Parasites like these make everyone else suffer

[crookesey]

You're advocating that her children be killed off?

 

Perhaps 'taken off' would suffice. What are they ever going to offer society having been trained to scrounge?

[Suffragette1]

How many children? to how many fathers?

 

Using benefits to pay for a boob job?

 

So you'd say that they were examples of good morals?

 

I'm not advocating a workhouse, just trying to point out that her children might be better off with someone to set them a good example.

 

If she was working and contributing to society, rather than taking from it I wouldn't question her choice of childcare. She isn't though is she, so we'll drop the straw man.

 

As for your last point I do agree, but we have to break this viscious circle of benefit lifestyles. Perhaps it's better that we continue to pay benefits for existing children, but cap benefits for future births to a maximum of 2 per household.

 

What about the morals of these absent fathers? Where are they and what are they contributing? Or do they just go around impregnating women then decamping into the sunset?

 

If benefits are capped at 2 children then it would be the children who would suffer and we'd be condemning them to a life of poverty. I couldn't condone children suffering the 'sins of the fathers'.

 

I don't know what the solution is or how we break the culture of benefits and entitlement.

[summa]

Some people are so soft it's unreal, I've read through this post and some of the comments made like 'it's her welfare to spend on what she like's' is absolutly ridiculous!!

She's not daft she knows exactly what she is doing, she understands the more kids she has the more money she will get!

I thought the ethos on having kids was to only have as many as you can afford to support yourself? I'm not talking about the mothers/fathers/families that may need genuine help, but she knew at 15 when she had her first she was on to a good thing so carried on regardless!

Her youngest is 3 so will probably be in nursery, im not saying she should be made to do 12hr shifts down a mine everyday but come on a few hours in the day...

[Tatman]

You're advocating that her children be killed off?

 

Oh my god.

What a toaly moronic and provocative thing to say.

You should be banned forthat. Its clearly said by to to irritate.

[chem1st]

Investing the money in a boob job is a good idea. Far better value for money than any training course could offer her.

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/2969192/On-the-job-Centre-advertises-for-porn-stars.html

[Suffragette1]

Some people are so soft it's unreal, I've read through this post and some of the comments made like 'it's her welfare to spend on what she like's' is absolutly ridiculous!!

She's not daft she knows exactly what she is doing, she understands the more kids she has the more money she will get!

I thought the ethos on having kids was to only have as many as you can afford to support yourself? I'm not talking about the mothers/fathers/families that may need genuine help, but she knew at 15 when she had her first she was on to a good thing so carried on regardless!

Her youngest is 3 so will probably be in nursery, im not saying she should be made to do 12hr shifts down a mine everyday but come on a few hours in the day...

 

One way would be for long term claimants to do some kind of community service or voluntary work in order to be eligible to continue claiming. Many would soon get fed up 'working' for nothing and it may encourage them into paid work.

[Paul2412]

What about the morals of these absent fathers? Where are they and what are they contributing? Or do they just go around impregnating women then decamping into the sunset?

 

If benefits are capped at 2 children then it would be the children who would suffer and we'd be condemning them to a life of poverty. I couldn't condone children suffering the 'sins of the fathers'.

 

I don't know what the solution is or how we break the culture of benefits and entitlement.

 

Perhaps if the lady in question closed her legs, took contraception or just said no once in a while she wouldn't need to claim so much benefit?

[Suffragette1]

Perhaps if the lady in question closed her legs, took contraception or just said no once in a while she wouldn't need to claim so much benefit?

 

That does not let these absent fathers off the hook, in my book. They also need to take some responsibility.

[L00b]

One way would be for long term claimants to do some kind of community service or voluntary work in order to be eligible to continue claiming. Many would soon get fed up 'working' for nothing and it may encourage them into paid work.

Had that debate on here some time before, and -unsurprisingly- it didn't turn out too good for the "common-sense brigade" (of which you and I are obviously part )

[summa]

One way would be for long term claimants to do some kind of community service or voluntary work in order to be eligible to continue claiming. Many would soon get fed up 'working' for nothing and it may encourage them into paid work.

 

Thats a great idea, I know it's hard being a mum and finding a job thats fits round kids and everything else and can understand with the costs of childcare it could be off putting.

If they had to give something back in return for their benifits maybe they would see things in a different light, stop having kids and learn to stand on their own two feet and support themselves.

This is just one story, and can believe that it's not a one off case and happens alot!