Please try and debate without throwing personal insults marialuc, I didnt get past the first line of your usual off the wall stuff which adds nothing to crazyhorses thread.

Its simple economics really, those people in fulltime work are having smaller families, some are postponing starting their families so late they wont ever have children. The people who are net recipients of the welfare state are continuing to have large families in the sure expectation that someone else will pay all the costs. the likes of marialuc will spout some sort of communist drivel in their ears about the wealthy rich and how they can afford to pay enough taxes to carry everyone else.

The ones in the middle who work ten hours a day and pay creche fees and mortgages are now being told that they wont be retiring after forty years, we cant afford to pay their pensions even though they have paid almost half of their income in tax throughout their working lives. They dont qualify for medical cards or back to school allowances or third level grants, they just pay and pay and pay and if they dare to whine about unemployed couple having five six and seven children they will be told they are snobs.

Look Specsaver, even taking your tendency for tunnel vision you must be aware that Ireland was a colony of Britain, if not please get off line and read a few books. We have consequently a post colonial system of thought and government, you and a few other of your ilk suffer from it worse than most. You hold the masters distain for the poor and less privledged.

Postcolonialism explains, and responds to the cultural legacy of colonialism and structural extraction of imperialism. Postcolonialism speaks about the human consequences of external control and economic exploitation of native people and their lands

Thanks for the chuckle, I can picture you sitting at behind a desk at a local authority, you and crazy, dismayed by the hoi poloi streaming through the doors, disturbing your tea break, you and Crazy of course, unless you and Crazy are more closely related that is.

Totally agree.. My parents took a house in an area miles away from were they were reared. It was considered the country 40 years ago but they were delighted!
Myself and my siblings have all bought properties but it just wasnt an option for them at that time.

Sorry wicklowgl, I misquoted you. But I still believe that if anyone is holding out for a home to house all your family, and you do not actually have a need to live in any particular area, you should be strongly encouraged to look to areas where these homes are actually available.

Go and spend a few months working behind a public counter in a local authority marialuc, that will open your eyes to what is going on, your post colonial stuff is rubbish, Iteland never engaged in colonialism. We were a peasant society with poor people having too many children and being exploited by landlords.
Most of societies problems are caused by feral uneducated teens who are growing up in teen gangs on the streets. Parents pop them out one by one, they are too feckless to care about anything, spend far too much money on alcohol so live in a permanent daze. Talk to a few social workers too marialuc, they will tell you what is like to see children starving and hungry while the house is full of empty alcohol bottles and cigarettes.

When my parents started out they were housed in s nice area, my father worked very hard and bought the house, he went on to buy a few properties and I think it's called giving someone a chance. I don't agree people should get to pick and choose where they are housed as those who have huge mortgages are often stuck in areas they hate and have huge commutes to work. While I don't agree with people having a lot of kids with no way to support them I think taking money from them is not the right answer as the children will suffer. I know a few men who were made redundant and they lost confidence in themselves and even now when lots of jobs are available they won't go look for them. The government need to push this as not only does it mean less social welfare payments it is good for anyone's mental health to be out working. A poster mentioned us paying for people in prison and child molesters being housed and getting medical cards etc.. that does make me sick. A lot of people can't work for various reasons are are unemployable for some reason. I don't think five kids in a room is a big deal. As long as they are fed and well cared for it's fine I think. My kids have their own room and we then have a spare for visitors but it doesn't make them happier than how I was as a kid squashed in with siblings and a grandmother.

It was me that said it isn't fair to stack 5 kids to a room. I have made no comment at all on people only wanting homes in certain areas. I'm not sure if you think I think people should get to live where ever they choose and if you do think that why you jump to that conclusion. It is quite a leap to go from children shouldn't be forced to live 5 of them to one bedroom and in poverty to people should get big homes in Dublin city if they want.

What? when did i say it was unfair to stack 5 kids in a room? .I agreed if you were relying on the state for an income that you shouldnt have more kids.
My family settled in one of the areas you mentioned because the council were begging for tenants. There was no shortage. Had there been then my parents of course would have had to consider their position. They were hard working, working class people who qualified for a council house. Its wrong to say they were abusing the system or using up resources as some ignorant posters have suggested.
They moved eventually when they purchased a house and hopefully another derserving family got the house.

Totally agree that the children should not be made to suffer, but there needs to be a greater emphasis on the parents considering the children and not the state, however that is applied.

No, wicklowgl, I was not referencing your post at all, there was a far earlier reference to people having the children they want. But to go back 40 years, we were a country that was suffering from high emigration rates. The population in rural areas were being attracted to the towns and larger urban areas to work in factories and there was an abundance of cheap land in these areas to build.

That is part of the issue, the land in towns and cities is pushing up the cost of building and buying homes. That is a direct result of the free market economy that our country is built on. That makes it hard to build and supply affordable housing and people do not want to consider moving away, to less urbanised areas.

In some cases, people need homes, but only want them in certain areas. That is not sustainable either. When you consider the suggestion from Wicklogl that it is unfair to stack kids 5 in a room, well why should parents not then be more open to consider locations where there are bigger homes? Why should it only be the squeezed middle who are forced to make the commute from towns and villages to Blanchardstown, Clondalkin and Dublin CIty?

I agree Fenway that way people could not say they were not warned.

I don't think anything can be done with current lists
And people but I do think changes should be impmelnted for down the road.

So after 2020 benefits will stop for anything more than x children, social housing criteria will be x by 2025

But this would need to be agreed and laid out by all political parties too

People need to know what they are facing - i do believe if these changes were implemented down the line then Ireland would see a shift in expectation.

you would like to think that everyone would consider their own ability to care for these children and not view the state as a third and more responsible parent.

I agree with this, you would like to think that but it isn't happening and I don't see that cutting benefits and leaving children open to poverty is the answer. I'm not saying that never working and having 20 children is morally right but leaving those 20 children in poverty isn't morally right either. I agree with you that upping services is the answer but before that happens you can't leave children going hungry and homeless.

It is a complicated issue and one that does need to be looked at but the turf them out of their houses after 5 years or stack them in 5 to a room and cut their benefits type of attitude is just not one I get behind. These kids deserve a future just as good as any child from an affluent family, their parents choices are not their fault.

You know the way they say when you owe a million (or less) to the bank and can't pay, you have a problem but when you owe a hundred million and can't pay they have a problem. Do people who have child after child without the means of providing for them sort of apply that attitude to it. One child & they will be left get on with it, four/five/six kids and help in terms of housing etc will be provided. I don't think it's an outrage for there to be an expectation that people living off the state limit their families. That's what we all do based on what we can afford.

Lordi if your referencing what i said, i stated MY parents could have 5 kids if they wanted because they worked hard to support them and never expected a handout. Imo thats different to a couple on the dole having multiple children with no means of feeding them. As i said i witnessed friends with 1 sibling who were neglected and not cared for.
When i was born there was a huge amount of social housing being offered in urban areas. New towns that needed a population. There was never a problem with shortage. In fact we moved to a 4 bed the year before my parents eventually bought a house. Shock horror!

It is absolutely right to say that we cannot control how our taxes are spent or who lives off them. But I really do believe that we simply cannot just say (as has been said on this thread) that people can have an many kids as they want, and are not in any way responsible for them, once born, they are the state's problem. Now, of course, we can't stop anyone from having children, but you would like to think that everyone would consider their own ability to care for these children and not view the state as a third and more responsible parent.

I totally see and accept the child neglect concern, but it also might make more resources available to schools etc put it into breakfast clubs and afterschool homework and sporting outlets. Put it into child dental services and free universal health care for all children. And then with these resources, there is nothing stopping the parents from getting jobs, or getting better education to build careers and lives for themselves and their children, without a massive childcare bill.

I know this sounds all too pie in the sky, but something needs to change. We are back at high employment levels and there are families living in hotels and b&bs so there is a breakdown in the system somewhere. We are a small population, and homelessness while on the increase is still not as big an issue as in other countries. There is a chance now to fix it, but first we need to understand it.

Oh if only this was "Another Deleted Thread" diatribe from a woman paid by the Taxpayer and simultaneously sneering at her client base. Post Colonial syndrome, hatred of one's own facilitated by a false sense of superiority. Crazy yours is the pride before the fall. IF you work in social housing, is it time to change, you clearly don't have the heart for it or basic respect for tenants.

I read mumsnet very regularly too and have never seen that. Mumsnet is very middle class on the whole, the people posting on mumsnet are not the people who are having large families on benefits.

You cannot deny that the benefits system in the UK is leading to terrible poverty, why you keep referencing it as something that we should want over here is beyond me. Food bank usage is going up year on year, child poverty is going up year on year, homelessness is on the rise, it is an absolute mess for those on low incomes and the unemployed. As universal credit is being rolled out across the UK things are only going to get worse. The UK is no place for the poor and not something I think we should be aiming to emulate on any level.

It was like that before they ever capped it to two children if anything its making people think twice. I read regularly on mumsnet and people have said they will not have a third child because of it.

They've gone down that rabbit hole in the Uk, child poverty is soaring and food bank use is at record highs. Definitely something we should be aiming for.

They have gone down that rabbit hole in the UK and it seems people are taking note and realising that actually maybe two children are enough.

You have no clue how that poster lives their life, you have no idea how hard some people work and will still never be able to afford a home for themselves. Of course there will always be people playing the system but you cannot control how people live, how many children people have because once you start down that rabbit hole, there is no turning back.

I would agree to an extent Lordi but worry that it would lead to child neglect. I do agree more funding should go towards carers and their familes, rather than people having kids hand over fist because they are entitled to do what they like.

Smac but we were specifically talking about this situation. I could worry about a million different scenarios but I am only talking about council housing on this thread.

Ritoak that is very mellow dramatic I was talking about council housing as my job is involved with it. A person on another thread was on the list with one child and went on to have another two with no stable housing.

That is irresponsible. What are you saying so everyone can do what they like? There has to be a bit of cop on.

remember ladies that every convicted criminal is no doubt living off your taxes too, not only when they're in prison but when they come out of prison too and find that they can't get a job so they need JSA, rent allowance, medical card etc etc. So I won't worry about the folks who genuinely know no other occupation than having babies, I'll be more concerned about the convicted paedophile who might just be getting HAP in private rented accommodation in your estate.

Well as I suggested, cap the allowances. You can procreate to your little hearts desire, but you get no state subsidy after number two. And then there might be the resources to look after the disabled, to award DCA and Carers and Respite.

Jesus this thread is so ridiculous, why stop at not allowing people on the housing list have children?

Maybe there should be a new law that your job determines how many children you have. Shop workers- 1 child, gps- 4 children.

Maybe we should tackle the amount of people born with disabilities, so that they are no longer a drain on society, by not allowing anyone over the age of 35 have a child, forced abortions for anyone pregnant with a child with a disability. Maybe we should test couples before they marry to make sure they are not carrying any hereditary conditions and if they are they won't be allowed marry.

Maybe we should just put down anyone that is in an accident/ has a stroke/ heart attack- sure they are all a drain on society too.

Maybe we should force every woman back into the workforce after they have children, not allow sahp. Sure they are a drain on society too- never contributing to the pot yet will one day expect a pension.

Would you really like to live in this totalitarian society crazyhorse?

Lordi i agree with some of what you said..If you rely on the state for your income and medical care then you need to only have children you can afford. We were always over the treshould for a medical card or grants for college etc. My friends dad had a little shop, earned plenty but got everyhand out going because he fiddled his books. Anyway Smyths is empty in case anyone has shopping to do!

And as a thread on here showed lately a great number of people default on their mortgages. A lot of people with mortgages work cash in hand too and don't declare all their income for tax purposes. Differential rent also means if you earn more, you pay more. You don't have to pay more if your wage goes up and you have a mortgage. You will also some day pay off your mortgage and then have nothing to pay, that will never happen with renting.

The councils operate a differential rent scheme, this means if gour income goes down you pay less, if you are paying a mortgage and your income goes down thats tough. The more children youu have in a council house the less rent you pay, this isnt thecase if you have a private mortgage hence people with mortgages plan their families.
A great number of people in council housed default on their rent, a lot hide their true income by taking cash in hand, their rent is then a tiny fraction of their income.

My bil works for a voluntary housing association and you get a quid off your rent each week for each child you have. I just looked up my local council and it is 5e a child. It's hardly a massive incentive is it, considering the same child will need to be fed and clothed. You get an extra 30e dole per kid and child benefit the same as everyone. It is not exactly a great money making scheme.

It would be interesting to discuss that Lordi. In the UK they have allowances for the benefit caps in that children born from rape or in abusive relationships are exempt.


I would fear people would go ahead anyway. There is a difference between having five children in a three bed and not having a medical card or money to feed them.

And to add for those who dont know the more children you have the less rent you pay as you get an allowance for each child.

Jesus now whos being nasty? No im not dense. It would still be heavily subsidised. Enjoy your shopping sounds amazing.
I dont hate people far from it, I do my best to help them everyday and people who take the piss annoy me as it takes away from those in true need.

I do not agree that people should be able to have as many children as they want. People say they don't care where their taxes go, but that is utter nonsense. If the government actually thought that this was a true statement, they would tax the bejasus out of us to build housing, and hospitals etc. But they know full well that if they squeezed the middle classes any tighter they would be out on their ear.

So no, if you are reliant on the state for your home and your income, and your household benefits package and your medical card etc you should not be burdening the state any further with willful procreation. In fact, I think the benefits you receive should be capped for two children. Go on and have 20 more kids, but only the first two will be on your housing application, your JSA, your family medical card and your child benefit.

Did you read the replys fancy? Wicklow suggested her and her siblings huge taxes make up for things but like you said my taxes dont count for anything.

But im nasty for pointing that out? I was called a snob but she makes herself and her amazing siblings out to be better than others and shes not a snob?

Thats fine with me if you think thats nasty.

It would be nasty to have one judgement for one group of people over taking from the system and another for the other group based on how well their children got on on later life.

Wicklowgl don't allow yourself to be personally riled by crazy. Only a nasty piece of work attacks posters families and personal circumstances, should go back to thinking about her Christmas tree. I'm amused by her alluding to her line of work, like the Teacher who hates kids she's part of the state that hates Citizens

How is it abusing the system?. Are you a bit dense? (read this slowly)
They paid rent according to earnings. The more my dad earned the more they paid. If you want to make a pathetic attempt to say that that was not above board then you must be desperate...
Now im going xmas shopping to spend MY hard earned money.. You spend the evening on your sofa judging others..

wow crazyhorse you really are getting nasty. Some people need a helping hand and don't want hand outs there will always be lazy people who think they are entitled to everything but they are in the minority and most people want to work and provide a roof over their heads for their family. I think it's kind of naive to think that your taxes are paying for these people when in fact nowadays probably most of people taxes are paying off the bank bailout and not for Mary and her 7 kids down the road looking for a house.

I did not ignore it in fact I said they should have bought a house before numbers three, four and five.

So your saying because you and your siblings are so AMAZING then it was ok to abuse the system as you yourself put it earlier?

So if a child brought up in a council house works in a corner shop they are a waste of resources? But you and your siblings are AMAZING because you went on to third level education?

Now whos the snob. You are not special.

Having baby after baby and taking whatever benefits, housing whatever they can get their hands on is a lifestyle choice for some young women, it's sad but true. Quite often they were raised in similar circumstances and it is what they know. One girl I know is having her 5th baby soon, she has a boyfriend who drifts in and out of her life as it suits him, leaving her pregnant each time. She is one of 7 kids, her parents never worked, she has never worked, she got pregnant straight out of school. She is a bright girl but she has no interest in anything or ambition of any kind. sometimes I just feel like shaking her tbh. She is one of many and her kids will probably follow in her footsteps. What do you do with people like that? If she wasn't given a house and money her kids would suffer. It doesn't make me angry, it makes me very, very sad.

Thank god they had government housing. It enabled them to raise 5 amazing people in a very happy home. If this doesnt fit in with your idea of a council tenant (you ignored the fact that they did in fact buy there own home after a few years) then that says more about you.
Your threads are just shit stirring nonsence with no substance.

They had every right to have as many children as they wanted. So they did.
Huge success story.

Whoopie for five of you you pay taxes... it was actually you who said it thats gas.

I was told earlier on this thread the fact that I pay tax means nothing...

I never once said I was perfect but my opinion stands. You put all your details on the thread. I am giving my opinion on them as you are yours.

You put your parents story here on this post Wicklow what did you expect. You knew how I felt about it. They did not pay for everything themselves. They had heavily subsidised government housing.

You said they eventually bought a house. Could they not have done that before number three, four or five and freed up that house for others in need. If they couldnt afford it at that time then they had no business having more children.

Their 5 children also all have good jobs and pay huge taxes so how you can describe that as dwindling resourses i dont know.. but sure you have your own agenda.

What are you talking about? my parents paid for everything out of their own pocket and are exceptional parents. They wanted a big family. How DARE you judge them? you know nothing. So you are the perfect wife and mother? i doubt it.
So easy to talk shite about others without actual facts which you obviously cannot get your head around.
Judge away your opinion means nothing anyway.

No it means there would be more resources to go around if people were not so selfish.
Contraception has come a long way since you were a child wicklow. While I dont think it was right to have five children while not paying for them out of their own pockets then, its even more unacceptable now.
There are numerous causes of poverty, but having multiple children without having the means to pay for them always was and always will be a massive one. It also puts a drain on the ever dwindling resources this country has. Yes the government need to and should do more, but that doesnt mean people can do whatever the hell they want and have numerous children and it all be fine and dandy.

Now you are not even making sense.
I have the solution..people living in council estates should be banned from having sex. i mean they dont deserve it, crazyhorse is paying their way and she knows everything. Problem solved.