[Miranda123]

Carole Malone, another day it how it is Lady, had the following to say about KP in her column today

Headed:

Your £40m will buy a lot of Cabs, Katie

Theres been much debate about whether katie Price is right to accept a £1,000-day-taxi service to take her disable son Harvey to school. Of course, its not right. Nor is it fair to those mums and dads denied this service because their Council couldnt affordit.

Katie Price is worth an estimated £40 million and is making another £500,000 for three weeks on Celebrity Big Brother. And I dont give a stuff that she might be legally entitled to this Super Taxi because of the small print int he benefits rules.
Yes, the 100-mile round trip to Harvey's school everyday if "f..king expensive" (her words).
In which case, why doesnt she do what other parents do when their child needs to go to a special school - move closer, make sacrifices (although its hard to think what sacrifices shes have to make with £40 million in the bank)

Price's mother Amy says "Its hurtful people can criticise Katie for doing the best she can for Harvey".

Im sorry, Pricey's got £40m to do whats best for Harvey. What about doing whats best for parents with kids like Harvey but are skint?

And if I lived in West Sussex, which forks out this cash, Id scream blue murder about councillors who cut vital sevrices for hard up working people and charge the old for care homes, yet fund taxis for a woman who is disgustingly rich (excuse the money jealousy, this woman does write for the Mirror after all, youd never get that in the Sun)

Whats happened here is a blatant abuse of a system (and its the systems fault) supposed to help people who cant help themselves. Not to fund a super rich celebrity who might go shouting to the press about victimisation of her disable son if she didnt get her way. Carole Malone

This echos what I said earlier on another thread, the Welfare State was invented so that those at the top, could contribute to those at the bottom, those STILL at the top (ie: with lots of dosh) are not supposed to be the ones taking OUT of the system, they are just supposed to pay into it so that kids like Harvey from less well off homes, get the same chances he does!

No one would begrudge any disabled child a chance, and Katie Price is doing that by using those funds that could be used for another kid on a waiting list somewhere in West Sussex.........

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by Miranda123

Carole Malone, another day it how it is Lady, had the following to say about KP in her column today

Headed:

Your £40m will buy a lot of Cabs, Katie

Theres been much debate about whether katie Price is right to accept a £1,000-day-taxi service to take her disable son Harvey to school. Of course, its not right. Nor is it fair to those mums and dads denied this service because their Council couldnt affordit.

Katie Price is worth an estimated £40 million and is making another £500,000 for three weeks on Celebrity Big Brother. And I dont give a stuff that she might be legally entitled to this Super Taxi because of the small print int he benefits rules.
Yes, the 100-mile round trip to Harvey's school everyday if "f..king expensive" (her words).
In which case, why doesnt she do what other parents do when their child needs to go to a special school - move closer, make sacrifices (although its hard to think what sacrifices shes have to make with £40 million in the bank)

Price's mother Amy says "Its hurtful people can criticise Katie for doing the best she can for Harvey".

Im sorry, Pricey's got £40m to do whats best for Harvey. What about doing whats best for parents with kids like Harvey but are skint?

And if I lived in West Sussex, which forks out this cash, Id scream blue murder about councillors who cut vital sevrices for hard up working people and charge the old for care homes, yet fund taxis for a woman who is disgustingly rich (excuse the money jealousy, this woman does write for the Mirror after all, youd never get that in the Sun)

Whats happened here is a blatant abuse of a system (and its the systems fault) supposed to help people who cant help themselves. Not to fund a super rich celebrity who might go shouting to the press about victimisation of her disable son if she didnt get her way. Carole Malone

This echos what I said earlier on another thread, the Welfare State was invented so that those at the top, could contribute to those at the bottom, those STILL at the top (ie: with lots of dosh) are not supposed to be the ones taking OUT of the system, they are just supposed to pay into it so that kids like Harvey from less well off homes, get the same chances he does!

No one would begrudge any disabled child a chance, and Katie Price is doing that by using those funds that could be used for another kid on a waiting list somewhere in West Sussex.........

Why are they still saying a grand?

But i agree with the rest.

[sampvt]

No surprises there then

[JoshBB]

She pays into the system, she receives what the system entitled her to. It's all fair.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

She pays into the system, she receives what the system entitled her to. It's all fair.

Yep. the Mirror story said that.

[Miranda123]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

She pays into the system, she receives what the system entitled her to. It's all fair.

could you read it properly please, and also read literature about the welfare state

I cant say it any clearer

IT IS THERE FOR THOSE FORTUNATE, TO PAY INTO A FUND FOR THE LESS FORTUNATE

WHEN THE RICH START TAKING THEIR MONEY OUT AGAIN, THE POOR/LOW INCOME/DISABLED ETC CANT GET THE SERVICES THE NEED!

[Jack The Cat]

Originally Posted by Miranda123

could you read it properly please, and also read literature about the welfare state

I cant say it any clearer

IT IS THERE FOR THOSE FORTUNATE, TO PAY INTO A FUND FOR THE LESS FORTUNATE

WHEN THE RICH START TAKING THEIR MONEY OUT AGAIN, THE POOR/LOW INCOME/DISABLED ETC CANT GET THE SERVICES THE NEED!

Well put, it is that simple and nothing to do with a child or distance to a school.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Miranda123

could you read it properly please, and also read literature about the welfare state

I cant say it any clearer

IT IS THERE FOR THOSE FORTUNATE, TO PAY INTO A FUND FOR THE LESS FORTUNATE

WHEN THE RICH START TAKING THEIR MONEY OUT AGAIN, THE POOR/LOW INCOME/DISABLED ETC CANT GET THE SERVICES THE NEED!

[tormented mind]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

She pays into the system, she receives what the system entitled her to. It's all fair.

This, and do not forget it is for Harvey not kp.

[Jack The Cat]

Originally Posted by tormented mind

This, and do not forget it is for Harvey not kp.

Harvey doesn't need the money he has an extremely rich Mother to pay for what he needs.

[MB.]

Yes, Carole did brilliantly on CBB, didn't she?...

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by MB.

Yes, Carole did brilliantly on CBB, didn't she?...

Well dare I say , no she didn't do well another lady who is hated for being blunt ,I am beginning to think that old saying "The truth hurts" fits these scenarios perfectly.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Well dare I say , no she didn't do well another lady who is hated for being blunt ,I am beginning to think that old saying "The truth hurts" fits these scenarios perfectly.

[abhorson]

The next book may not go down so well. Unlike Katie!

[Lstan]

how far does she live from this schoo for it to cost £1000 a day?! thats crazy.

[Jack The Cat]

I totally agree with the article.

[Marsh.]

So, she's obligated to pay large amounts of tax from her fortune into this system but is not entitled to use the benefits this system offers because of her fortune?

Makes sense. Not.

[Jack The Cat]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

So, she's obligated to pay large amounts of tax from her fortune into this system but is not entitled to use the benefits this system offers because of her fortune?

Makes sense. Not.

Makes perfect sense to me. She doesn't need any benefits, even if she is legally entitled. Benefits should be reserved for those who really need them, it is a limited pot after all.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Jack The Cat

Makes perfect sense to me. She doesn't need any benefits, even if she is legally entitled. Benefits should be reserved for those who really need them, it is a limited pot after all.

Is it limited because of people like Katie Price? No. It's limited because of the people in charge of the pot being crap managers.

Also, Harvey fits the bill for someone who really needs them. Not Katie. Harvey.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Is it limited because of people like Katie Price? No. It's limited because of the people in charge of the pot being crap managers.

Also, Harvey fits the bill for someone who really needs them. Not Katie. Harvey.

I can;t believe what you just typed.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by abhorson

I can;t believe what you just typed.

Poor you.

[MB.]

Originally Posted by Jack The Cat

Makes perfect sense to me. She doesn't need any benefits, even if she is legally entitled. Benefits should be reserved for those who really need them, it is a limited pot after all.

Her son does.

[Jack The Cat]

Originally Posted by MB.

Her son does.

As his parent and legal guardian, the money is paid to KP (The multi millionaire) not her son (A child). If she wished to she could refuse the benefit and pay for any required care, etc out of her very large fortune.

She has chosen not to do that, it doesn't make her a bad Mother, just in my opinion a bad millionaire.

[bots]

this argument has been done to death already. There is no means testing on the benefit. KP's lad needs to go to that school because his local one was shut down. KP has not behaved improperly in this regard at all.

if people have an issue with the benefit not being means tested, they should take it up with the government, not Katie Price

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Jack The Cat

Makes perfect sense to me. She doesn't need any benefits, even if she is legally entitled. Benefits should be reserved for those who really need them, it is a limited pot after all.

Then shouldn't people like KP be exempt from having to pay large sums of money into the benefit system? Perhaps she could use that money to pay for her disabled sons school journeys.