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

givyjoe

Raheem Euro wrote: »

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.

I don't think we need to humiliate everyone who may be on welfare, even temporarily, solely to make life difficult for the likes of Cash. Has to be a better way.

Deebles McBeebles

end of the road wrote: »

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.

This is posted daily on AH. Do you think no one else understands how the political system works or what a TD is?

And again, using divisive terms like "ranting", to annoy I assume.

end of the road

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

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

you do know that post about "settled people travel to halting sites to dispose of rubbish" was satire right? i can't believe so many fell for it.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

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.

yes, i believe that reducing the benefits does have the possibility of increasing crime. there is no 100% guarantee of it happening, but there is no guarantee of it not happening. either way, i'm personally not willing to take the risk. i'm entitled to be safe.

SusieBlue wrote: »

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?

i'm not making excuses for their behaviour at all. i never have done so either. i am suggesting that the alternatives people want, are likely to cause more problems then would be solved, then exist with the current system.

SusieBlue wrote: »

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.

with the greatist of respect, it sounds like there was something to report. you could have reported it if you were concerned and nobody would know apart from you and the wellfare. you made the choice not to report it which is fine, but you can't really complain that the state isn't doing enough about wellfare abuses when you ignore a possible abuse, IMO.

Ruraldweller56

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I know you have zero intention of changing your view, so I'm not going to try and then leave myself open to unchecked abuse.

That's why its not a debate. Its too entrenched.

Oh I'm sure you'd love to tell me and the others on here lots of weird and wonderful facts about your favourite ethnic group but won't because of all of our perverse and irrational bigotry towards said people.

I've already pointed out on here that I've had, and do still have dealings with them. I've brought and sold dogs from them. All very legitimate and above board. A few years ago they decided they'd make my local their local. I still go in. I'm not going to be ran out of my own regular bar.

To be fair it's seldom I've seen it kicking off. There's a core of maybe 5 that keep the rest in check.

Gormdubh was asking about people who have been in boxing clubs with them. I have. It didn't do much to put them in a great light for me anyway. They were only any way OK to someone if they were good with their fists.

I don't hate these people. Far from it actually. In many ways I respect where they're coming from. Don't want to work for the man, pay taxes, make capitalists rich? Stay around the caravan all day minding nana and the horses? Fine by me.

But I've had my fill of subsidising it. If they want to make it work it should be up to them. Not us.

And people like Ryan Tubridy, Jennifer Zampadildo, the star of this thread missus Cash, Martin "that's a complete misrepresentation boss" Collins who continually label the rest of us intolerant racists while our neighbours and grandparents houses are ransacked, younger siblings have sh1t knocked out of them for 50c (where I come from its known as the settled tax) do nothing to help their cause.

Next GE I'm making this a single issue with whoever comes to me looking for a vote.

SusieBlue

EOTR, I'd like to hear your suggestions on how to deal with this crisis, that doesn't involve throwing even more money at them.
What do you suggest to improve the current situation?

PlaneSpeeking

SusieBlue wrote: »

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.

Sadly you've hit on exactly why nothing will be done about these feral parasites.

No benefits and/or CAB crackdown; no increase in prosecutions for their many law breaking activities; nothing in the way of bettering their children through education and increased life expectancy; no end in sight to the misogyny that treats their women like brood mares - nothing.

Because the second you try that, the liberal media; Pavee Point and the far left unelectable - thank God - parties in leafy Dublin will go into overdrive.

One journalist or poster or campaigner etc asks for the Travelling community to be subject to the same laws as every other parent around school attendance, or asks the CAB to investigate a halting site with 182 Beemers etc - and they can expect the Twitterstorm of their lives.

Raheem Euro

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 actually have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. A source of pride.
So the premis of your guilt tripping sick, dying crippled is faulty. The approach I proposed does not mean one cent less to the unemployed. It is a different mechanism of delivery. And one which prevents abuse of the system. And we know not everyone abuses the system. And this won't impinge on those deceant people in any way.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

end of the road wrote: »

you do know that post about "settled people travel to halting sites to dispose of rubbish" was satire right? i can't believe so many fell for it.



yes, i believe that reducing the benefits does have the possibility of increasing crime. there is no 100% guarantee of it happening, but there is no guarantee of it not happening. either way, i'm personally not willing to take the risk. i'm entitled to be safe.



i'm not making excuses for their behaviour at all. i never have done so either. i am suggesting that the alternatives people want, are likely to cause more problems then would be solved, then exist with the current system.



with the greatist of respect, it sounds like there was something to report. you could have reported it if you were concerned and nobody would know apart from you and the wellfare. you made the choice not to report it which is fine, but you can't really complain that the state isn't doing enough about wellfare abuses when you ignore a possible abuse, IMO.

Why did you remove your thanks when you were called out on it? And if it wasn’t posted by the most left poster on boards.ie I might believe it was satire but that poster has practically got levoscoliosis he’s bent that far left

Deebles McBeebles

SusieBlue wrote: »

EOTR, I'd like to hear your suggestions on how to deal with this crisis, that doesn't involve throwing even more money at them.
What do you suggest to improve the current situation?

125 pages and I'm still waiting to see this answered by entitlement culture defenders.

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

We actually have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world. A source of pride.
So the premis of your guilt tripping sick, dying crippled is faulty. The approach I proposed does not mean one cent less to the unemployed. It is a different mechanism of delivery. And one which prevents abuse of the system. And we know not everyone abuses the system. And this won't impinge on those deceant people in any way.

Of course it will. You think completely changing how the welfare system operates won't impinge on the decent ones? They will now need to go to the approved food banks to collect their rations. No more socializing tho. Cant have a drink out of those rations.

The sh1t you are peddling belongs in Soviet Russia.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Rory28 wrote: »

Of course it will. You think completely changing how the welfare system operates won't impinge on the decent ones? They will now need to go to the approved food banks to collect their rations. No more socializing tho. Cant have a drink out of those rations.

The sh1t you are peddling belongs in Soviet Russia.

We don’t owe anyone drinks funded by what we’re taxed, gtfo with that. I can barely afford my own drinks

PlaneSpeeking

Rory28 wrote: »

Of course it will. You think completely changing how the welfare system operates won't impinge on the decent ones? They will now need to go to the approved food banks to collect their rations. No more socializing tho. Cant have a drink out of those rations.

The sh1t you are peddling belongs in Soviet Russia.

If I can;t afford a few gargles after work on my salary why the f*** should the likes of Cash and her workshy ilk ??

ohnonotgmail

Rory28 wrote: »

Of course it will. You think completely changing how the welfare system operates won't impinge on the decent ones? They will now need to go to the approved food banks to collect their rations. No more socializing tho. Cant have a drink out of those rations.

The sh1t you are peddling belongs in Soviet Russia.

the only one who has mentioned food banks is you. get away with your strawman.

Roger Hassenforder

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

Why did you remove your thanks when you were called out on it? And if it wasn’t posted by the most left poster on boards.ie I might believe it was satire but that poster has practically got levoscoliosis he’s bent that far left

Had to google that.
Its a thing

Jerichoholic

They don't need drinks really, they have so much drugs that are selling them off.

Rory28

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the only one who has mentioned food banks is you. get away with your strawman.

So the alternative is to force Supervalu, Tesco and the rest to comply with these food accounts. How in the name fcuk do we do that?

I completely get the hate for Margaret but what you people want will affect all us if we ever lose our jobs. Not everyone on the welfare is Margaret.

ohnonotgmail

Rory28 wrote: »

So the alternative is to force Supervalu, Tesco and the rest to comply with these food accounts. How in the name fcuk do we do that?

I completely get the hate for Margaret but what you people want will affect all us if we ever lose our jobs. Not everyone on the welfare is Margaret.

We turn the PSC into a debit card.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Rory28 wrote: »

So the alternative is to force Supervalu, Tesco and the rest to comply with these food accounts. How in the name fcuk do we do that?

I completely get the hate for Margaret but what you people want will affect all us if we ever lose our jobs. Not everyone on the welfare is Margaret.

Instead of cash, welfare is given on a debit card that can be used in any supermarket but can’t be used to buy lotto cigarettes or alcohol.

Jerichoholic

Yeah, because that's their only source of income.

Rory28

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

We turn the PSC into a debit card.

Jasiah Hot Talker wrote: »

Instead of cash, welfare is given on a debit card that can be used in any supermarket but can’t be used to buy lotto cigarettes or alcohol.

You are only going to catch the decent ones here. Margaret cash and co have more than one income. That is why we see them driving around in Mercs and the like. The guy or girl who lost their job and is searching for a new one won't have this second income.

ohnonotgmail

Rory28 wrote: »

You are only going to catch the decent ones here. Margaret cash and co have more than one income. That is why we see them driving around in Mercs and the like. The guy or girl who lost their job and is searching for a new one won't have this second income.

Does she drive around in a merc? dont think i've seen those pics. Any decent people wont be put out. I wouldn't be.

SusieBlue

Rory28 wrote: »

You are only going to catch the decent ones here. Margaret cash and co have more than one income. That is why we see them driving around in Mercs and the like. The guy or girl who lost their job and is searching for a new one won't have this second income.

I would only want such a regime imposed on the long term unemployed, the career dole heads, to make them accountable.
I wouldn't want anyone with a disability, down on their luck & out of a job, carers etc. to have to use stamps/vouchers. There is no need as they aren't taking advantage.

I just believe that if you sustain your lifestyle over a large number of years on handouts from social welfare, you should have to justify your expenses.

Rory28

SusieBlue wrote: »

I would only want such a regime imposed on the long term unemployed, the career dole heads, to make them accountable.
I wouldn't want anyone with a disability, down on their luck & out of a job, carers etc. to have to use stamps/vouchers. There is no need as they aren't taking advantage.

I just believe that if you sustain your lifestyle over a large number of years on handouts from social welfare, you should have to justify your expenses.

No issue with this at all. If they refuse training or are not actively seeking employment then completely agree

gwalk

Didn't Centra start doing a scheme for students where parents could top up a card an they can use it in store but can't be spent on alcohol or cigarettes

Something similar to that should be in place for the freeloaders

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Rory28 wrote: »

You are only going to catch the decent ones here. Margaret cash and co have more than one income. That is why we see them driving around in Mercs and the like. The guy or girl who lost their job and is searching for a new one won't have this second income.

If someone has paid prsi and has stamps then they should collect their payment as usual. Does it not strike you as odd that the jsa and jcb are exactly the same??

Raheem Euro

Rory28 wrote: »

So the alternative is to force Supervalu, Tesco and the rest to comply with these food accounts. How in the name fcuk do we do that?

I completely get the hate for Margaret but what you people want will affect all us if we ever lose our jobs. Not everyone on the welfare is Margaret.

Shops want business. Thats there raisondetre.
You will get your goods in the same shop just the state will pay the shop direct. You are not entitled to alcohol paid for from the public purse.

You havent found one argument against this.
Just some drama about sickness and Soviet Union. Perhaps it suits you the current system is so scamable.

Lefty Bicek

end of the road wrote: »

then you would surely know that contacting your td and raising issues at election time, are ways that are likely to bring about changes

I surely know that TD's will be well aware of the hassle Phil Hogan got when he represented his constituents as they wished, in relation to Travellers.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/traveller-in-phil-hogan-row-was-convicted-of-stealing-cash-28817253.html

THE Traveller at the centre of the Phil Hogan letter row appeared in court in recent weeks on theft charges.

Patrick Carthy (32) was given 12 months' probation for taking cash from a garden centre on the Callan Road in Kilkenny.

He was also fined earlier this year for trespassing on a property and driving an animal-drawn vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

And court records show at least two further convictions in the last seven years.

Mr Carthy has been at the centre of a storm of controversy after it emerged the Environment Minister wrote to constituents just outside Kilkenny city to say that the Carthy family "will not be allocated the house in your area".

In the letter, he told locals in Bonnettstown he was "glad to be of assistance in this matter".

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

Shops want business. Thats there raisondetre.
You will get your goods in the same shop just the state will pay the shop direct. You are not entitled to alcohol paid for from the public purse.

You havent found one argument against this.
Just some drama about sickness and Soviet Union. Perhaps it suits you the current system is so scamable.

Not at all. I am thankfully employed but I remember the crash. 2 years I was out of work and if I had to do that again but under your new rules I'd sooner throw myself off a bridge.

end of the road

SusieBlue wrote: »

EOTR, I'd like to hear your suggestions on how to deal with this crisis, that doesn't involve throwing even more money at them.
What do you suggest to improve the current situation?

properly fund the gardai, properly fund cab. fund wellfare inspectors.

SusieBlue wrote: »

I would only want such a regime imposed on the long term unemployed, the career dole heads, to make them accountable.
I wouldn't want anyone with a disability, down on their luck & out of a job, carers etc. to have to use stamps/vouchers. There is no need as they aren't taking advantage.

I just believe that if you sustain your lifestyle over a large number of years on handouts from social welfare, you should have to justify your expenses.

sure, but as has been already pointed out, people like miss cash have other incomes.

freshpopcorn

gwalk wrote: »

Didn't Centra start doing a scheme for students where parents could top up a card an they can use it in store but can't be spent on alcohol or cigarettes

Something similar to that should be in place for the freeloaders

I think it was Super-Valu(which is basically the same) but I was inder the impression you could spend the money on anything. I don't think it was overly successful because I haven't heard much about it.

Raheem Euro

Rory28 wrote: »

throw myself off a bridge.

I hope you never have real problems.

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

I hope you never have real problems.

Have you ever been on the welfare?

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

I hope you never have real problems.

Also, 2 years out of work was a real problem.

Raheem Euro

Rory28 wrote: »

Have you ever been on the welfare?

That you think being on welfare is in the neighbourhood of a real problem. You havent a clue.

blanch152

SusieBlue wrote: »

I would only want such a regime imposed on the long term unemployed, the career dole heads, to make them accountable.
I wouldn't want anyone with a disability, down on their luck & out of a job, carers etc. to have to use stamps/vouchers. There is no need as they aren't taking advantage.

I just believe that if you sustain your lifestyle over a large number of years on handouts from social welfare, you should have to justify your expenses.

I think foodstamps is a step too far for Ireland at this point in time.

However, a significant reduction in child benefit for newborns to be replaced by the following system which would pay for their needs as children:

- extra paid maternity and paternity leave
- paid childcare for working parents
- one-year of pre-school for children as at present, with meals provided and childcare for working parents
- free school uniforms and free school books for all children
- meals at school for all children and afterschool childcare for working parents
- 1 sports membership fee for all children
- no exam fees for Leaving Cert etc.

etc.

This would ensure that child benefit isn't spent on skiing holidays, or injected or drank down the pub. Instead, a reduced child benefit payment would be paid to cover the much smaller costs left.

Existing recipients could keep their existing level of child benefit and this could apply to children born next year.

Rory28

Raheem Euro wrote: »

That you think being on welfare is in the neighbourhood of a real problem. You havent a clue.

That you think you have a clue about me or the problems I faced during those years and after shows you dont have a clue about anything least of all how our welfare system should be run.

Ruraldweller56

Miriam O'Callaghan. Another enemy of the ordinary working person. Remember these people.

http://www.thejournal.ie/margaret-cash-accommodation-4184113-Aug2018/?amp=1

Lefty Bicek

Ruraldweller56 wrote: »

Miriam O'Callaghan. Another enemy of the ordinary working person. Remember these people.

http://www.thejournal.ie/margaret-cash-accommodation-4184113-Aug2018/?amp=1

Maybe she was asking Miriam to contact her local brother TD, for her.

That's how all problems can be easlily resolved in this great little country, dontchaknow ?

Ruraldweller56

Lefty Bicek wrote: »

Maybe she was asking Miriam to contact her local brother TD, for her.

That's how all problems can be easlily resolved in this great little country, dontchaknow ?

Ya Probably

gwalk

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I think it was Super-Valu(which is basically the same) but I was inder the impression you could spend the money on anything. I don't think it was overly successful because I haven't heard much about it.

No centra

Lefty Bicek

end of the road wrote: »

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.

What part of compulsory do neither you nor they understand ?

It wasnt me123

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.

And in the south east - the guards raided them recently

James Brown

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

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.

If we're specifically talking about people on welfare, playing by welfare rules....I think it's policy makers we should be looking at. Unless she's committing fraud what do we expect her to do? 'No thanks love, keep your money, I couldn't possibly, sure I'm full a the drink'?

If we're talking about people on welfare getting something for noting, that's just sh*te talk from 'the squeezed middle' misdirecting their ire. Which makes sense because the f***ing idiots keep voting in FF/FG and then whinging at the results.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If we're specifically talking about people on welfare, playing by welfare rules....I think it's policy makers we should be looking at. Unless she's committing fraud what do we expect her to do? 'No thanks love, keep your money, I couldn't possibly, sure I'm full a the drink'?

If we're talking about people on welfare getting something for noting, that's just sh*te talk from 'the squeezed middle' misdirecting their ire. Which makes sense because the f***ing idiots keep voting in FF/FG and then whinging at the results.

When the only alternative (apart from the Greens) is rubbish parties that will only increase welfare and hand-outs, there are few options to vote for.

SF, the SDs, the PBP or whatever they are called, along with various independents like Mick Wallace, only want to increase the hand-outs to various groups. I can understand people voting for FG and FF to try and stem the tide.

Your obsession with Leo, even to the extent of your username, is quite strange.

tayto lover

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If we're specifically talking about people on welfare, playing by welfare rules....I think it's policy makers we should be looking at. Unless she's committing fraud what do we expect her to do? 'No thanks love, keep your money, I couldn't possibly, sure I'm full a the drink'?

If we're talking about people on welfare getting something for noting, that's just sh*te talk from 'the squeezed middle' misdirecting their ire. Which makes sense because the f***ing idiots keep voting in FF/FG and then whinging at the results.

So is this now the official SF line?
Blame the "squeezed middle" for the won't work/never worked criminal element and for who these heavily taxed workers voted in?
Tell us, what would SF do differently that would make these people go out and earn a crust?

gormdubhgorm

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

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

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/watch-cork-city-faces-250k-bill-to-clean-up-illegal-dump-yet-again-855747.html

Ruraldweller56

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/watch-cork-city-faces-250k-bill-to-clean-up-illegal-dump-yet-again-855747.html

That article says travellers are dumping on the site. If there are 'country folk' dumping there on top of it all normal minded people will condemn it.

BBFAN

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.

Whilst I agree with posts on both sides of the fence here to a certain extent, the second part of your post I can't agree with.

I don't agree that the welfare state created this situation because traveller women ALWAYS had large families, long before the welfare state existed. That is a tradition that they and only they can change.

I've met some traveller women who try to buck this trend but admittedly very few.

James Brown

tayto lover wrote: »

So is this now the official SF line?
Blame the "squeezed middle" for the won't work/never worked criminal element and for who these heavily taxed workers voted in?
Tell us, what would SF do differently that would make these people go out and earn a crust?

You're talking out your ar*se chief. I don't represent nor often vote for SF. And if I did what of it? My comment stands. You've workers who need state aid getting blamed by other workers slightly better off who think they should have it easier and they just might if it wasn't for all the working people and their 'can't afford to live culture'.
On to your point about dem that want and won't or what ever. Re read my comment. If you don't like the policies blame the policy makers not the recipients. Do you think anyone on welfare is willing or in a position to give back some of their entitlements because some blue shirt aficionado is feeling squeezed? Maybe the poor Tory voter who feels squeezed should go back to school or get a better job and earn a bigger crust? Same dumb logical leap. Or better still stop voting the same wasters in again and again while expecting things to be different?

Roger Hassenforder

I wouldnt like to be a female traveller.

16 times as likely to have the shît beaten out of you by your partner.
#savethisculture