[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Hyperbole rides again.

I wish that just for once your immensely sympathetic posts for benefit scroungers, political agitators and subversives, and certain types of immigrants, would extend to the DECENT, HARDWORKING, RESPONSIBLE and FAIR people of this country.

Note I said 'posts' and not you personally.

If you don't like my posts feel free to avoid them.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Cherie

That is huge chip on shoulder nonsense, very few tax payers begrudge any vulnerable, disabled or genuinely medically unfit person benefit, however when fit able bodied people choose it as a lifestyle choice then yes pardon me for being a bit annoyed at putting in a weeks work so they can sit on their arse

SUPERBLY WRITTEN.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

If you don't like my posts feel free to avoid them.

The same applies dear - so why the habitual complaints from you about mine?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Cherie

That is huge chip on shoulder nonsense, very few tax payers begrudge any vulnerable, disabled or genuinely medically unfit person benefit, however when fit able bodied people choose it as a lifestyle choice then yes pardon me for being a bit annoyed at putting in a weeks work so they can sit on their arse

Chip on shoulder...
Why would my mockery of the Mails reportage suggest I have a chip on my shoulder?
I haven't at all said I agree with one thing the woman has said, and yet I'm her champion?
I disagree with her being put in virtual stocks, and question the motives for the 'story'.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

Hardly. That woman is bringing up 8 future tax payers. Every baby born in this country has worth to the government and because birth rates are low in this country, the government economists love people like her. Do the maths...£55.5 a week is spent on each individual in the house. Some of the kids are only a few years off working age but even if we take the baby up to working age and then work out the average tax that person will pay over its working life its considerably more in pay-back.

No doubt someone will jump back at me with, "all the kids will probably claim benefits too".

This place reminds me more and more of the Jeremy Kyle show. Instead of going after people like this, why don't the press pay more attention to all those millionaire tax dodgers that are protected by our present government?.

Like Girth says: they had to dig deep to find such a story.

I do not know which world you are actually living in, but your posts become more estranged from reality by the day.

"That woman is bringing up 8 future tax payers."

"Some of the kids are only a few years off working age but even if we take the baby up to working age and then work out the average tax that person will pay over its working life its considerably more in pay-back."
.

Err....No - "all the kids will probably claim benefits too" is about right.

And on one hand your posts support unfettered immigration into this country and claim that the majority of such immigrants work and pay their way, yet here you are claiming that the 8 kids of a pair of benefit scroungers are going to find jobs when they all grow up.

There will be no jobs - even if these kids defy the conditioning which environment and habit imposes, and actually DO try to find work - which is highly improbable.

Do the Math.

"they had to dig deep to find such a story"- more presumption passed off as authorative fact. Could you please provide genuine statistical proof for this statement?

And "millionaire tax dodgers" are a completely seperate issue - not a deflection from this one.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

The same applies dear - so why the habitual complaints from you about mine?

I don't know if you've noticed but I never quote you, I just field your comments.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I don't know if you've noticed but I never quote you, I just field your comments.

If you say so - I'm sure you will find one or two of 'The Usual Suspects' to agree with you, but no more than that.

[Black Dagger]

JSA (well now Universal Credit) is actually a demoralising experience and I wouldn't wish it on anybody. The fact I only got away from it for 2 months was the worst part.

[Josy]

She was on one of the benefits shows last year she had over a thousand pound of rent arrears and wanted a new house, the council gave her a house and scrubbed her arrears

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Josy

She was on one of the benefits shows last year she had over a thousand pound of rent arrears and wanted a new house, the council gave her a house and scrubbed her arrears

So now she is back in arrears, runs a car and has had more babies?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I do not know which world you are actually living in, but your posts become more estranged from reality by the day.

"That woman is bringing up 8 future tax payers."

"Some of the kids are only a few years off working age but even if we take the baby up to working age and then work out the average tax that person will pay over its working life its considerably more in pay-back."
.

Err....No - "all the kids will probably claim benefits too" is about right.

And on one hand your posts support unfettered immigration into this country and claim that the majority of such immigrants work and pay their way, yet here you are claiming that the 8 kids of a pair of benefit scroungers are going to find jobs when they all grow up.

There will be no jobs - even if these kids defy the conditioning which environment and habit imposes, and actually DO try to find work - which is highly improbable.

Do the Math.

"they had to dig deep to find such a story"- more presumption passed off as authorative fact. Could you please provide genuine statistical proof for this statement?

And "millionaire tax dodgers" are a completely seperate issue - not a deflection from this one.

I changed my mind, best not impose exacting standards for others if you can't stick to your own rules.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I changed my mind, best not impose exacting standards for others if you can't stick to your own rules.

And your point was?

"Tis not the style of writing
Nor the size of text
'Tis the merit in what's written
And what will be written next."

Kirk The Poet 2016.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No, it is not the childrens fault at all, no more than it is the childrens fault in families where the dad is doing a 9 stretch for armed robbery and the heroin addicted mummy has 7 kids by 6 different fathers - all on benefits.

All I know is that in this case 8 kids would NOT BE THERE to suffer if the 'poor' mother had exercised a little responsibility instead of indulging her stupid and selfish desire to breed children like flies JUST BECAUSE she KNOWS THAT SHE CAN DO UNDER THIS COUNTRY'S FECKED UP BENEFITS SYSTEM.

I don't entirely disagree with that but the moral thing to do would be to say "This can't happen ANY MORE", as in, make the 2 kid max only apply to children who are born AFTER the point that that is decided.

No, she shouldn't have had 8 kids believing the state would provide for them. If she had known it wouldn't you're right, she likely wouldn't have had so many. So the right thing to do is say to the generation growing up NOW, "you will only get extra money for up to two children". Because... and I don't mean to point out the obvious here... but in the cases where there are already multiple kids, it's sort of too late. I mean you could try to stuff them back in but I'm not sure it would end well. And those kids who are ALREADY HERE and have done nothing wrong OTHER THAN BE BORN do not deserve to suffer for their parents' mistakes.

[Amy Jade]

I remember the show she was on and remember the council waving her arrears...I also remember she had Sky TV and bought the kids expensive clothes and that her house was pretty disgusting.

If the council gave her a second chance and waved her first set of arrears and she claimed to be struggling at that point why have they had yet another baby and why have they gotten behind in their rent?

Seems to me some people just want to live off others for free, she should make do with what she gets

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Way to generalize just from one post. I have no problem with people who genuinely need benefits in order to survive but people like this women are the definition of scroungers who give others in need a bad name, it's not particularly hard to see that.

People always say that but when push comes to shove they'll tar everyone on benefits with the same brush.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Josy

She was on one of the benefits shows last year she had over a thousand pound of rent arrears and wanted a new house, the council gave her a house and scrubbed her arrears

Yes its a mess
but she she still went on ITV1HD This Morning

[Ammi]

...there is something odd about this story..I don't know Arista, you said this lady just appeared on Good Morning yesterday ..?...but the penalty charges notice is from 2013, this was over two years ago that the story first appeared and this isn't her and her children's situation now..





...anyways, it isn't totally clear what the update is but apparently her ex-partner, the father of the children did help out and was very supportive...they did manage to get a larger, 4 bedroom home which was needed, she did start training at college to become a mechanic but I don't know if it's something that she succeeded in or not but she did try anyway....

“She wants to work and has enrolled on a two-day-a-week college course where she is learning to be a mechanic.“She is currently at Level 1 but will progress onto Level 2 soon.

“She wants to set up a mobile mechanic business where she will attend callouts in a van.

“It is aimed at women who struggle to do the basics when it comes to car maintenance such as changing tyres, repairing windscreen wipers and changing water and oil.

“She is determined to work and be successful.”



...she has an agent/manager/whatever though../crikey everyone seems to have managers, I need me a manager..who 'allegedly' is trying to get her a TV career as well, but again..I don't know if that's true..this doesn't seem to be a current story so confusing...good luck to her anyway/whatever she's doing, I hope that it's all working out for her and her family...

[Ammi]

..an article/blog where this story has been shown before and updated in December 2013.../...using the exact same pictures that I presume are meant to be current...


http://mashariazgitonga.blogspot.co....-benefits.html

[jennyjuniper]

This makes me so mad. Hard working men and women limit their families so that they can go out to work to support the children they have. Whereas this woman and her childrens father just keep producing and expect the rest of us to pay for it. WHY THE HELL SHOULD WE?
Also if she can afford a car, she can afford to pay her rent.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...there is something odd about this story..I don't know Arista, you said this lady just appeared on Good Morning yesterday ..?...but the penalty charges notice is from 2013, this was over two years ago that the story first appeared and this isn't her and her children's situation now..





...anyways, it isn't totally clear what the update is but apparently her ex-partner, the father of the children did help out and was very supportive...they did manage to get a larger, 4 bedroom home which was needed, she did start training at college to become a mechanic but I don't know if it's something that she succeeded in or not but she did try anyway....

“She wants to work and has enrolled on a two-day-a-week college course where she is learning to be a mechanic.“She is currently at Level 1 but will progress onto Level 2 soon.

“She wants to set up a mobile mechanic business where she will attend callouts in a van.

“It is aimed at women who struggle to do the basics when it comes to car maintenance such as changing tyres, repairing windscreen wipers and changing water and oil.

“She is determined to work and be successful.”



...she has an agent/manager/whatever though../crikey everyone seems to have managers, I need me a manager..who 'allegedly' is trying to get her a TV career as well, but again..I don't know if that's true..this doesn't seem to be a current story so confusing...good luck to her anyway/whatever she's doing, I hope that it's all working out for her and her family...

I love and admire your genuine generosity and charitable spirit Ammi but this article is nothing but propaganda for this woman and is written for the most mercenary of reasons.

Anyone who supposedly has the intelligence to undertake a college course KNOWS that being employed or self-employed and running any type of business is just not compatible with breeding large numbers of children in relatively quick succession, because those children DEMAND constant 24/7 attention, leaving zilch time for any type of other work.

“She is determined to work and be successful.” then, is nothing more than B.S. self promotion - an attempt to pacify potential critics and render her in a more 'favourable' light.

I think the fact that she has an 'Agent' says it all really, and she is nothing more than a cunning, mercenary self-seeker who wants La Dolce Vita without working for it and - drawing her plans on the success of other Social Leeches such as Josie Cunningham, the Leeds 'Model' (L.O.L.) - is using 'Notoriety' to achieve that Good Life.

Just as with the now famous non-entities who rocketed to fame after 'sex tapes of themselves' were covertly made public by themselves, I would not be the least surprised to discover that this useless bitch was the source of this story and secretly responsible for 'feeding the media' with the details.

The really sad thing about these benefit system abusing twats, is that - as Cherie said - it causes ordinary working, tax-paying people who are struggling by on less than £500 per week, to believe that ALL people on benefits are scroungers, and lends conviction that Cameron's Benefit Cuts program is the right and proper thing to do., which is just NOT the real case at all.

[Amy Jade]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

People always say that but when push comes to shove they'll tar everyone on benefits with the same brush.

I don't think that's true at all - I have members of my family on benifit who I feel deserve it through unfortunate circumstances - every issue is different but this woman and her boyfriend imo are irrisponsible in continuing to have children when they can't support them and expect the tax payers to do it for them.

I personally find it quite difficult to feel sorry for the woman here moaning that £500 a week for free isn't enough when she and her other half have been given so many chances and free let offs and you hear of people with serious health issues struggling to afford to support themselves on a pittance the government awards them with.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I love and admire your genuine generosity and charitable spirit Ammi but this article is nothing but propaganda for this woman and is written for the most mercenary of reasons.

Anyone who supposedly has the intelligence to undertake a college course KNOWS that being employed or self-employed and running any type of business is just not compatible with breeding large numbers of children in relatively quick succession, because those children DEMAND constant 24/7 attention, leaving zilch time for any type of other work.

“She is determined to work and be successful.” then, is nothing more than B.S. self promotion - an attempt to pacify potential critics and render her in a more 'favourable' light.

I think the fact that she has an 'Agent' says it all really, and she is nothing more than a cunning, mercenary self-seeker who wants La Dolce Vita without working for it and - drawing her plans on the success of other Social Leeches such as Josie Cunningham, the Leeds 'Model' (L.O.L.) - is using 'Notoriety' to achieve that Good Life.

Just as with the now famous non-entities who rocketed to fame after 'sex tapes of themselves' were covertly made public by themselves, I would not be the least surprised to discover that this useless bitch was the source of this story and secretly responsible for 'feeding the media' with the details.

The really sad thing about these benefit system abusing twats, is that - as Cherie said - it causes ordinary working, tax-paying people who are struggling by on less than £500 per week, to believe that ALL people on benefits are scroungers, and lends conviction that Cameron's Benefit Cuts program is the right and proper thing to do., which is just NOT the real case at all.

...the thing is though, Kirk...she won't be able to continue to claim benefits if she's declaring any income made from selling her story to different medias and obviously the tax office will be aware of these stories etc...so, she is actually attempting to create an income, which will take her off benefits and possibly gain a better life for her children just by doing this..?..it may not be something that all of the public would approve of as a means to an income but it is 'self created' by types of media as well, their 'thirst' for these kind of stories ....obviously it won't be a permanent income, it won't be long lasting but it could give her the opportunity to be able to make it gro and work for her/fitting something around her family life...

[Ammi]

..anyways, the odd thing about the story is that this is a story from over two years ago and being told as if it's recent and not an update..

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I don't entirely disagree with that but the moral thing to do would be to say "This can't happen ANY MORE", as in, make the 2 kid max only apply to children who are born AFTER the point that that is decided.

No, she shouldn't have had 8 kids believing the state would provide for them. If she had known it wouldn't you're right, she likely wouldn't have had so many. So the right thing to do is say to the generation growing up NOW, "you will only get extra money for up to two children". Because... and I don't mean to point out the obvious here... but in the cases where there are already multiple kids, it's sort of too late. I mean you could try to stuff them back in but I'm not sure it would end well. And those kids who are ALREADY HERE and have done nothing wrong OTHER THAN BE BORN do not deserve to suffer for their parents' mistakes.

I WAS NOT disagreeing with you T.S - I actually agree with what you said and cannot fault what you say above.

It is not the children's fault and you are right - these kids should NOT be made to suffer in any way for the 'sins of the parents'.

It is a problem the parents have bequeathed us for us to solve - it's not fair, but we cannot do anything about that.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...the thing is though, Kirk...she won't be able to continue to claim benefits if she's declaring any income made from selling her story to different medias and obviously the tax office will be aware of these stories etc...so, she is actually attempting to create an income, which will take her off benefits and possibly gain a better life for her children just by doing this..?..it may not be something that all of the public would approve of as a means to an income but it is 'self created' by types of media as well, their 'thirst' for these kind of stories ....obviously it won't be a permanent income, it won't be long lasting but it could give her the opportunity to be able to make it gro and work for her/fitting something around her family life...

You have such a genuinely beautiful soul Ammi, I think you could even convince me to vote 'IN' in the EU Referendum.

Seriously though, I agree that if she is successful in her covert aspirations, then that will be good news for the tax payer as she will be off benefits.

(And I'd like to claim that I'd already thought of that..... But I'd be lying. )