What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Note in Post #3372**

Actually China is more civilised than the west. If you want to see the future for the west, look at China.

Came here to post about here.

She's lapping it all up.

You can see her setting up a charity of some sort and drawing a tasty salary. Ironically….she could benefit a lot from this.

What happened to her was dreadful. The guy should be in prison.

I was assulted…..reported it, guy arrested, admitted the assault but nothing happened

I've had 2 bikes stolen and 1 bike damaged beyond repair from an attempted theft……all reported and nothing came from them.

I think there's a strange contradiction in criticising people on benefits having children and also knowing we need more children to run the country as the population ages.

If you're on benefits with a big family of 3 or 4 children, then you must have a very low expectation for your quality of life. And maybe they're right...

I'm in a 2 income house, careful with money, finally saved enough to buy a house. Have one child and weighing whether we can afford to have another child if we also want to live what my parents generation would consider any kind of middle class lifestyle. By which I mean having enough to do nice things as a family, buy groceries, pay the mortgage and probably have a family holiday most years, save some money for school and uni for the child and have a pension to fall back on in later life.

But I'm wondering if my expectations are wrong and people on benefits are more realistic. The era of normal people working on median income and owning a house, having a big family of 3 or 4 children and living comfortably, are coming to the end

I siad that last week it was only a matter of time before she started to milk the whole thing and it didn't take her very long to do it.

How long before one of those get her to run in the next election?

Are these kids of families on benefits going to work as adults or become layabouts like their parents though?

If the latter, they won't be "running" anything, running to the bookies perhaps.

Times change,. The days of 'The Simpsons' family: 1 x wage earner and 1 x homemaker, their own house and 3 or 4 kids are well gone for various reasons. And they're not coming back.

Schools being good makes no difference if there is zero encouragement from home.LeBron James has spent millions on a school in Ohio and the results in the school are horrific, and I suspect he could keep spending money and it would make no difference as people who generally do well do well in school because there is some emphasis on education within the household not because the teachers or school facilities are brilliant.

It can only make a difference if education is encouraged.No point having a wonderful school good facilities and then as soon as the kid goes home they aren't in an environment which encourages them to study and work hard and values education.

One of the key factors on how well kids do across all income and ethnic categories is reading books. People who read as children do much better in life than those who don't.Kids who read books read because their parents get them interested in it and encourage them and this sparks curiosity amongst children which is a key to learning.

Really? why is that?

In fairness multitude of research has been done on this and is pretty conclusive. Attractive people do better when all other things equal in most cases.

Doesn't necessarily lead to life on "easy mode" but does make things just that bit easier.

I'm cautious about furthering the pity party and weird rabbit hole you're trying to go down but a lot has to do with how attractive people at assumed to have certain qualities within societies and the associated benefits of these.

For example, attractive people tending to be more confident and assured and you get better partners (through wider choice) , careers and opportunities in life. Given that most attractive people would take car of their bodies, it stand to reason they are physically healthier too. Regarding natural intelligence, well that's quite hard to measure in the first place and I'd say attractiveness has no correlation there.

Agree that these are important too and is why I said earlier that attractiveness "doesn't necessarily lead to life on "easy mode" but does make things just that bit easier."

There's moments and opportunities in life that are impacted by certain traits to a varying degree but often, a huge part of it comes down to sheer chance.

Wonder will anyone trot out the ‘but they’re not paying tax!!!!’ line, that was, usually, the last gasp attack on these women.

I don't see any reason to attack them, they should be paying tax just like any other self employed individual. If they don't then they are committing tax evasion, and saying that is just stating facts, not attacking them.

No, attacking them would imply some level of hate or at least some ill will on my side, which I have none. So I'm only stating a fact.

Is It? You had the term 'sex workers' but also chose to call them whores. It's pretty clear what you meant.

Sex worker is a statement of fact as they work in the sex industry. Whore is a pejorative which isn't accurate as they're not prostitutes. So, it's clear what you mean.

Just on the recent discussion here, my controversial opinion is prostitution should be legal in Ireland and I think it is very backward that it isn't.

Can you take part in sexual activity virtually? I would have thought it's an in person activity but I'd defer to you if you know.

Is there a distinction between any sex worker and a prostitute? Is a stripper a prostitute because the dancing is a sexual act?

But the obvious question is how you arrived a the conclusion they have questionable morals?