Wednesday, 30 March 2016

ARGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Devastated Marie told the Birmingham Mail: “Lots of people are getting themselves in this situation because of the benefits cap. Raising eight kids on the cap while paying full rent is hard enough.
“I have been trying to find work for a long time now but it is not that easy. As soon as you say you have eight dependents they don’t want to know. My only way out of the cap is doing 16 hours of work a week.
She’s 33 years old, a single mum of eight, and it’s ‘the government’s fault’ that she’s about to be evicted?


20 comments:

DJ said...

Cracking line in the comments though:

Does she have to pay bedroom tax ? She must do as it seems she is never out of there !!!

Meanwhile, in Realville, with an average wage of £26,500 pa, getting £20,000 tax-free almost puts this cow in the top half of earners in the country, and the left is still baffled why they keep losing elections.

Ripper said...

So, what's the alternative - evict her and put the kids into foster care? Compared to the combined cost of that, her 20k benefits are chicken feed. And as to her having 8 kids, well, that's none of your business - if she were childless do you really think you would pay less tax? The house containing the biggest benefit scroungers in the UK is in Westminster.

Easy to slag people off that you don't know, as long as it isn't you in that situation.

Anonymous said...

Actually her having eight kids is my business when I am expected to pay to support them.

Stonyground

ivan said...

Ah, it sounds as if the benefits farmer has been rumbled at last, such a pity that she didn't think of that before.

The other question that should be asked but won't is 'how much are the fathers contributing to the upkeep of their brats' or is the problem that she doesn't know who the fathers are?

Anonymous said...

They can genuinely never see the incongruity of their position and the burning anger it causes amongst the working class who support these idle scum through their taxaes

Nice Mr Pierrepoint said...

The alternative is to limit Child Benefit to a certain number of children. The government has been flirting with this idea for a while. Last year there were reports that the Treasury was thinking of a 3 child cap, before then Iain Duncan Smith had proposed a limit of 2. I think it is unfair to criticise the woman while the baby-fathers who doubtless cleared off because they 'wanted their space'. Usually this means an urge to screw around but in this case might actually be true at face value.

Antisthenes said...

Ripper ripped into you. So Ripper believes that it is her right to have access to other peoples money who go out to work to earn it while she does not. She chose her life style and the number of children she had no doubt not caring about the consequences happy in the knowledge others will pick up the bill. When those others decide enough is enough and cannot afford her extravagance any more she and Ripper become very aggrieved. What kind of rational logic is that as it certainly lacks any fairness of thinking or understanding of self-reliance and personal responsibility. All those things appears to be totally alien to them. Unfortunately all so prevalent in our society today where the entitlement and dependency culture is now so embedded.

Ted Treen said...

"And as to her having 8 kids, well, that's none of your business"

No it isn't - if she supports them herself.

If she breeds in an unrestrained manner, expecting me to contribute to their costs, then it becomes my business.

Jim said...

"And as to her having 8 kids, well, that's none of your business"

It f*cking is, as I (and all the other taxpayers in this country) have to pay for the little sods!!!!!!! She can spread her legs as much as she likes if she's prepared to pay for the results herself, and not expect the rest of society to pick up the tab.

Tees Maid said...

"And as to her having 8 kids, well, that's none of your business"

That would only be true if we weren't paying for 'em. It's my money so it's my business.

Anonymous said...

Bunny

Yep it's my money too that is contributing to them so yes its my business. These eight offspring will think that their mother's lifestyle is normal and the chances are that they will follow their mother's lead. Potentially sixty four copies of this mother.

They used to have proper boarding schools for these situations educate the children to a high standard and break the cycle of dependency. Given the breeding potential it is worth a cost benefit analysis, given that her benefit cap is the tax take on twelve people earning £20k a year.

Anonymous said...

There ought to be a lifetime total cap on payments from the state. Thus folk like this divvy would find all their benefits halted, no pension, no place in an old folks home, no money for housing. She has made decisions throughout her life that make her unemployable, that was deliberate. Nobody wants to see children penalised, but bone idle self-centred hostile old slags are a different matter.

Trevor said...

Jesus wept. The only 'cap' she should be worrying about is of the Dutch variety.

Anonymous said...

The plain fact is that you all won't breed so there needs to be lots of immigration or you end up like Japan.
Where do you think future English will come from to help you in your old age?
Like it or not procreation has to be done by someone.

Anonymous said...

Bring back the workhouse anyone? So she actually has to work to support and house herself and spawn? Would this be stigmatising? Of course. Pour encourager les autres..

Lord T said...

We procreated just fine before we paid people to do so. Seems to me that having kids is simply a new career made available by the generosity of the taxpayers.

We should pay those in employment with an IQ above a fairly intelligent rock to have kids. Much better use of the cash.

Jim said...

"We should pay those in employment with an IQ above a fairly intelligent rock to have kids. Much better use of the cash."

Better still, just don't tax people who work who have kids. Just say that if you are married, have children and you are in receipt of no State benefits your tax free allowance goes up to £50k/household. People in stable jobs and relationships might then be able to afford to have more kids, rather than paying taxes to pay benefits to wastrels to breed generations of more wastrels.

Anonymous said...

Bunny

Jim fantastic idea, as £50k/household doesn't provide a great deal to the exchequer it would encourage those who worry about providing for their children a great incentive.

JuliaM said...

"Cracking line in the comments though"

Often a nice antidote to the subliminal line the MSM feeds us...

"So, what's the alternative - evict her and put the kids into foster care?"

Works for me!

"The other question that should be asked but won't is 'how much are the fathers contributing to the upkeep of their brats'..."

Good point!

"The government has been flirting with this idea for a while."

Time they stopped flirting and put out!

JuliaM said...

"So Ripper believes that it is her right to have access to other peoples money who go out to work to earn it while she does not. "

Which makes him as bad as her, doesn't it?

"There ought to be a lifetime total cap on payments from the state."

Especially for those who've never, ever paid in...

"The plain fact is that you all won't breed so there needs to be lots of immigration or you end up like Japan."

*blinks* And....that's a bad thing?

"We procreated just fine before we paid people to do so. "

Spot on!