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

Jerichoholic

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Amazing what info you can find with the right surname and town, everything from rape to stoning the elderly in there. Dalton Park sounds like a great spot to live.

It's insane. Any "settled" people caught for those crimes would be in jail for life.

Deebles McBeebles

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Ah the righteous working man :P Of course you'd never spend your day posting comments on a chat forum, because you work so hard isn't that right.

Again, you're not really contributing much here. But that seems to be ok with you.

KrustyUCC

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

"Some of them even work, and they just can't afford a mortgage to put a roof over their head".

Imagine! The mad b*stards!

strange one alright when you can just have a whole lifestyle paid for by others

Rory28

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Ah the righteous working man :P Of course you'd never spend your day posting comments on a chat forum, because you work so hard isn't that right.

That is a load of sh1t Tombo. She has every right to be annoyed at freeloaders.

end of the road

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

With all due respect why should we give a fück about other people’s children when their own parents can’t even be bothered to worry if they’ll have a roof over their head?

If I have the responsibility of kids I’d have my own

ultimately you don't have to, but the reality is it's not about you or me or anyone else. you don't have to give a feck about anyone but you will need to come to terms with supports being availible to children where their parents qualify for such supports to be availible.

Vox Nihili wrote: »

Over 80 percent of Travellers are unemployed. But according to CSO fertility statistics on women aged 40 to 49, half of Traveller women have five or more children, and 13.5 percent have 8+ children. Just one in 20 settled women in that age group has five or more children.

You really think that if Travellers did not have the security of lifelong unemployment benefits and the added incentive of child benefit (€1,120 per month for eight children), they would be popping out so many kids?

Margaret Cash was married at 15, pregnant at 16, and a mother of seven by 28. Is this the kind of "culture" the taxpayer should be funding -- a culture of uneducated child brides whose only way to increase their household income is to have more and more kids?

yes, it is quite possible that some travelers would continue to have children without the supports in existence. something which would likely apply to non-travelers as well.

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Even if you have no issue with people of any culture or ethnicity doing this, bigger picture, its really not helping the long term future of the planet. No person in this day and age should have 7 or 8 kids. Its irresponsible. When you can't pay for them yourself, its negligent.

no, someone having 7 or 8 kids is not automatically irresponsible. as for this supposed bigger picture and the long term future of the plannet, i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone.
i'm going to speculate that the long term future of the plannet isn't the reason you have a problem with people having large families.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

end of the road wrote: »

because the state deems quite rightly, that the children are entitled to a decent quality of life, regardless of one's opinions of the parents.



because that is what you choose ultimately to do, i'd imagine.




it's not "lefty liberal bs" to state the realities of why the systems we have exist, and to support the existence of those systems, in recognition that without them, there are likely going to be more problems then exist with the supports continuing to exist. you aren't paying taxes for "irresponsibility" but for supports and services. if you are sick of paying taxes for such supports (by the way your tax bill wouldn't be going down if they didn't exist) then imagine how sick of paying taxes you will be for the alternative when it quite likely doesn't work?

No, sorry, you’re wrong

PlaneSpeeking

Rory28 wrote: »

That is a load of sh1t Tombo. She has every right to be annoyed at freeloaders.

Yeah the sickening thought of being slagged off for working for 30 years and having the odd quiet day as the boss is WFH - whereas I could be lauded for having 30 years on my hoop nicking from Penney's!!!

blanch152

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Ah the righteous working man :P Of course you'd never spend your day posting comments on a chat forum, because you work so hard isn't that right.

Could you stop just throwing insults at other posters and engage in some of the actual healthy discussion and debate that is taking place.

Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: »

Sorry, but the "no debate welcome" attitude is exactly what you'll find in mainstream politics and on RTE, where anyone who dares to say anything critical about Travellers is immediately branded a racist. Look at the recent disgraceful treatment of Peter Casey, for instance.

The prevailing mainstream narrative is that Travellers are a disadvantaged ethnic minority group whose many problems have been caused by discrimination, racism, and social exclusion. Everything that goes wrong in Traveller communities is somehow regarded as settled people's fault.

People are right to call BS on this -- and the fact that Casey got 23 percent of the vote in the recent election shows that there are many in Irish society who are fed up of the pandering around Travellers. It's evident that their numerous problems are directly caused by the very "culture" that the mainstream politicians and media pundits tell us is valuable and worth protecting.

If any settled person took his daughter out of school at age 12 and married her off to her first cousin when she was 16, our politicians and media would be up in arms protesting about it. It would be seen as utterly disgraceful treatment of a vulnerable young girl that should not be condoned in a civilized society. When Travellers do exactly this, words like "tradition" and "culture" get thrown about and everyone politely looks the other way.

If you want to have a discussion about any of this, feel free.

blanch152 wrote: »

I think that yourself and others are choosing to reply only to the most inflammatory posts.

There are plenty of reasoned posts out there discussing the real issues with Traveller culture in a way that doesn't stigmatise all Travellers. There is plenty of room for an educated discussion about the aspects of Traveller culture that are incompatible with a modern equality-based, enlightened and tolerant society.

A tolerant society doesn't have to tolerate criminality, misogyny and homophobia. Taking girls out of school and marrying them off at 16 to become baby factories is not something that anyone should condone. Margaret Cash is in some ways as much a victim of Traveller culture as those farmers who are burgled every second week.

Similarly, strict observance of Ramadan, treatment of women, the wearing of the hijab are all issues that need to be discussed when considering the how Islamic culture translates into a modern society like ours.

Rex Tasteless Gutter wrote: »

While Margaret Cash herself is far from blameless, I do see her as a product both of Traveller culture (which is responsible for her being taken out of school at 12, married at 15, and pregnant by 16) and the misguided welfare policies of the Irish state, which steadily increased her monthly income and eligibility for social housing as she had more and more children. She is now caught in a poverty trap -- but there's no doubt that her entire life would have been different if she had continued on in school, got a job, and delayed marriage and children until she was more financially secure.

There are plenty of posts drawing out some of these issues, I have only included three of the many, but it would be helpful if you answered them, rather than inflamed things even more.

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

no, someone having 7 or 8 kids is not automatically irresponsible. as for this supposed bigger picture and the long term future of the plannet, i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone.
i'm going to speculate that the long term future of the plannet isn't the reason you have a problem with people having large families.

Huh ????

No one's going all Al Gore ffs - we're talking about a little over 15 grand a year just in children's allowance. Before the rest of the gravy train rolls in to Cashville.

Not earned, not justified and not welcomed. Just handed out in the knowledge that the parents might be uneducated but by God can they claim "entitlements".

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

end of the road wrote: »

capping child benefit is unlikely to work. remember, there are countries with no wellfare system whatsoever, and yet there are large families.

That's a complete red herring because countries with no welfare systems are also likely to be countries where women do not have access to contraception. In some such countries, women do not even have the legal right to refuse sex to their husbands. That means that many women don't have any reproductive rights.

But Ireland is not one of those countries. Irish Travellers live in a civilized first-world country where contraception is freely available and women enjoy numerous legal protections -- and yet Travellers have fertility rates comparable to South Sudan. Why is that?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

end of the road wrote: »

ultimately you don't have to, but the reality is it's not about you or me or anyone else. you don't have to give a feck about anyone but you will need to come to terms with supports being availible to children where their parents qualify for such supports to be availible.



yes, it is quite possible that some travelers would continue to have children without the supports in existence. something which would likely apply to non-travelers as well.



no, someone having 7 or 8 kids is not automatically irresponsible. as for this supposed bigger picture and the long term future of the plannet, i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone.
i'm going to speculate that the long term future of the plannet isn't the reason you have a problem with people having large families.

Of course it’s irresponsible, unless the kids that are born can survive on fresh air? kids cost money. If you have no money and you keep having kids, so many infact, that you have nowhere for them to live, then you’re irresponsible and the kids should be put into state care, and no I don’t care if it costs more, I’d rather contribute to a decent society than a lazy layabout one if I have to pay taxes.

I DGAF about other people’s kids. They’re of no concern to me. Sure, I’ll stop one from running out onto the road if I have to, or I’ll help a child up if it falls, but I’m not responsible for anything that didn’t come out of me. If travellers are quite happy to have children without supports in place then that’s what they should do, they should support themselves. They’re capable enough. Two hands and two feet and a head like the rest of us. “Oh but you wouldn’t hire a traveller, would you?” Is it my fault they’re uneducated, and have a predisposition to helping themselves to items not belonging to them??
Society has tried to help them, they’ve had money thrown at them, they’ve been given houses, they aren’t expected to work, and nothing is working.

Rural Ireland and the elderly that built this country from nothing are terrified of them. Padraig Nally was sleeping in his cattle shed because they had him tortured so much, and we only know about him because he had the good sense to blow one of them to kingdom come. Oh but I’m sure that was a motal sin to gbh shocking to say you can’t rob pilfer and terrorize people in their own homes without being pumped full of lead, shocking pavee point, shocking it’s a crying shame a motal sin that travellers can’t express their culture

Deebles McBeebles

Rory28 wrote: »

That is a load of sh1t Tombo. She has every right to be annoyed at freeloaders.

Its when people aren't angry and don't question that this is allowed to happen.

end of the road wrote: »

no, someone having 7 or 8 kids is not automatically irresponsible. as for this supposed bigger picture and the long term future of the plannet, i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone.
i'm going to speculate that the long term future of the plannet isn't the reason you have a problem with people having large families.

7 or 8 kids is not irresponsible these days? Even Elon Musk should never have that many kids and he can afford them. Also he's batsh*t but that's another debate.

Your point on resources I won't get into because, as you say, its your belief and that's all you have. I would strongly disagree however.

You can speculate about my opinions, that's fine, but the overpopulation of the world certainly is a concern and indeed, is the main reason I find it appalling to pop out kids left, right and centre. From homelessness to climate change, all come back to the world being overpopulated.

SusieBlue

Their flashy weddings, new cars and designer clothes don't really correspond with the poor mouth, misunderstood, poverty stricken charade they like to pedal to the media.

They should have to prove where they are spending their social welfare.
Instead of giving them cash, their welfare should come in the form of food stamps (that can't be used on alcohol/cigarettes), electricity voucher, fuel voucher, tv/internet voucher, etc. with a small cash payment to cover any extras they might incur.
They could have quarterly vouchers for Penney's etc for kids clothes, which they would have to then provide receipts for.

They already get rent allowance/HAP (if they aren't in caravans) and have medical cards.
Its only fair, when I claim expenses in work I can't just go in with a figure, I need to provide receipts to prove it.
If they are living their lifetime out of the public purse, they absolutely should have to account of their expenses and I'm sure that paying them via vouchers and stamps would see a reduction in the unexplainable wealth we frequently see in these families.

PlaneSpeeking

SusieBlue wrote: »

Their flashy weddings, new cars and designer clothes don't really correspond with the poor mouth, misunderstood, poverty stricken charade they like to pedal to the media.

They should have to prove where they are spending their social welfare.
Instead of giving them cash, their welfare should come in the form of food stamps (that can't be used on alcohol/cigarettes), electricity voucher, fuel voucher, tv/internet voucher, etc. with a small cash payment to cover any extras they might incur.
They could have quarterly vouchers for Penney's etc for kids clothes, which they would have to then provide receipts for.

They already get rent allowance/HAP (if they aren't in caravans) and have medical cards.
Its only fair, when I claim expenses in work I can't just go in with a figure, I need to provide receipts to prove it.
If they are living their lifetime out of the public purse, they absolutely should have to account of their expenses and I'm sure that paying them via vouchers and stamps would see a reduction in the unexplainable wealth we frequently see in these families.

+1

The CAB has a duty to investigate, it's their very raison d'etre.

Ruraldweller56

Money for the first 4 kids and vouchers for pike for every subsequent child.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

+1

The CAB has a duty to investigate, it's their very raison d'etre.

It’s no secret, the dogs on the street know, a huge amount of heroin in the midlands is trafficked through travellers.

PlaneSpeeking

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

It’s no secret, the dogs on the street know, a huge amount of heroin in the midlands is trafficked through travellers.

Sad but true.

end of the road

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Here we go again, the ridiculous "pay up or they'll rob us blind" argument.

I've had enough of it. No more.

We need welfare reforms now, if it means putting that money into increased law and order so be it and if we need to bring in food stamps and workhouses then fine, I've no issue with that.

I DO have an issue with the constant defending of these people who have no idea what it is like to go to work and have to pay for everything. Let's not forget the fragrant Ms Cash takes home roughly 3 times what someone on the average industrial wage takes home; still gets EVERYTHING for free and then steals on top of that!

Well you might be fine and dandy with being bled dry but I'n not. And I doubt many others are too.

actually no, i'm not fine with being "bled dry" . however i recognise that there is a risk of me being "bled dry" even more with the type of reforms some would want.

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

Of course it’s irresponsible, unless the kids that are born can survive on fresh air? kids cost money. If you have no money and you keep having kids, so many infact, that you have nowhere for them to live, then you’re irresponsible and the kids should be put into state care, and no I don’t care if it costs more, I’d rather contribute to a decent society than a lazy layabout one if I have to pay taxes.

I DGAF about other people’s kids. They’re of no concern to me. Sure, I’ll stop one from running out onto the road if I have to, or I’ll help a child up if it falls, but I’m not responsible for anything that didn’t come out of me. If travellers are quite happy to have children without supports in place then that’s what they should do, they should support themselves. They’re capable enough. Two hands and two feet and a head like the rest of us. “Oh but you wouldn’t hire a traveller, would you?” Is it my fault they’re uneducated, and have a predisposition to helping themselves to items not belonging to them??
Society has tried to help them, they’ve had money thrown at them, they’ve been given houses, they aren’t expected to work, and nothing is working.

Rural Ireland and the elderly that built this country from nothing are terrified of them. Padraig Nally was sleeping in his cattle shed because they had him tortured so much, and we only know about him because he had the good sense to blow one of them to kingdom come. Oh but I’m sure that was a motal sin to gbh shocking to say you can’t rob pilfer and terrorize people in their own homes without being pumped full of lead, shocking pavee point, shocking it’s a crying shame a motal sin that travellers can’t express their culture

so, you don't care if it costs more to put children into a system, which from my very very limited knowledge of it doesn't seem to have very good outcomes, then it does to simply provide the supports for the parents and their children? how does throwing the children into this system if it is the case that outcomes of it aren't so good, contribute to a decent society, and how could it be considered any sort of value for money?

VinLieger

end of the road wrote: »

i believe that people over-exaggerate how much resources there are in the world. there are plenty of resources for everyone.

This might be the most uninformed ludicrous statement i think i've ever seen you make, is there any point in asking you to back up such a claim?

Lefty Bicek

KrustyUCC wrote: »

Margaret doesn't seem to have an issue with the culture at all

"Margaret also opened up about her life as a traveller and how she became a mother to seven children by the age of 28.

"I got married at 15," she said. "That's when I had my own family then. [As a child] my aunty fostered me and I class her kids as my own brothers and sisters.

"I went to school until the end of primary school. Being a traveller - it's hard to explain, if you don't understand it.

"When you're a traveller and get married, you claim your coop and have kids. I love that, I love my kids. I wouldn't change any of them for the world.

"I just don't have a home and I don't really care what people think."

https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/homeless-dublin-ireland-15036222

Marry early check
Have Kids early check
Claim coop check
Never work check

Last but not least...

Don't really care what people [who are subsidising my lifestyle] think... check.

PlaneSpeeking

VinLieger wrote: »

This might be the most uninformed ludicrous statement i think i've ever seen you make, is there any point in asking you to back up such a claim?

You can ask..... :rolleyes:

end of the road

SusieBlue wrote: »

Their flashy weddings, new cars and designer clothes don't really correspond with the poor mouth, misunderstood, poverty stricken charade they like to pedal to the media.

They should have to prove where they are spending their social welfare.
Instead of giving them cash, their welfare should come in the form of food stamps (that can't be used on alcohol/cigarettes), electricity voucher, fuel voucher, tv/internet voucher, etc. with a small cash payment to cover any extras they might incur.
They could have quarterly vouchers for Penney's etc for kids clothes, which they would have to then provide receipts for.

They already get rent allowance/HAP (if they aren't in caravans) and have medical cards.
Its only fair, when I claim expenses in work I can't just go in with a figure, I need to provide receipts to prove it.
If they are living their lifetime out of the public purse, they absolutely should have to account of their expenses and I'm sure that paying them via vouchers and stamps would see a reduction in the unexplainable wealth we frequently see in these families.

i'd suggest that it's probably the opposite. vouchers and stamps can be exchanged for cash on the black market. sure, you could probably try to implement a system that would keep them to a person but no doubt there would be some way found around that.
to me it sounds like a hugely expensive system to get up and running and to oversea, for which the money used could be better spent on more gardai and cab officers.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

end of the road wrote: »

so, you don't care if it costs more to put children into a system, which from my very very limited knowledge of it doesn't seem to have very good outcomes...

Let's not pretend that Traveller culture produces good outcomes.

Barely literate, married off to a cousin at age 16 to produce an average 5 children, very likely to experience domestic violence, with a life expectancy of 70 -- that's a reasonably likely outcome for a girl raised in Traveller culture.

For a boy, a much higher likelihood of going to prison than to college, a suicide rate 7 times higher than young settled men, and a life expectancy of just 61.

Children raised in state care may have poor outcomes, but I challenge you to find an environment worse for children than Traveller culture.

Lefty Bicek

end of the road wrote: »

because the state deems quite rightly, that the children are entitled to a decent quality of life, regardless of one's opinions of the parents.

The other side of that coin is the state's responsibility to sanction parents who do not play their part.

The state being obviously unwilling to do so, has no business to waste my taxes on one-sided exploitation.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

end of the road wrote: »

actually no, i'm not fine with being "bled dry" . however i recognise that there is a risk of me being "bled dry" even more with the type of reforms some would want.



so, you don't care if it costs more to put children into a system, which from my very very limited knowledge of it doesn't seem to have very good outcomes, then it does to simply provide the supports for the parents and their children? how does throwing the children into this system if it is the case that outcomes of it aren't so good, contribute to a decent society, and how could it be considered any sort of value for money?

We’ve tried it your way, and it’s not working. Time to try something else

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

i'd suggest that it's probably the opposite. vouchers and stamps can be exchanged for cash on the black market. sure, you could probably try to implement a system that would keep them to a person but no doubt there would be some way found around that.
to me it sounds like a hugely expensive system to get up and running and to oversea, for which the money used could be better spent on more gardai and cab officers.

Are you familiar with "the bigotry of low expectations" theory ?

You seem to have a cast iron certainty that every social welfare recipient is corrupt, thieving and one missed dole cheque away from bank robbery and tiger kidnappings.

SusieBlue

end of the road wrote: »

i'd suggest that it's probably the opposite. vouchers and stamps can be exchanged for cash on the black market. sure, you could probably try to implement a system that would keep them to a person but no doubt there would be some way found around that.
to me it sounds like a hugely expensive system to get up and running and to oversea, for which the money used could be better spent on more gardai and cab officers.

Would you go away, the black market?!
This is a voucher for Aldi we're talking about, not cocaine and elephant tusks.
Most people can just buy their own food with their own money so there would be little to no demand for exchanging food vouchers for cash on the "black market".

It would be very simple actually.
Instead of collecting their payment at the post office, they collect a book of stamps/vouchers.

Its very clear the current system isn't working.
I have seen, with my own eyes, a woman of traveller "ethnicity" arrive up to the SVdeP in a BMW, her backseat full of shopping bags, and cry and beg for food to feed her kids.
She did it every single week without fail, she just saw it as free food.
She took food that day that could have been given to a family that actually couldn't afford to eat that week.

Its all take, take, take with them, and they contribute nothing.
They're laughing at us for getting up and going to work every day while they live a comfortable life sponging off the tax payer.

Its about time they were individually held accountable for their cost to the taxpayer, and I think giving them food stamps and vouchers instead of cold hard cash would be a good start.

end of the road

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

The other side of that coin is the state's responsibility to sanction parents who do not play their part.

the state does sanction people where there are clear breaches and abuses of the rules. however, sometimes the state won't know that certain breaches and abuses are taking place, because people won't report such abuses to them. you may not support or like the sanctions either, but there are avenues open to you to challenge it, contacting your local td or raising the issue with local election candidates at election time.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

The state being obviously unwilling to do so, has no business to waste my taxes on one-sided exploitation.

unfortunately, the state will spend your tax money on what it deems worth while for it to be spent on. should you have an issue with your taxes being spent on something, by all means raise it with your local td or your local election candidates when they come to the door at election time.

PlaneSpeeking

SusieBlue wrote: »

Would you go away, the black market?!
This is a voucher for Aldi we're talking about, not cocaine and elephant husks.
Most people can just buy their own food with their own money so there would be little to no demand for exchanging food vouchers for cash on the "black market".

It would be very simple actually.
Instead of collecting their payment at the post office, they collect a book of stamps/vouchers.

Its very clear the current system isn't working.
I have seen, with my own eyes, a woman of traveller "ethnicity" arrive up to the SVdeP in a BMW, her backseat full of shopping bags, and cry and beg for food to feed her kids.
She did it every single week without fail, she just saw it as free food.
She took food that day that could have been given to a family that actually couldn't afford to eat that week.

Its all take, take, take with them, and they contribute nothing.
They're laughing at us for getting up and going to work every day while they live a comfortable life sponging off the tax payer.

Its about time they were individually held accountable for their cost to the taxpayer, and I think giving them food stamps and vouchers instead of cold hard cash would be a good start.

Susie, we may have disagreed on other matters previously but I am only sorry I cannot thank that more than once.

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

the state does sanction people where there are clear breaches and abuses of the rules. however, sometimes the state won't know that certain breaches and abuses are taking place, because people won't report such abuses to them. you may not support or like the sanctions either, but there are avenues open to you to challenge it, contacting your local td or raising the issue with local election candidates at election time.



unfortunately, the state will spend your tax money on what it deems worth while for it to be spent on. should you have an issue with your taxes being spent on something, by all means raise it with your local td or your local election candidates when they come to the door at election time.

With all due respect that is the most simple, flawed, not thought out, utter nonsense post that I have ever read on here.

Ever.

gwalk

Black Market for food vouchers hahahaha

here i have a one4all i wanna shift for cash, can you point me in the direction of your food voucher dealer and see will he buy it off me

Rory28

gwalk wrote: »

Black Market for food vouchers hahahaha

here i have a one4all i wanna shift for cash, can you point me in the direction of your food voucher dealer and see will he buy it off me

While I dont disagree the current system does not work there is a blackmarket for foodstamps in the US. I dont now how it works but people trade their stamps for meth/heroin/whatever.

Lefty Bicek

end of the road wrote: »

the state does sanction people where there are clear breaches and abuses of the rules.

Unless they're travellers.

sometimes the state won't know that certain breaches and abuses are taking place, because people won't report such abuses to them

School register.

The state does know.

But as your pal here has indicated...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108726628&postcount=1712

... they 'need the extra push'.

QED, the sanctions that apply to everyone else for not schooling their children in accordance with the law... do not apply to travellers.

Does your TD know that ?

unfortunately, the state will spend your tax money on what it deems worth while for it to be spent on. should you have an issue with your taxes being spent on something, by all means raise it with your local td or your local election candidates when they come to the door at election time.

You're smart enough to be condescending, but I'm smart enough not to need your advice.

Thanks anyway.

Deebles McBeebles

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

With all due respect that is the most simple, flawed, not thought out, utter nonsense post that I have ever read on here.

Ever.

Ah c'mon, I know for a fact I've posted worse

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Huh ????

No one's going all Al Gore ffs

That was me bringing the Manbearpig into the room. I should know better than to post anything slightly off topic as it will be used to distract and go off topic.

end of the road

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

We’ve tried it your way, and it’s not working. Time to try something else

that's all well and good, but the solutions being proposed aren't exactly solutions that look as if they will work better.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Are you familiar with "the bigotry of low expectations" theory ?

You seem to have a cast iron certainty that every social welfare recipient is corrupt, thieving and one missed dole cheque away from bank robbery and tiger kidnappings.

far from it. i am very clear that most social wellfare recipients are genuine and receive wellfare for genuine reasons. if there were other options for them they wouldn't be on wellfare. however there are a small minority who are on wellfare because they would quite frankly, be no asset to an employer.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Would you go away, the black market?!
This is a voucher for Aldi we're talking about, not cocaine and elephant tusks.
Most people can just buy their own food with their own money so there would be little to no demand for exchanging food vouchers for cash on the "black market".

It would be very simple actually.
Instead of collecting their payment at the post office, they collect a book of stamps/vouchers.

Its very clear the current system isn't working.

anything has the potential to be traded on the black market.
vouchers will have to be redeemed wherever, that means surely the state having to compensate the relevant outlets for their use. that quite likely has to be adminned and have huge oversight. then we have to try and remove all possible abuses of that system which would surely cost a bit.
i'm not seeing why we should bother, when the money being spent on extra gardai and cab officers would have benefits outside wellfare fraud.
the current system has it's faults (it is working to an extent) however more issues can be solved by spending the money on manpower, which can be used to tackle other issues as well.

SusieBlue wrote: »

I have seen, with my own eyes, a woman of traveller "ethnicity" arrive up to the SVdeP in a BMW, her backseat full of shopping bags, and cry and beg for food to feed her kids.
She did it every single week without fail, she just saw it as free food.
She took food that day that could have been given to a family that actually couldn't afford to eat that week.

Its all take, take, take with them, and they contribute nothing.
They're laughing at us for getting up and going to work every day while they live a comfortable life sponging off the tax payer.

Its about time they were individually held accountable for their cost to the taxpayer, and I think giving them food stamps and vouchers instead of cold hard cash would be a good start.

did you report her? people on here seem to have a habbit of seeing people doing this and that but they seem to never do anything about it. how is anyone within the relevant departments going to be able to do anything about women like her when people won't report them?

PlaneSpeeking

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

Ah c'mon, I know for a fact I've posted worse

It was getting towards "settled people travel to halting sites to dispose of rubbish" levels!!!!!

PlaneSpeeking

end of the road wrote: »

far from it. i am very clear that most social wellfare recipients are genuine and receive wellfare for genuine reasons. if there were other options for them they wouldn't be on wellfare. however there are a small minority who are on wellfare because they would quite frankly, be no asset to an employer.

And yet you believe that if we even reduce the benefits payable currently the Gardai will be overstretched with people turning to crime and the minute they get Lidl vouchers they'll be selling them to buy contraband rather than feed their kids ?

Your posts are either coming from a very delusional point of view or they are designed as a complete wind up and I really cannot fathom which.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

end of the road wrote: »

yes, it is quite possible that some travelers would continue to have children without the supports in existence. something which would likely apply to non-travelers as well.

The number of births per woman in Ireland has more than halved since the 1960s, driven by numerous social and economic changes. Contraception became legally available and socially acceptable, women went to third-level education and entered the workforce in greater numbers, and the average age of first pregnancy and marriage increased. Today, the average Irish woman is 30 when she has her first child; the average Irish bride is 33.

Compare that to Margaret Cash, who was married at 15 and had seven children by age 28.

There simply is no meaningful comparison between settled women and Traveller women when it comes to marriage and childbearing. The latter have more children today than the former did even decades ago. Having 8+ children is virtually unheard of for a woman under 50 today, and yet one Traveller woman in seven has 8+.

SusieBlue

end of the road wrote: »

anything has the potential to be traded on the black market.
vouchers will have to be redeemed wherever, that means surely the state having to compensate the relevant outlets for their use. that quite likely has to be adminned and have huge oversight. then we have to try and remove all possible abuses of that system which would surely cost a bit.
i'm not seeing why we should bother, when the money being spent on extra gardai and cab officers would have benefits outside wellfare fraud.
the current system has it's faults (it is working to an extent) however more issues can be solved by spending the money on manpower, which can be used to tackle other issues as well.

You don't see why they should bother? Maybe because the current system has the country on its knees?
Something being difficult is not a good reason not to do it.

You are making excuse after excuse for their behaviour, yet offering no alternatives apart from "suck it up and put up with it".
Well, to use your own words, why should I?

end of the road wrote: »

did you report her? people on here seem to have a habbit of seeing people doing this and that but they seem to never do anything about it. how is anyone within the relevant departments going to be able to do anything about women like her when people won't report them?

I was volunteering there and there was nothing to report.
They couldn't take the risk of the children actually being starving, child neglect is more common in their community than the "settled" community so there were fears the kids would go without if we didn't give them the food.

The SVdeP also didn't want the media storm and backlash if the poor traveller woman went to the media about how a charity discriminated against her in her hour of need.

Raheem Euro

You don't need physical vouchers. Accounts for dole monkies can be opened at designated shops and credited once a week by social welfare. On presentation of photo id recipient can buy certain, designated, essential food and household products. No smokes, booze or cakes. That would eliminate most of the black market stuff.

end of the road

end of the road wrote: »

i'd suggest that it's probably the opposite. vouchers and stamps can be exchanged for cash on the black market. sure, you could probably try to implement a system that would keep them to a person but no doubt there would be some way found around that.
to me it sounds like a hugely expensive system to get up and running and to oversea, for which the money used could be better spent on more gardai and cab officers.

In that case, they don’t want or need support.

SusieBlue

Raheem Euro wrote: »

You don't need physical vouchers. Accounts for dole monkies can be opened at designated shops and credited once a week by social welfare. On presentation of photo id recipient can buy certain, designated, essential food and household products. No smokes, booze or cakes. That would eliminate most of the black market stuff.

That's a very sensible idea that could actually work but I have no doubt EOTR will find fault with it.

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

You don't need physical vouchers. Accounts for dole monkies can be opened at designated shops and credited once a week by social welfare. On presentation of photo id recipient can buy certain, designated, essential food and household products. No smokes, booze or cakes. That would eliminate most of the black market stuff.

See now we are getting a little to close to 1984 for my tastes. I disagree with everything you said here. How can you tell people to do this? How would it work? Would there be special police?

ArmaniJeanss

Why Aldi vouchers in particular?

Aldi don't do vouchers or coupons in their normal business model, so doubt they'd have any interest in getting involved in something like this.

Raheem Euro

Rory28 wrote: »

See now we are getting a little to close to 1984 for my tastes. I disagree with everything you said here. How can you tell people to do this? How would it work? Would there be special police?

You're providing all their essential needs. Alcohol is not an essential need. There would be an administrative cost to this but no policing cost.

end of the road

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Unless they're travellers.

not true, travelers are sanctioned when caught. not everyone will be caught of course, because there aren't the resources to catch everyone abusing any system, and people won't report abuses to the authorities.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

School register.

The state does know.

the state knows to an extent, and deals with what it does know where it is possible to do so. the school register will not be able to provide the state with all the information it needs in relation to every single abuse.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

But as your pal here has indicated...

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108726628&postcount=1712

... they 'need the extra push'.

his point was in terms of been given the relevant supports and push to stay in education, by showing them via the method of education that education is valuable.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

QED, the sanctions that apply to everyone else for not schooling their children in accordance with the law... do not apply to travellers.

Does your TD know that ?

actually, they do. however, the state services have to be realistic in terms of what they can do in relation to this issue, so they will tend to focus on areas where it is likely for them to have some sort of a good outcome.

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

You're smart enough to be condescending, but I'm smart enough not to need your advice.

Thanks anyway.

then you would surely know that contacting your td and raising issues at election time, are ways that are likely to bring about changes, whereas ranting on boards.ie isn't going to bring any change.

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

You're providing all their essential needs. Alcohol is not an essential need. There would be an administrative cost to this but no policing cost.

And if you happen to lose your job and end up on welfare will you be happy with to go collect your food on the condition you supply them with photo ID? Is there to be special supermarkets or food banks where these people can collect there govt issued rations or are we to force private companies into this?

If I may exaggerate a bit, your plan sounds like a dystopian nightmare.

James Brown

Raheem Euro wrote: »

You don't need physical vouchers. Accounts for dole monkies can be opened at designated shops and credited once a week by social welfare. On presentation of photo id recipient can buy certain, designated, essential food and household products. No smokes, booze or cakes. That would eliminate most of the black market stuff.

The problem with that monkey headed logic is it assumes the sick and poor are being fraudulent and punishes them all collectively. It's the height of pig ignorance. You should sign up to Fine Gael.
We squander money on business and corporations. We then need to bring in cuts. Then we see people, working people, needing aid just to get by. Then we blame them for getting freebies because we find ourselves unhappy with government spending on them. It's a hilarious merry-go-round really.

ohnonotgmail

Matt Barrett wrote: »

The problem with that monkey headed logic is it assumes the sick and poor are being fraudulent and punishes them all collectively. It's the height of pig ignorance. You should sign up to Fine Gael.
We squander money on business and corporations. We then need to bring in cuts. Then we see people, working people, needing aid just to get by. Then we blame them for getting freebies because we find ourselves unhappy with government spending on them. It's a hilarious merry-go-round really.

we're not talking about working people. we are talking about people like Margaret Cash who dont work, never have worked and most likely are not actually qualified to do any work bar the most menial task.

Raheem Euro

Rory28 wrote: »

And if you happen to lose your job and end up on welfare will you be happy with to go collect your food on the condition you supply them with photo ID? Is there to be special supermarkets or food banks where these people can collect there govt issued rations or are we to force private companies into this?

If I may exaggerate a bit, your plan sounds like a dystopian nightmare.

The point of ID is to stop the aforementioned fraud. The first argument against vouchers is always that they will sold on black market. What if you turned up for weekly shop and they told you it had been given out already. Someone else gave your name. Sorry. Your goods are linked to you and your id to protect them and ensure only you get them. No different to producing id at post office or intreo centre.