Thanks for answering questions I didn't ask.I think our collective behavior, that means seriously disabled children are left in crowded conditions are deplorable.
Her behavior, you mean having sex, that is of course acceptable. Giving birth, perfectly acceptable.
Do I wish her children were brought into a more stable environment, absolutely.
But the situation is, as it is. I assume you find her 'behavior' unacceptable?
What do you propose to do about it now, and what do you propose should be done for future instances of this 'behavior'?
You can be peeved off all you want, but your taxes are so insignificant in paying for her needs.
In fact, as I understand it, she doesn't have a house of her own, so not only are your taxes insignificant, they are not actually paying for her needs.
On the other hand, she looks after her disabled child. How much would it cost the tax payer for full-time medical care? This would be required if she wasn't being responsible and didn't look after her child.
My guess is she is saving the State, and you, a small fortune. So show some gratitude.
If all those irresponsible people were more responsible then the money that's wasted on them could go towards more productive uses
Her behavior, you mean having sex, that is of course acceptable. Giving birth, perfectly acceptable.
Do I wish her children were brought into a more stable environment, absolutely.
Thanks for answering questions I didn't ask.
I assume you find her 'behavior' unacceptable?
What do you propose to do about it now, and what do you propose should be done for future instances of this 'behavior'?
You're missing the point. Her's is one case of many. I
If all those irresponsible people were more responsible then the money that's wasted on them could go towards more productive uses.
Socialists have a big problem with the concept of limited resources. The answer is easy....just tax the "rich"
Point taken.Money trees!
This is the section of society where socialists mostly seek their mandate from so you should not be surprised by the deflective/absurd answers/analogies your are getting on this and other epic threads which have arisen here recently.
Though I am surprised that so many long established and intelligent posters would continue to engage with such a level of debate!
Point taken.
The Horseman didn't mention their own taxes, they said "We" are looking after them. Since she is in no way providing for herself or her children then logically others are doing it for her. Those others are the "we".Get of your high horse (no pun intended), but your personal tax contribution to society is so inadequate, barely relevant, to anything in that woman's life. This notion that 'your' taxes pay for 'everything', for everybody is delusional.
We" are looking after them. Since she is in no way providing for herself or her children then logically others are doing it for her. Those others are the "we".
The lack of compassion on here is astounding at times. The couple in this story, yes that's right there is a partner in all of this who seems to have been forgotten about here, are in dire circumstances. If they're not entitled to housing them who the hell is?
if you look at these two cases
On the face of this we have a 28 yr old person and her partner who have five children between them. One of which was conceived while they were homeless. They say they are living in cramped conditions but yet added to their family despite the fact they were homeless and therefore added to an already difficult situation.
We also recently had another case where a 32 yr old mother of two was on the housing list for 12 yrs with two children aged 4 and the second was 4 months. This person decided when they were 20 yr old to go on the housing list rather than trying to get a career etc
I'm happy to look at these two cases. Beforehand, I was wrong to reference your personal tax contributions earlier.
You apology is accepted ( I suspect you feel as strongly about this issue as I do but from different sides of the fence).
I'm not going to sit here and advocate that the situation she is in is desirable or ok. But people do make mistakes, and all we know about this woman is what we heard on radio.
I don't know if her partner is father to all her children, or if she had a different partner before bailing out on her? Leaving her with children to bring up? I don't know if she a job previously and subsequently lost it?
She did reference that she was paying rent to a landlord in accommodation that was unfit for habitation. So should she have stayed, paying rent, in a location that is unhealthy for children?
Aside all that, there could multiple other factors to consider as to why she is in the situation that she finds herself in.
We do know however that she has a child that has cerebral palsy and requires full-time healthcare. We know that child doesn't even have a bed.
So, to answer your question, no I can't understand why people feel the way they do on this site.
Do you think that someone on the housing waiting list should cancel their lives in terms of starting a family?
Deciding to go on housing list v trying to get a career are not comparable options. It is not an option for people to choose in.
Some people are from deprived socio-economic backgrounds, they don't have the education, the confidence, the abilities to compete with everyone else. It is a problem no doubt, but probably best that you propose your solutions at this point.
I came from a working class background, left school at 16 (back in the late 80's during the last recession) to get a job to contribute to the household. I went to college part time while working full time in my mid twenties, got a degree, a masters and am currently studying for a professional qualification.
I don't buy that at all. The RTB would be all over the Landlord. I work with a guy who owns an apartment which he rents out. The tenant wrecked the place and then complained that it wasn't up to scratch. The RTB insisted that he repair everything, despite the fact that the tenant damaged it and wasn't paying the rent. Threshold were also involved. So, she could have stayed put and used the State services to force the Landlord to bring the place up to standard.She did reference that she was paying rent to a landlord in accommodation that was unfit for habitation. So should she have stayed, paying rent, in a location that is unhealthy for children?
I agree. Where I have a problem is the poverty industry pretending that the root cause of all of this is economic. It isn't. Poverty is a symptom of a social problem, or basket of inter-related social problems. While all the emphasis is placed on treating the symptom the root causes will never be tackled.Some people are from deprived socio-economic backgrounds, they don't have the education, the confidence, the abilities to compete with everyone else. It is a problem no doubt, but probably best that you propose your solutions at this point.
Where I have a problem is the poverty industry pretending that the root cause of all of this is economic. It isn't. Poverty is a symptom of a social problem, or basket of inter-related social problems. While all the emphasis is placed on treating the symptom the root causes will never be tackled.
My solution is education, mainly primary school level. Build more schools in the small number of areas where most social problems are concentrated, hire more teachers, lower the pupil-teacher ratio to 12 or 16, have breakfast clubs and homework clubs and teach the kids how to cook and vote and basically try to replace the parent with the school as the primary influence on the children because the root cause of all of this is bad parenting. That may not mean the parents aren't trying, it may not even be the parents of the particular child, but poverty is a result of a culture which is dislocated from, and incompatible with, mainstream society.
I don't buy that at all.
My solution is education, mainly primary school level. Build more schools in the small number of areas where most social problems are concentrated, hire more teachers, lower the pupil-teacher ratio to 12 or 16, have breakfast clubs and homework clubs and teach the kids how to cook and vote and basically try to replace the parent with the school as the primary influence on the children because the root cause of all of this is bad parenting. That may not mean the parents aren't trying, it may not even be the parents of the particular child, but poverty is a result of a culture which is dislocated from, and incompatible with, mainstream media
Can't that be said of every side in this debate?The problem with that view is that we are then into cherry-picking the parts of her story we don't like, to admonish her and the situation she is in, and ignoring the parts that perhaps we don't want to hear, because it may spoil the narrative.
Had the house been reported to the RTB? They can't fix things that they don't know about. What I do know is that the institutions of the state are hostile to landlords and assume the tenant is in the right until proven otherwise so that aspect of her story doesn't hold water.Wasn't there fatalities last month in Rathmines in a house that was carved up into eight units? I thought this thing was supposed to be in the past?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?