far removed from this attitude she has. Like demanding a big house, and you've never contributed anything to society, quite the opposite actually, you've been involved in crime.
I mean she must just have zero self awareness. I wonder why she feels she's entitled to a house?

Pavee Point have Travellers convinced that they can do no wrong and the Council and Government owe them because of all the racism and discrimination they suffer. It's not Travellers fault they can't get a job - it's discrimination, nothing to do with the fact that they don't want to get educated and follow a career path.

Paddy Cow

Pronto63 wrote: »

The solution is tough love.

Programme on RTE 1 at the moment about fertility time bomb. Basically as a society we're not having enough kids.

Cut back on child benefit and transfer it to a tax credit. This might encourage workers to have kids that will then become productive members of society.

Long term we've lost a generation as in Cash's angles will never be productive. They need to look around and see that families that work are better off than those that don't work. Unfortunately that isn't the case at present.

The problem is the social welfare system. It started out as a safety net for people but has ended up as a lifestyle choice. It's crazy that someone who has never worked a day in their life can be raking in more in benefits than someone who works 40+ hours a week and still has to pay creche fees and mortgage.

Margaret wants a forever home in Tallaght. In fifteen years her kids will be well on their way to having 6/7 kids themselves. They will also want forever homes in Tallaght and so on. It's not possible to keep this up.

Pronto63

Paddy Cow wrote: »

The problem is the social welfare system. It started out as a safety net for people but has ended up as a lifestyle choice. It's crazy that someone who has never worked a day in their life can be raking in more in benefits than someone who works 40+ hours a week and still has to pay creche fees and mortgage.

Margaret wants a forever home in Tallaght. In fifteen years her kids will be well on their way to having 6/7 kids themselves. They will also want forever homes in Tallaght and so on. It's not possible to keep this up.

Agree 100%

The only way to break this cycle is to ensure that workers have a better life than scroungers.

Paddy Cow

Pronto63 wrote: »

Agree 100%

The only way to break this cycle is to ensure that workers have a better life than scroungers.

That won't happen though when you have a party like Sinn Fein who appeal to the benefits voters by promising them everything. If the Government tried to revamp the social welfare and tax systems to work in favour of workers, Sinn Fein would cause uproar. It's fine for them with their guaranteed wage, expense account and pension to look forward to but pretty sh!t for the average working person. The system will collapse eventually. It simply cannot go on the way it is. Working people have small families but benefits lifers have big ones. Eventually the tide will shift and there won't be enough workers. Plus we have the looming pension crisis. Leo thinks bringing in more people will solve this but we can barely provide housing/education and health care to the current population. Ireland will be a mess in another generation or two if someone doesn't put a stop to all this entitlement. I still can't believe there was a serious discussion about putting it in the constitution that "everyone has a right to a home". Who the hell is going to pay for that??

Credit Checker Moose

How would the likes of Mags be treated elsewhere in Europe? I assume the continental welfare systems are not as generous?

normanoffside

Credit Checker Moose wrote: »

How would the likes of Mags be treated elsewhere in Europe? I assume the continental welfare systems are not as generous?

They are more generous to people between jobs and less generous to the long term unemployed.

Paddy Cow

Credit Checker Moose wrote: »

How would the likes of Mags be treated elsewhere in Europe? I assume the continental welfare systems are not as generous?

normanoffside wrote: »

They are more generous to people between jobs and less generous to the long term unemployed.

In some European countries, when you are first unemployed you get a payment relative to your salary which decreases over time. Ireland does it the opposite way - if you have been working for 10/20 years and paying PRSI the whole time, you get the basic €198. You are not entitled to fuel allowance or the Christmas bonus but if you are long term unemployed (I think it's 15 months) you get both. Makes no sense.

normanoffside

Bernard’s take on the protest. I see Maggie is back on the smokes

https://www.facebook.com/100007227857780/posts/2254444404806466?sfns=mo

normanoffside

Paddy Cow wrote: »

In some European countries, when you are first unemployed you get a payment relative to your salary which decreases over time. Ireland does it the opposite way - if you have been working for 10/20 years and paying PRSI the whole time, you get the basic €198. You are not entitled to fuel allowance or the Christmas bonus but if you are long term unemployed (I think it's 15 months) you get both. Makes no sense.

Unfortunately we adopted the British model of a single standard payment. Then we made it more Generous than the British one.

Edenmoar

My friend has lived in Munich for 15 years or so and had 3 kids there now. He was telling me if he lost his job now he’d get something like 18 months of 75% of his salary. There are also tax breaks or at least there used to be for working couples to have more kids. Basically the opposite of Ireland.

Wanderer78

Edenmoar wrote:

My friend has lived in Munich for 15 years or so and had 3 kids there now. He was telling me if he lost his job now he’d get something like 18 months of 75% of his salary. There are also tax breaks or at least there used to be for working couples to have more kids. Basically the opposite of Ireland.

That simply wouldn't work here, we re just a different type of human being, there would be wide scale abuse of this type of system, we seem to respond well to harsher situations

Edenmoar

Wanderer78 wrote: »

That simply wouldn't work here, we re just a different type of human being, there would be wide scale abuse of this type of system, we seem to respond well to harsher situations

When you say “we” who do you mean? I’d love to have that safety net, not that I’ve ever been unemployed and probably never will be

Wanderer78

Edenmoar wrote:

When you say “we†who do you mean? I’d love to have that safety net, not that I’ve ever been unemployed and probably never will be

Us Irish, shur we all love a bit of misery, social safety nets don't make sense at all, shur how will we pay for them!

Lillyfae

Edenmoar wrote: »

When you say “we” who do you mean? I’d love to have that safety net, not that I’ve ever been unemployed and probably never will be

He's not outlining a safety net for unemployment, he's outlining an incentive for employed people to have children. But feel free to be outraged anyway.

Where I am I got 16 weeks of maternity leave on full pay and my partner and I each have 26 weeks of unpaid parental leave per child to use until they are 8. Both parents tend to use this by dropping their working hours to 3/4 days per week. Childcare is extortionate but after subsidy and adjustment of hours just about affordable, and lends to a more healthy balance.

Having said that, lots of women choose not to work or work as carers for elderly or disabled people because there is more flexibility in it. I know very few mothers who don't work at all. Families tend to be smaller and it's not seen as a career move to spend 20 years raising children- they're off to school at 3/ 4 and between long days, shorter holidays and plenty of after school activities there just wouldn't be that much for a stay at home parent to do. The financial incentives are not very lucrative without the childcare aspect, which isn't available unless both parents are at work.

If one of us becomes unemployed we get a month for every year we have worked on 70% pay, but have to prove at least 4 applications a month for jobs and have regular meetings (monthly I think) at our jobs centre.

The new childcare payment that was announced yesterday seems interesting, anyone have more details about it?