Dublin mother shares footage of offered council house

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117743766#Comment_117743766

I'll point out that you were the one telling people they shouldn't be commenting on the public news article and have now started going after others for following social media (not a big fan myself, but it's a bit rich to tell people to stop doing research).

At least we're clear that everyone can comment on her story and form their own opinions :) or should that be 🤣

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117743557#Comment_117743557

tusla certainly has issues, but it doesn't change the fact that if she was unable to actually look after the children, they wouldn't be with her.

Yurt2

A better question is how much the council is leasing the sh*tbox for, who's the benifiencary of the inflated lease, and who's the real leech in this scenario?

But no, trampolines, fingernails and second hand jackets on adverts.ie

My council house neighbours ride a brand new golden chariot to Krispy Kreme and have Fabergé eggs strewn on the lawn. I swear.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744098#Comment_117744098

You can point out whatever you like, even if you are pulling it out of your arse. Nowhere did I say that anyone shouldn’t be commenting on a news article, nor did I go after anyone for following social media, nor did I tell anyone to stop doing research.

At least we’re clear now that you can continue to gossip and fling shìte in the hope that something sticks.

Exaggerations of a similar style to "so she wants a mansion in Dalkey is it?" don't change that people with an inflated sense of entitlement and who play the system, have a serious attitude problem. And the cost of private accommodation in this country is indeed absolutely obscene.

Both can be criticised at once.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744026#Comment_117744026

Answer to who though? As far as I can see she doesn’t have to answer for shìt, to anyone. I still don’t see how the sins of the father applies in this context either, those kids are likely to grow up hard as breeze blocks, resilient little bastards, nothing like the limp waisted lefties who you clearly have a disdain for. I do too tbh, but I’m able to keep it to myself for the most part.

That attitude you’re referring to btw is as old as Christianity, nothing new about it whatsoever, Jesus and all was a right pain in the hole for his parents as a teenager, but he grew up to be fairly resilient too, until he was nailed to the cross. That’s bound to do it for anyone really.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744126#Comment_117744126

At the risk of repeating others, you're all over the place!

Anyway, we'll see if her little publicity stunt gets her the desired outcome.

Gatling

At this rate they should be asking for Magic wands so they can magic up everything they want for nothing and even at that it would be enough for some ,

Some will be crying we aren't doing enough for these people ,

How many more hours should be expected to work extra to keep the entitled in brown Thomas shopping sprees and €600 coats for their kids

dotsman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117743976#Comment_117743976

Nope, it has nothing to do with my ideals or specifications, nor would I ever want social welfare to be used as a weapon. I have no idea where you got that from. I do want social welfare to do what is was intended to do. Help people during times of hardship (illness/disability/recession/temp unemployment etc), not funs an an entire person's life and lifestyle simply because they choose not to take care of themselves.

It is not about children whose parents are on the housing list or welfare. It is about children born to those who choose to have children (and keep having children) when they are not even capable of taking care of themselves. What future do these children have with a mother like that? What role model will she be? How will she teach them to have pride & ambition, provide for themselves and contribute to society? In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she herself is a victim of our current social welfare fiasco, where she was born into a family dependant on welfare and is simply doing what the current social welfare system encouraged her to do.

costacorta

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117738439#Comment_117738439

Ask end of the road I’d say he could be the daddy !! He knows a lot about her and backing her to the hilt . Either that or he is another sponger off the state

Or some people may not be on welfare but won't budge from the "all on social welfare are downtrodden" position for ideological reasons.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744818#Comment_117744818

it is absolutely about children who's parents are on the housing list, lets cut the crap and be honest.

parents having children who need state support is not for the care system to solve, the only time the care system needs to be, or even can be involved, is if the children are in actual danger, and quite rightly so that this is the case, as otherwise it goes from being a care system, to a weapon against people who do not live up to certain ideals, which means it doubly can't do it's job.

i would suggest that for all her faults, the children are better off with her then in the care system, dispite the best efforts of the majority who work in it, who do their best dispite limited resources.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745051#Comment_117745051

incorrect on all counts.

i don't know her nor nothing about her, however i will never whinge because someone decides that accommodation which clearly isn't up to a reasonable standard isn't for them.

nor will i ever, ever, support making children suffer, because the parent doesn't live up to my ideals.

dotsman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745120#Comment_117745120

Society would have been better off if she had been spayed after the second.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117743960#Comment_117743960

I've no idea where you get your own ideas from.

You don't seem to understand the cost of housing or the value to someone in having it provided for free. One reason for that might be if you never had to pay for housing yourself. But on the other hand, you don't appear to understand the available schemes or how they work. So you don't seem to be one of the people playing the system.

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745300#Comment_117745300

it wouldn't as such nonsense would likely put us in breach of human rights.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117744066#Comment_117744066

hmmmm. And yet plenty of other people do reduce the number of children they would otherwise like to have, or postpone having them, due to changes in life circumstances. Would you be implying that the likes of this lady are just a bit stupid and would not be able to likewise adjust to reality and consequences?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745352#Comment_117745352

It’s YOUR idea we were discussing Donald, that the underclass receives more financial support from the State vs ordinary people receiving financial support from the State, and so far you’re coming up well short of being able to support your opinion.

Certain dudes need to stop spreading their seed also. Don't put it all on the woman.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745425#Comment_117745425

Au contraire me oul' pal. It is you who have absolutely no evidence to back up your statements that the "underclass" (your expression) get LESS.

I gave the simple example of housing. Two 18 year old kids. Lets call them Jim and Pat. Both live in the same area. They actually live next door on the same street. Both go to the same school. Jim's mother and father have average jobs and scrimped and worked hard to buy and pay for their house. Pat's mother has never worked but she successfully pushed out a few sprogs. She already had a female sprog and then the State borrowed some money to buy the house next door to Jim after she pushed out a male sprog (Pat) which qualified her for an upgrade to a 3 bed. JIm's daddy also lives there, but unofficially of course. And, despite your claim that "the State doesn’t pay for anyone to move house", it actually does. That statement is not, as you think, a statement of fact, but a statement of your own ignorance. If it not the tooth fairy that pays for such moves!

So when Pat and Jim hit 18, they have both received more or less the same services from the State. Except Jim also had his housing paid for. That means he got more from the State. I don't really know how you have issues understanding that. You will need to explain why you think he got less.

You're response to the same point earlier was that "The State will of course pay the housing expenses of any child or children, precisely because children have no means of generating income of their own!". Which is patently untrue. The State does not pay for the housing expenses of "any child". I would like to see what would happen if any poster on here who is working and paying their own way, rocked up to a government department asking for the State to reimburse them for the cost of their child's accommodation. Perhaps it was the case for yourself, but for most people their parents actually pay the housing expenses for their children. Not the State.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117743806#Comment_117743806

There is constant complaining on social media about politicians. It's endless. Zappone and Varadkar are being picked apart, which is understandable.

Re your first paragraph - I picked you up wrongly, apologies.

dotsman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745367#Comment_117745367

The children have human rights too. You don't seem to care about that.

It doesn't have to be a human rights issue if it is voluntary. It would simply be part of the woman volunteering for state support.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745515#Comment_117745515

Jim, Pat and the Imaginary Natalist Housing Swindle. A musical from the mind's eye of an eye-twitching maniac. Not coming to the Bord Gais Theatre next spring.

Featuring such memorable numbers as "Trampolines for the Childer" , "Boards.ie Taxpayers Pay for me Forever Home", and "Canada Goose or Nothing at All".

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745515#Comment_117745515

Your evidence is a convoluted hypothetical which suits your argument and has no grounding in reality?

Before you accuse me of dodging it, I’m going to tell you straight out it’s not even worth entertaining. It could literally go anywhere, like am I expected to assume that Jim’s parents who are out working are also eligible for subsidised childcare and mortgage relief and child tax credit or working family payments or maternity and paternity benefits, whereas Pats parents are receiving none of these payments and benefits from the State because they’re ineligible, but they’re saving the State a bundle in childcare by raising their children themselves… y’know, it could literally go anywhere. Do those payments and benefits even come under housing expenses which the State is providing for the families and their dependent children?

That’s what I mean when I say the State will pay the housing expenses of every child, because children have no means to pay for themselves, Of course I’m suggesting that because they are dependents of their parents, the State acknowledges and recognises their relationship to their parents. Does Jimmy inherit the property or do his parents avail of the Fair Deal scheme, y’know, also not an option for… actually I’m genuinely confused now because I’m reading it again and I’m wondering are Jim and Pat brother and sister, or brothers, or is Jim Pats father and living with Pats parents on the sly.. it’s like an episode of Neighbours ffs! Honestly your hypothetical is completely useless, and I tried to address it in the best of faith but honestly man I’m lost, it throws up more questions than any point it was supposed to be making.

In any case I thought we were speaking in more general terms which is why I was using the term underclass, to refer to people who are underclass, as opposed to middle class, which is who I was assuming you were referring to when you were using the term ordinary people, and it’s on that basis I suggested you simply have no way of supporting your opinion because it’s impossible to calculate the way you’re trying to do it, whereas it’s very much a fact and evidenced in Irish society that the middle classes receive more in funding from the State than the underclass who are generally accommodated in shìtholes, and even in your example are piled in on top of each other, until they are eventually moved to a larger property, which means moving schools and all the rest of it, but the houses may not be up to minimum living standard, and if they wish to find another accommodation more suitable, they have to find a landlord who isn’t trying to dodge HAP tenants which they cannot legally discriminate against, and it is the council who pays the landlord, and the tenants pay the council, if that’s the scheme they’re on. The idea that tenants are receiving this money into their hand as if it should be counted as income in the same way as they’re eligible for social welfare payments and so on is just ridiculous.

They’re being accommodated. They aren’t getting anything for free, and the conditions they’re being accommodated in, are often unsuitable for human habitation. Some people may well get their jollies imagining all sorts of ways to make their life more difficult, to teach them a lesson, to punish them for their immorality and all the rest of it, but thankfully cnuts like that are very much in a minority.

I dunno ‘bout you but I don’t judge anyone on the basis of their financial or family status, I judge people based upon their attitudes and behaviours towards other people. I’m not going to judge anyone who is less fortunate than I am, notwithstanding the fact that it appears to take more considerable effort to do so than it does to offer anyone support, which is far easier to do than being a cnut all your life (not you personally Donald, but the kind of people who appear to make it their life’s mission to seek out people they can humiliate and belittle in order to feel better about themselves).

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745683#Comment_117745683

It WOULD be a violation of human rights issue, there’s no “doesn’t have to be” about it. In any case notwithstanding the sheer stupidity of the idea, it’s not a procedure medical professionals will do without a compelling health related reason, and it’s almost impossible for a woman to avail of sterilisation in Ireland if she is under 30 years of age. Making it contingent upon receiving State support removes the whole idea of it being voluntary in any case, it would be regarded in law as coercion, and would simply be regarded as unlawful.

I’m guessing you aren’t aware of the massive amounts of compensation from the State which people who were sterilised have received either, but that’s just to put the idea completely out of your head, or just ignore the fact that it would be unethical, unlawful, would lead to massive compensation having to be paid to the victims of your stupidity, and carry on with your fantasy.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745712#Comment_117745712

That's an awful load of waffle.

You have zero evidence or justification to your assertion that the State invests less in the "underclass".

Zero. A big fat zero.

This is what you state - "whereas it’s very much a fact and evidenced in Irish society that the middle classes receive more in funding from the State than the underclass". It is so well known that you can't point to any evidence for it....maybe you can have a look at the likes of Paul Murphy or one of those nutjobs. But give me figures. The likes of this lady will get far more from the State than you or I will (or at least than I will - you may be on a similar trajectory of playing the system as she is).

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745698#Comment_117745698

No evidence either from you. A lazy resort to ad hominem. That is all you have. And a few random spoutings of verbal diarrhea to finish it off at the end.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745763#Comment_117745763

I’ve given you the justifications for my reasoning Donald, which was far more reasonable than your hypothetical scenario.

Is there any particular reason you’re continuing to make petty jibes towards me as a substitution for your lack of an argument? The question was never about what you or I or the particular woman in question and her family receive from the State. We were speaking in general terms before you pulled that hypothetical out of nowhere with the expectation that I was going to entertain it.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745772#Comment_117745772

No you haven't. You've given nothing. You just repeat your own misinformed opinion.

It is a thread about a lady and her family getting free housing from the state.

You said that the State doesn't give people like that as much as it gives ordinary people. I said that it gives them more. Which is demonstrably true

I pointed out that the housing itself is a big **** investment. You didn't understand that simple point (strange given that it is the topic of the thread and you continue to write novels on it)

Because you didn't understand it, I put a name on the child. I called him Jim.

But apparently pointing out that money is spent providing housing, in a thread about the provision of free housing, is "convoluted" to you.

You have ZERO evidence and ZERO argument. This lady has gotten 13 years of rent supplement so far. She is now being provided with a house. And you think she is getting LESS from the State than the average ordinary person who works. Now I am not even arguing whether she should or shouldn't get anything. Just over your ridiculous claim that she gets LESS from the State than the average ordinary person.

Can you give us a demonstration from yourself. Let's say that that lady was getting 1500 a month in rent supplement from The State every month for the past 13 years. So that is 1500 * 12 * 13 = 234,000 Euro. Do you consider yourself a member of some grouping other than the "underclass"? If so can you enlighten us as to how much more than 234,000 you have received from the state over the past 13 years for things that were not available to this lady.

But you will ignore that last point and try to deflect and run away.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745766#Comment_117745766

Really Donald? Your complaint about a lazy resort to ad hominem leaves me wondering if your attempts are actually your best effort. It didn’t appear as though you were putting any effort into them at all tbh.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745786#Comment_117745786

Still waiting on the facts from you. Deflect deflect deflect

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745788#Comment_117745788

Sure why would you bother me. You appear to have a great affinity for this lady. That is your prerogative. You may well identify with her and her life choices. Which you are entitled to do

The thread is about housing. Or as you like to now call it "a makey-uppey scenario". Do you not know that social housing is a real thing? It's not made up. I mean it is what the thread is about. You are posting on it

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745791#Comment_117745791

Did you just say...ENTITLED?!?

While you typed that flaccid response, I just bought a Canada Goose jacket online from your labour - upon which I'm sure you paid a bazillion euro on taxes. Feels good man.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745794#Comment_117745794

I gather you appear to think your replies are "smart". That's a little sad. I would expect better standard of posting on the site to be honest.

The only point I commented on was the other posters continued assertion that the State invests less in your wan than the average person. You are free to believe him as you are free to be wrong.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745797#Comment_117745797

Ah Donald would you ever lighten up? You're here on a massive rager at 2.30 am posing as an upright taxpayer making up fantastical scenarios about people called Pat and Jim and childbirth for houses conspiracies. You can't expect people not to start tickling you under the arm a little bit.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745799#Comment_117745799

Where did I mention anything about taxpayers? Where did I mention childbirth for houses "conspiracies"? You may have extrapolated from my indirect reference to the fact that there are criteria for the number of bedrooms vs. number of children and gender of the children but those are facts. Not conspiracy.

My only point was that the State does not invest less in these people than other people. I never opined whether it should spend more or less than it does. Just that it currently does not invest less in them than the average person.

Yurt2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745801#Comment_117745801

"These people"

*adopts German psychoanalyst voice*

Tell me Donald, are zeese people on trampolines and Canada Goose jackets in zee room mit you right now?

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745785#Comment_117745785

Donald you call my opinion misinformed, yet in the same post you allude to having some insight into this woman’s particular circumstances which I really don’t think you actually have, which means it is you who is either misinformed, or ill-informed on that much at least.

I also have to correct you on the idea that anyone is getting free housing from the State, they’re not, and the woman and her family in question certainly are not getting free housing from the State. The Council owns the property, and she is being accommodated as a tenant, she is paying the council for her accommodation while she is on the housing waiting list. I don’t know the exact particulars of whichever scheme she is being accommodated under, but that’s generally the way it works - tenants pay rent to whomever is providing them with accommodation. It is not being provided for free, nor is it being availed of for free.

I know what I said, and I demonstrated my point, I also know what you said, and you haven’t demonstrated your point. You came out with a hypothetical scenario which I found impossible to follow, notwithstanding the fact that it didn’t demonstrate your point to any reasonable degree, and as I said it simply threw up more questions than any point you were attempting to make.

That’s why hypotheticals are pretty useless to demonstrate anything, whereas I already demonstrated to you using your own example how it was easily possible that the working family would receive more in funding from the State than the non-working family would receive in funding from the State, and I demonstrated two fundamental reasons why - because the parents of one family were working and owned their own property, whereas the other family, the parents were not working, and they didn’t own any property.

It’s not that I’m running away from your request to give you any demonstration based upon my own circumstances. It’s simply because my own circumstances are none of your business, in the same way as the woman in question and her family circumstances are none of your business.

Your example is just another hypothetical which I’ve already pointed out is completely useless, and we can only speak in broad terms if we’re referring to two different classes or groups of people in Irish society. It doesn’t matter which one any particular individual belongs to whether it’s you or I or the woman in question when the point is being made that as a whole group, the difference in financial support which they receive from the State favours people who are working, not those people who are not working, and certainly not people who don’t own property.

Atlantic Dawn

When I was in secondary school a local scrote attending the same school torched 3 classrooms to the ground in an arson attack, fast forward 20 years later, me working me bollix off and being able to afford sweet sweet fook all to live in, him having 2 kids with some young wan and a 3 bed house provided by the council despite not having a career in shovelling sheite his entire life, what an out and out fooking idiot I feel. I feel worse for those getting the €350k mortgage and lifetime unemployed's arrive next door paying €75 a week and on the cans most of the week. Why are we housing 5 year plus unemployed people in productive areas, makes zero sense.

dotsman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745759#Comment_117745759

If she volunteers to keep having babies, she volunteers not to fend for herself, then we, the state, can volunteer to tell her to go fcuk herself. I am assuming you are talking about the Lourdes scandal? You do realise that that involved removing organs unnecessarily and without the patient's knowledge or permission. I have no idea why you brought that u. What has that to do with this?

Why do you keep defending this child abuser?

Why are you resorting to personal abuse?

JimmyVik

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745352#Comment_117745352

You would have tyo be trying to pay for your house to understand that value to be fair.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117746366#Comment_117746366

We, the State, are far more likely to tell you GFY if you ever thought the idea of forced sterilisation of women was going to get legs tbh. You’re hardly that snowflakey that you think you can suggest an idea like that and not be told straight out that your idea is stupid and expecting anyone to entertain it is indicative of your stupidity?

The reason I bring it up is because your idea, as ridiculous as it is, would inevitably to lead to compensation claims -

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/19/california-forced-sterilization-prison-survivors-reparations

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/mother-awarded-100000-as-failed-sterilisation-leads-to-tragic-pregnancy-29045991.html

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/nov/26/claredyer1

And that’s even before anyone entertains the idea of it being anything but disgusting. I have no doubt you’ll have the few intellectual willy wavers who agree with you that your idea is fierce clever altogether, and in that case I would suggest that they volunteer themselves to be sterilised before they ever pollute the gene pool with their seed - better off in the toe end of their socks.

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117746402#Comment_117746402

It’s just silly to suggest Jimmy that all property owners think the same. They very clearly do not, nor are their feelings towards anyone else in society or understanding the value of property ownership predicated upon their ownership or paying for said ownership of property.

In it’s simplest terms - my ability to pay for my own property is not influenced by, and has no bearing upon anyone else’s ability or inability to own or afford property. The inability to understand the value to the economy of social and affordable housing is predicated upon an individual being bitter and self-absorbed with a debilitating victim mentality.

That would certainly provide a reasonable explanation as the reason why the jobsworth who signed off on accommodating the woman and her family in the shìthole they did, imagining that nobody would ever know they were such a miserable cnut. I do hope there is an internal investigation as to how it was allowed to happen, but given they’re working in the public service paid for by the taxpayer, I don’t hold out much hope of accountability and responsibility ever being something they have to be concerned with.

TrampFighter

i really hate that term "forever home".

end of the road

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745683#Comment_117745683

i think we both know you don't want it to be voluntary.

given i support having state supports for children and their parents who need it, your claim that i don't care about the human rights of children has no basis.

it's also a bit rich for you to be claiming others don't care about the human rights of children or other individuals.

Donald Trump

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745806#Comment_117745806

You don't need to write an essay. How much investment have you received from the State in the past 13 years compared to that 234,000 figure? Might it be perchance that you yourself are in on the same racket and have also received similar and just don't want to admit it?

And again, I am only focused on your point that these "underclass" (your expression) receive less investment from the State than the average ordinary person. They don't

JimmyVik

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117746648#Comment_117746648

There are many people who would gladly take that apartment.

Especially if they were getting it for free rather than trying to save come up with hundreds of thousands for one.

Can you not see why people who have scrimped and scraped a deposit together, jumped through the hoops to get a mortgage and are paying for 30 or 35 years for it after that, would be a bit annoyed at her attitude.

Basically she is being handed over a quarter of a million euros and yet she is moaning.

This entitled behaviour could be quickly stamped out by implementing the following:

1. Child benefit paid in cash is only given for the first 2 children. After that a tax credit is given for any additional children.

2. If you do not have a job in Dublin you do not qualify for social housing in Dublin. There are plenty of houses that can be provided in towns around the country that are crying out for new inhabitants.

3. An annual cap on social welfare and benefits received by any individual is implemented, at say the average annual wage as per the CSO. A person who chooses not to work should not be financially better off than any person who takes on employment.

Make people contribute to the system. This is a simple numbers game. The country cannot afford to have so many net takers/drains/sponges that bleed the welfare system for all they can while not contributing one cent in tax (and no, paying VAT on items purchased with social welfare receipts does not count as paying tax because that person has not generated the income).

One eyed Jack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117746687#Comment_117746687

You’re clearly not only focused on that point Donald? You are in fact trying to ascertain my personal circumstances which you’ve been told already are none of your business. They’re irrelevant to the conversation as it pertains to a social issue, which is why I don’t care for your personal circumstances either, in much the same way as I don’t care for the personal circumstances of the woman and her family in the opening post, when her point was about the councils failure to provide suitable accommodation for people on housing waiting lists. Now if you want to discuss that point, I’ll entertain it, but otherwise, there’s nothing else to discuss as far as I’m concerned.

Jinglejangle69

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117745788#Comment_117745788

Jesus man.

You need to calm down.