[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

You are not only one of the most intelligent and knowledgeable members on here Joey but one of the more rational.

Whenever we have held opposing views your posts remain balanced and your attitude civil.

I applaud the fact that you discern between someone stating facts gleaned from personal experience and someone merely attacking those genuine people who have to rely on benefits.

What others seem to miss, is the fact that the obese mother of 12 who wrongfully receives benefits of £900 per week I was referring to, and other fraudsters like her, are the very ones giving ammunition to the Anti-Benefits & Bash The Poor Brigades.

Without these scum the media would not be able to highlight such cases and influence public opinion that these cases are the norm.

Thank you Joey for accepting my posts in the manner in which they were intended.

Coming to what you say in your post; I cannot fault any of which you say.

I am shortly going to be posting my very last post on here Joey and starting a new thread to do so, before deleting my account, and I think you should find a lot of what I have to say in it very interesting and enlightening.

She isn't a fraudster though, the fact there is/are large families on benefits is not enough reason to demonise them in the media either.
By branding them scum you've shown that you subscribe to the model as portrayed in the right wing tabloids.
they are scapegoats, trawled out across the pages when there's something to cover up as it's a guaranteed headline grabber.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

She isn't a fraudster though, the fact there is/are large families on benefits is not enough reason to demonise them in the media either.
By branding them scum you've shown that you subscribe to the model as portrayed in the right wing tabloids.
they are scapegoats, trawled out across the pages when there's something to cover up as it's a guaranteed headline grabber.

Kizzy - You are persisting in the same misconceptions and misrepresentations:

She IS a fraudster because I KNOW HER PERSONALLY. She is obese through gluttony and has NEVER WORKED due to having her first baby at 15 years of age and ELEVEN OTHERS SINCE, but she has NEVER HAD ANY DISABILITY OR CHRONIC ILLNESS which could have prevented her from working.

I am REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO THE ONE WOMAN ABOVE WHO HAS ALWAYS CLAIMED BUT NEVER HAD A LEGITIMATE REASON TO DO SO - APART FROM CONTINUOUSLY BREEDING BABIES WITH DIFFERENT ABSENTEE FATHERS WHICH SHE REALLY COULD NOT AFFORD TO DO.

I AM NOT THEREFORE, AND HAVE NEVER DONE - ANYWHERE IN MY POSTS - REFERRED TO ANY LARGE FAMILIES ON BENEFITS PER SE, OR ANY OTHER CLAIMANTS PER SE, ONLY ONES WHICH I PERSONALLY KNOW TO BE CLAIMING FRAUDULENTLY.

Nor do I agree that any GENUINE CLAIMANTS should be DEMONISED BY THE MEDIA and I AM NOT BRANDING ANY GENUINE CLAIMANTS 'SCUM' - IF YOU READ MY POST CORRECTLY, YOU WILL SEE THAT I AM BRANDING BENEFIT FRAUDSTERS AS SCUM.

So I am NOT subscribing to any model as portrayed in the right wing tabloids.

I cannot control what the media publish and I have even stated several times that I agree with Joey that claimants are being made an issue by the government to deflect from the failure of their other - more grave - policies.

I stated that the obese woman I know above was in receipt of £900 per week, and I was attacked as a liar and ridiculed because of the amount among other things. Well Josy's FOI post proved me right, but I am still havin g to defend myself against attack for things I JUST HAVE NOT SAID.

It is wearing, time consuming and futile, and it is not my fault if what I state is continually misconstrued when I state it clearly and in the Queen's English.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Kizzy - You are persisting in the same misconceptions and misrepresentations:

She IS a fraudster because I KNOW HER PERSONALLY. She is obese through gluttony and has NEVER WORKED due to having her first baby at 15 years of age and ELEVEN OTHERS SINCE, but she has NEVER HAD ANY DISABILITY OR CHRONIC ILLNESS which could have prevented her from working.

I am REFERRING SPECIFICALLY TO THE ONE WOMAN ABOVE WHO HAS ALWAYS CLAIMED BUT NEVER HAD A LEGITIMATE REASON TO DO SO - APART FROM CONTINUOUSLY BREEDING BABIES WITH DIFFERENT ABSENTEE FATHERS WHICH SHE REALLY COULD NOT AFFORD TO DO.

I AM NOT THEREFORE, AND HAVE NEVER DONE - ANYWHERE IN MY POSTS - REFERRED TO ANY LARGE FAMILIES ON BENEFITS PER SE, OR ANY OTHER CLAIMANTS PER SE, ONLY ONES WHICH I PERSONALLY KNOW TO BE CLAIMING FRAUDULENTLY.

Nor do I agree that any GENUINE CLAIMANTS should be DEMONISED BY THE MEDIA and I AM NOT BRANDING ANY GENUINE CLAIMANTS 'SCUM' - IF YOU READ MY POST CORRECTLY, YOU WILL SEE THAT I AM BRANDING BENEFIT FRAUDSTERS AS SCUM.

So I am NOT subscribing to any model as portrayed in the right wing tabloids.

I cannot control what the media publish and I have even stated several times that I agree with Joey that claimants are being made an issue by the government to deflect from the failure of their other - more grave - policies.

I stated that the obese woman I know above was in receipt of £900 per week, and I was attacked as a liar and ridiculed because of the amount among other things. Well Josy's FOI post proved me right, but I am still havin g to defend myself against attack for things I JUST HAVE NOT SAID.

It is wearing, time consuming and futile, and it is not my fault if what I state is continually misconstrued when I state it clearly and in the Queen's English.

It sounds like a pretty sad story though to me. Who would really want to have a child at 15, when you're just a child yourself? Sounds to me that no matter how much free things she got, she's actually missed out on having a proper life herself

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It sounds like a pretty sad story though to me. Who would really want to have a child at 15, when you're just a child yourself? Sounds to me that no matter how much free things she got, she's actually missed out on having a proper life herself

I agree Niamh, but we have to remember that we tend to view others and their actions by our standards. None of her family have ever worked and the die was cast really from an early age. She sees no disadvantage or loss in the life she has, because it's unfortunately the way she was raised.

If you and your partner had adopted her at say, 3 years old, her life choices and life would probably have turned out completely different.

As it is - in my opinion - she is happy and definitely thinks she has 'one up' on the system and the world.

My son has worked part-time, but as many hours as he could, all the way through school and university, and still is, for minimum wage, having gained his law degree and saddled himself with £30,000 of loans.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I agree Niamh, but we have to remember that we tend to view others and their actions by our standards. None of her family have ever worked and the die was cast really from an early age. She sees no disadvantage or loss in the life she has, because it's unfortunately the way she was raised.

If you and your partner had adopted her at say, 3 years old, her life choices and life would probably have turned out completely different.

As it is - in my opinion - she is happy and definitely thinks she has 'one up' on the system and the world.

My son has worked part-time, but as many hours as he could, all the way through school and university, and still is, for minimum wage, having gained his law degree and saddled himself with £30,000 of loans.

Well there's always going to be people like that and no system is fool proof really. The way I look at it is, would I like to trade places with her or have my kids trade places with her? And the answer is no. I feel sorry for her that she will never have the sense of achievement of earning a wage herself or truly know what it is to be independent

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well there's always going to be people like that and no system is fool proof really. The way I look at it is, would I like to trade places with her or have my kids trade places with her? And the answer is no. I feel sorry for her that she will never have the sense of achievement of earning a wage herself or truly know what it is to be independent

I agree again, and stated in an earlier response that she has nothing that I envy or want. I know my children wouldn't trade places with her either.

I also agree about the 'sense of achievement', but my sympathy for her is severely tempered by the fact that I know her and she is not really my 'cup of tea' to put it politely.

I do have genuine sympathy for people caught up in a poverty trap though because I've been there - though on £900 a week she hardly qualifies - and I do think that no government has really addressed this disgusting truth of the low paid and those on inadequate benefits. There always seems to be plenty of public money ever available for successive governments to squander in other areas.