Wednesday, 21 March 2012

Acey Davies Embodies The ‘I Want It All And I Don’t Care Who Pays’ Generation

And who is she? Well, according to CiF, she’s ‘a single mum with three children from Kent’. Furthermore, she ‘runs a social enterprise called Prampushers which supports mums’.

And she’s
scared, bless her.
I'm scared. I'm scared because I am just about scraping by at the minute, and the government is going to bring in changes meaning I'm not going to be able to provide for my children any more.
Errr, if you’re relying on child benefits to do that, you aren’t providing for your children now.

Everyone else is…
I chose to go to work and to go to college. And yet, I'm earning less than someone who sits at home with their children. And as a single parent, I don't have anyone I can rely on; no one to help when I find a job that won't work around the school run.
And whose responsibility is it to provide for a child, Acey? Not mine! Where’s the children’s father? Is he paying support? No?

So why should I have to support you instead via my taxes?
When they cut childcare support last year, I was doing the hours and then handing the money straight over, so I ended up cutting my work back from 30 to 16 hours. I could work more, but then I'd lose my benefits and I wouldn't end up any worse off or better off than I am at the moment.
You would, however, be providing a positive role-model for your children by not living off the sweat of others.

Doesn’t that count for anything? I won’t even mention the fact that you’ve failed to note – in your little diatribe about the budget – the other government plans that will ensure that this state of affairs won’t continue, the plan being to ensure benefits are never higher than the money you might receive from working.

Are you grateful? No. There’s no indication you’ve even noticed them. Too busy whinging about what you aren’t being given, I expect….
I don't know what I'll do when these changes come in. I'll have to make more cut backs and more sacrifices. Right now, I have every penny budgeted for over three to six months, but when my daughter needs new school shoes or when there's a trip at school, I have to cut back or go into debt to pay for it.
Just like a hell of a lot of families. Even those with two parents, but on low incomes. So what?
I don't drive. I don't have holidays. We don't have a Sky package on our little TV.
Those are sensible decisions given your situation; they are not some awful sacrifice that you are having to make because the mean ol’ government won’t give you more of everyone else’s money…
We've already cut back. If I'm £50 or so worse off a week under the new welfare system, what else exactly does the government expect me to cut back on? I don't want my children to be sad about their lifestyle. We live in a society where peer pressure is one of the things that affects them, and I hate seeing them miss out on things because I can't provide for them.
Oh, FFS! *throws monitor out of the window*

Look, the benefit system is there to ensure you don’t starve; it’s not there so you can give in to ‘peer pressure’ and ensure your brats have the same trainers as everyone else, or that they don’t lack for sweeties!

As a commenter points out (if it’s still there after the moderators have been at work) it’s this sort of poorly-thought-out sob story that gives everyone compassion fatigue.

But as Anna Raccoon points out, the ludicrous examples the 'Guardian' trots out as the Budget draws ever closer just serve to throw a light onto the 'hardships' that the left are constantly screaming about.

And it's a damned unflattering light indeed.


Captain Haddock said...

"Acey" ? .. FFS !

Says it all really ...

Anonymous said...

Besides the stupid name, it is interesting to see the comments underneath, the most recommended ones are the ones which aah, didums and where is the father/fathers. I don't think this woman gets much sympathy even in the Guardian.

Lynne said...

The entitlement class (generation?) - aren'tcha sick of 'em?

Anonymous said...

The problem is that idiots like 'Acey' are the majority now.

As to the 'father' question, just why would a father work and contribute when he, it is almost guaranteed, will have no access or involvement in his childrens lives (except when she wants a babysitter so she can go out, at his expense, with one of a series of boyfriends - yes, I'm stupid enough to work, living in a one room bedsit, funding my ex's social life to be able to see my son, but most men wouldn't even consider that even if allowed to by the feminazis in social services and the courts)

JuliaM said...

"Says it all really ..."

As do the words 'a social enterprise which supports mums'...

" I don't think this woman gets much sympathy even in the Guardian."

Even their regulars know when someone's pissing up their leg but telling them it's raining.

"The entitlement class (generation?) - aren'tcha sick of 'em?"

Heartily! Sick of paying for them too.

".. just why would a father work and contribute when he, it is almost guaranteed, will have no access or involvement in his childrens lives..."

Good point.

James K said...

I've seen worse.

There was a serious newspaper story about a woman who had filled her entire flat with beds for seven children conceived with one father after another. The journalist seemed to think it was cruel that we did not provide her with an even bigger flat - missing the obvious point that she would only fill the extra space with even more beds.

Anonymous said...

She has used her vagina to make her living.

If she is struggling, she must have a poor-quality vagina.

Understandable, as that is where she houses her brain.