http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...her-Moira-Pearce-asks-charity-money.html

This is enough to make your blood boil!

I work long hours to earn the same amount of money that this drain on society is being given for nothing!

Can't feed and cloth her kids but can afford horrible tattoos on her tits.

Fcuk sake!!

I'll second that mate, was having this conversation the other day with my mate, he was telling me about some bird on Jermey Kyle who had 7 kids and got 70k a year and a decent sized house, get on my wick how people can sponge like that yet i have to sit in a shitty office or out on site mon - Fri 5 days a week

Think she could afford some decent ink!

I suppose that'll be £30k AND the house she lives in.

Just think how much a normal person would need to earn to have that sort of lifestyle?

If my calculations are about right, on a salary of £42,000 a year you will take home approx. £30,000 after tax etc.

Now let's say with rent/bills/council tax on a modest house which is large enough for 10 kids you'd be looking at another £1,000 a month then you're looking at needing a net £42,000 a year.

That's a gross annual income of over £60,000.

Fcuk off and die you horrible sponging little [censored].

Makes you sick that doesn't it, yeah torries have got it sussed out honest

Bloody crazy country we live in. Oh, & some of the kids' names; Shardonnaie FFs.

Where's this 'cap' stopping people on benefits from earning more than those on minimum wage!?

No wonder people don't want to work.

Exactly that, where's the incentive to get your arse out of bed when they hand money out to lazy arses, must be in the wrong game gents ?

Even people on minimum wage get benefits if they have X amount of children and their wage is not a livable amount.

And another is called "Blade".....

I've never had to delve into how the system works and I very much doubt I will have to, but thanks for filling me in.

People who can't afford kids should not have them, it really should be that simple.

Why should the kids be brought into a world where they can't be given the basics that they need to live and eat up to an age where they can support themselves? Otherwise it's selfish parenting.

In fact, you should have to pass a test in order to have kids.

Life being what it is, one minute you can afford children, the next minute you can't. Thankfully I've never been in that position but there will be plenty who have. The solution would have to be very barbaric, nothing i would sign up to.

It'd solve a lot of problems.

I'm willing to bet anything that the majority of the rioting scumbags around Birkenhead came from families on benefits...

I'm sure there are families that have once been able to afford children, but now can't. Not much you can do about that.

The opposite are the ones I'm talking about, don't have them if you can't afford them. If times change and you can, have them then!

This country is far too cushy for work-shy layabouts, at the expense of those people who WANT to work. It is these people affected most by the rest of the population who think they are owed something just by being born - and I wonder where they get that impression? Yep, by those who think are owed something bringing them up.

... and I don't know who I blame more... the families taking what they can simply because it's there for them or the idiots sat in their expensive office chairs giving it to them.

Coming from someone who has lost 2 children, to have to 'pass' a test isn't a good idea. I would do anything to have my babies back.

I don't agree with having 10 children and then scrounging off tax payers like yourselves to bring them up, and then have the cheek to complain that what they get isn't enough.

I am 23, I work full-time (have done since I was 16), I earn £14,000 a year, and I can't afford to live in my own place. It makes me sick that these can do and they get away with it.

However, you can't tar everyone with the same brush, because if I had of been able to have my babies full term I will of started out on benefits - but luckily I had the upbringing of working to make a living - hence I would of been working as soon as they were old enough to put into nursery.

Why is it people who live on benefits are better off than those who work??????

I'm sorry you lost two children, truly.

But, do you not think it better to wait until you have finished your studying (it'll be easier without having kids to worry about), not being on benefits, not spending more of that £14,000 than you need to i.e. on kids and having your children once you can afford to have them? That's kind of the whole point of my argument here.

Doing what you're doing, you won't be earning £14,000 for long will you - then you're sorted.

I don't agree that you at 23, on £14,000 a year whilst study is ongoing would be able to give those kids the attention they would have deserved.

Who said I still study. I came out of 6th form with 2 A'levels, and 6 GCSE's.

I decided not to go to university - and I am currently enrolling on a uni home course (but decided this after my loss).

I never stated I was still studying, I finished studying and then fell pregnant.

I am saying that even though I am on £14,000 a year, I couldn't afford to have children now, because I can't even afford to live on my own.

And don't judge on how I would bring up my children, as that is not fair - i know a single mum, who works part-time and studies and her child is the best looked after child I know.

And yes I will be earning £14,000 for the forseeable future, so where am I going to get the benefit of working if I can't afford to live on my own or have children.

I don't disagree with you in that it's better now that I don't have them, but what I am saying is not everyone who has kids and are on the dole want to be, so don't tar them all the same.

Why is it people who live on benefits are better off than those who work??????


If people who live on benefits are better off, if you accept that benefits are set by experts and are suppose to be set to/at a manageable existence, then wages must be to low.

Sorry, I confused you with someone else, namely GrandMasterFlash, my mistake, I take it back.

It's definitely good that you don't have them then isn't it?



Presumably with the help of benefits, which again goes some way in supporting my argument, surely?



See my first comment.



I never once said that they all want to be on the dole, just that they shouldn't have kids.

I'm not deliberately being offensive here, but out government need to tell people in no uncertain terms that they WILL NOT be left better off as a result of not working. Unfortunately, they won't, and people are.

Therein lies the problem.

The experts are doing something wrong.

Maybe if the minimum wage was upped it would encourage people into work? Therefore in the process meaning less is paid out in benefits and the knock on effect being that taxes could maybe be lowered. Win/win on paper.

But a) are the jobs there? b) will people actually want to sort themselves out and get a job or are they happy doing nothing and being proxy-parented by the tax payers c) do I have a clue what I'm going on about?

But that's why I'm in investments and not an MP.

In certain ways yes it is good that I don't have them - i can't say the same for my mental stability because certain times of the year are very tough for me, as they would be with anyone else int he same position.

Yes she does have the help of benefits - but she is currently doing a course on accountancy to get out of benefits and start on a career. She has to start somewhere, and at least she is working part-time, and looking for other work.

I have mixed feeling on the subject of children and having them. especially when there is people out there that can't have them.

If these people didn't have children, what would they be doing - still sat on their arse probably? Or trying to find work - work that isn't out there?

I just don't think you should tar everyone with the same brush, because not all people that have kids want to be on the dole, but because of circumstance have to be. What happens with accidental pregnancies...abortion? Our rate of abortion is high as it is.......theres loads of questions involved with this argument......

If wages were higher than benefits, that in itself would be an incentive for people to find jobs, obversouly there has to be jobs available but thats another argument. What incentive does an employer have to pay higher wages when they know they can employ workers on poor money knowing full well that, that person will be backed up by the state with working benefits.

I understand. Sorry.



Good on her, but see the bit in bold, my argument there would be yep, but she should have started with the accountancy before having the baby...



In a perfect world they'd be trying harder to find a job and due to flexibility I imagine they'd probably be a bit more employable.



I addressed that earlier. It should therefore be a case of wanting kids but not being able to 'because of their circumstances'




I'm not religious in the slightest and believe abortion is fine and in some cases for the greater good.



Too right, and abortion isn't one I want to address to be honest.

But, remember, I read the Daily Mail which is total gutter press with a face of respectable middle england and my main aim is to become rich through corruption, raise the cost of motoring until only the very rich can afford it, then hoon about deserted roads.

Indeed, and there's an argument for putting up minimum wage.

But on the flip side, why make yourselves unpopular with business owners if there's no guarantee it'll fix any problems.

I am a skilled Engineer and I do not make £25K basic! Stop the benefits and make um work for a living like the rest of us FFS!

I'll second that, how anyone on the scrounge can even earn more than the lowest skilled workers i don't know, no justification in my eyes but to pay scroungers better than profesional engineers,surveyors,consultants and PM's i'm baffled ???

You want to get yourself over to Australia mate!

The minimum wage is going up.

It's not about wages, it all boils down to the previous Labour government targeting votes from those who wish not to work.

The only real difference between Labour and the Conservatives in this country, for the past god knows how many years, is benefits.

- If the Tories had our way, we would scrap all these benefits and leave the welfare state as a safety net for those who find themselves, through no fault of their own, in shit street, and those benefits would be enough to exist on and not much else.

- If Labour had their own way, they would scrap working altogether, as their belief is make everyone able to afford a fantastic life, regardless as to whether or not they want to work.Just keep building up that deficit bitch!

Neither will reach their goal, however Labour came pretty darn close to doing so in their previous 13 year term.

Wherever you look in the country today, there is plenty of people making a good living from benefits. I was speaking to a mate the other day, who wants to work desperately (she has worked all her life previously to having a child). She herself admits she gets too much money on benefits, and it is a dis-incentive to work. She can afford a good night out once or twice a month, fags every day, new TV's etc, the council pay for a nice home for her, she doesnt worry about money in general, and she is on benefits.

What narks me is why society feels it is okay that I have to pay for other people to have kids. I have no kids, and have no intentions of having kids - as a result, I am not eligible for any benefits. You go and pop a kid out, and suddenly a world of benefits becomes available to you. Child tax credits, free milk, free childcare, vouchers left, right and centre etc... and you also benefit from increased allowances on rent, council tax etc, and other benefits.

Did you know, just for popping out a kid, the system pays you £3100 per year, even if you don't work, and never have worked - and that's just CTC! Should you pop out 3 kids, people at the lower end of the spectrum, will get give £8220 - you wage has to go above £20,000 before your CTC allowance starts getting hit. I work in the CAB on IT support and everywhere you look, there is "benefit entitlement" guides plastered all over the walls, the range of benefits for those with kids is quite literally obscene.

I'm of the same opinion as you Alex, people should work for their money, and work fookin hard if they want extra money, kids etc... When you see these doleys sat in their homes, paid for by the taxpayer, with taxpayers money, playing their xbox 360's and drinking booze, smoking week, going out every saturday night, it makes you realise that benefits are simply far too high, and this country has it all wrong.

What was it Cameron found when got into power, a family living in a £140,000 per year house, paid for by the taxpayer? And yet Bert and the rest of his Labourites will tell you that it is only fair that people on benefits should get the same income as the rest of us, be able to live the same life as the rest of us.

It's nothing to do with wages, the problem comes down to Labour pushing and pushing and pushing the welfare system as an alternative way of life for those who do not wish to work, and make it so fookin comfortable for them, that they lose any need to work.

They also promoted people to have kids, regardless of whether you could afford it or not, it was actually to the point where they were paying people to pop kids out, the idea of getting a home for most hard-working young people is just a dream - yet you pop a kid out, and we will give you a home, and pay for it, and then pay you extra money to live a fantastic life in it - just so long as you don't intend to get a job!!

The next person to tell me benefits are not high enough, can explain why most people on them, openly admit that they are too high. The next person who can tell me that benefits are not high enough, can explain why someone on benefits should be able to afford fags, booze, consoles etc, even cars, that the rest of us have to work hard to get.

The best thing in this country is the conservatives, where it not for them Alex, you'd probably be paying 85% tax to sustain the lives of those Labour scumbags who want everything for nothing, and want to give everyone everything for nothing.

Labour needs to get back to its roots, it was setup to help and protect the working class, modern-day Labour simply helps the idle-class, the economically inactive, and the stupid folk who spend more than they can afford by having kids etc...

If you want kids, have them, but fkin pay for them yourselves, just like my Nan and Grandad with 5 kids, they managed it, why is so hard to think that anyone can't manage it nowadays?

Bert, why do your lazy barstard Labour chums feels its okay to not work? Quit blaming it on low wages and all the rest of the shite, where has your pride gone, where is you self-respect, what has happened to going out and doing an honest-days work for an honest days wage, this country has never had working regulations or wages so good, and yet you still sympathise for those who don't want to work.

How about we make a two tier tax system - those who support Labours ideology of a state will pay for everything society, and you can pay 80% tax, and those who support a work for your own life society, and we will pay 10% tax.

That sounds good to me!!

Sorry for the rant, I'm just sick of paying for other people to have kids, for other people not to have to work, working upwards of 60 hours a week to afford a nice home and be putting savings away, and seeing scroungers everywhere I look... and then watching Labourites have the audacity to blame all the problems on low wages, and try to brainwash everyone that its only fair for people to never work a day in their lives, and then leech tens of thousands of pounds of benefits a year from the taxpayer, whilst there is cancer patients being denied £12,000 courses of drugs and other treatments "because they cost too much"

Argh

13 years, 13 FOOKING YEARS.

And what did your party do to address this issue? Fook all!! No, instead, they simply made the living on benefits more comfortable than ever, and decreased the gap between income on benefits, and income through working... to the point where many people found themselves better of on benefits. So don't give us that shite!!

Matt,I have never said its ok not to work, quite the opposite, i wish there was work available for everyone. The fact there isn't, then we have to have a welfare system. You have also never heard me defend the work shy, the ... as you frequently call them, as i have put it to you before on more than one occasion, no British government are going to let people starve and that is what the result would be if you stopped benefits, add to that an increase in crime. Yourself and the party you support will not do it, it sounds good on the TV and in the newspapers but it won't happen, I've been hearing this all my life through various Tory governments and Tory PMs and i may add from Labour governments also, neither of them can do much about it because they can't provide full employment, until they can, status quo I'm afraid. Just to inform you, my pride and self respect are still intact along with my sense of reality and a little bit of compassion. Having never been on or drawn benefits of any description my entire life and have very little time for those who fiddle the system, i will defend those who through no fault of their own have to. If people work full time in this country and still have to rely on benefits to achieve a living wage, then wages must be to low, what else can they be.

Hey Matt, stop beating about the bush and say what you really feel!
(JK, actually I agree with you about 1000%!)

Benefits are way too high. If someone can afford to smoke and have nights out on benefits, you know they are paying far too high.

People also expect everything handed to them nowadays andthink they have an entitlement to have nice things regardless of the wage they are on; maybe if we were not so quick give everyone everything they want, we could have the money to invest in business, enterprise, lower taxation levels to a point whereby Great Britain would become an attractive place for businesses to move into etc... I want the council to pay for my game of tennis, I want the government to pay for MY kids that "I" decided to pop out, I want the working family next door to pay for MY alcohol and fags and weekend out!

During the Labour "boom" years, there were plenty of jobs, wages were good and people lived moderately wealthy lives; and yet your wonderful party decided it was a fantastic time to welcome hundreds of thousands of workers from the Eastern block of the EU, increase benefits left, right and centre for all those who didnt want to work, or those who were not getting £100,000+ per year, and above-all, let the scroungers continue to scrounge, without ever doing a damn thing to get them into employment.

And now all you hear is Labourites moaning how unfair it is to expect people on benefits to have to work, to have their benefits cut.

The welfare system is supposed to be a safety-net, NOT a way of life. It should be enough to allow someone to feed, clothe and clean themselves, not buy fags, tv's, macdonalds and other luxury goods!!

Sayers, Betfred and Bargain Booze all have massive marketshare in deprived area's - that in itself should tell you that benefits are far too high!!

Personally, I'm waiting for the (non)Labour party to get back into power, so I can start a petition asking for all working people wthout kids to be provided with subsidised cars, £500 cash as a bonus for signing up, a £3400 annual fuel allowance, car-maintenance vouchers etc...

You know, just like those with kids get for their sprogs?

I can get my V8 then - why shouldn't I have one, someone else (aka the taxpayer) can pick up the tab for it, surely that's fair?

Stupid Fat C#'T!

Makes my blood fooking boil!

I am off work after my bike crash and becoming disabled yet I cant get one fooking pennie! this makes me so angry!.

So, we will have to wait and see, will this present government not only reduce benefits but tell people on them how to spend their money, pull out of any freedom of movement within Europe as far as jobs go which will have to include the British working in Europe.
I have to agree that monies should be spent sensibly but who are we to dictate how people spend their dosh.

I'd like to know who gets these benefits?

and wheels alot of people don't realise how hard and daunting it really is.
Try not to let it get to hun, its not worth it.

Don't forget they have to tell the landlords to reduce the rent they charge as well, lower benefits mean inability to pay the rising rents.

Could I suppose make them all homeless, but we've just seen what a lot of people are capable of when roaming the streets, and those had homes as well.

Reducing rents will drive the price of owner occupied housing down as well, resulting in all mortgage payers going into negative equity, it was the buy to let that helped drive up the prices.

It's all about the return on investment for landlords, low rents don't produce good returns on high buy prices.

http://www.workingfamilies.org.uk/a...claim-the-500-sure-start-maternity-grant

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTa...ed/ChildBenefitandwhoqualifies/DG_073770

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/taxcredits.htm

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/taxcredits/start/who-qualifies/children/childcare-costs.htm

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/taxcredits/people-advise-others/entitlement-tables/no-work-child.htm

Theres a few lol.

Wheels, your problem is probably down to a lack of experience, you don't know how to play the system or what your entitled to. Go to the CAB or a one-stop-shop, they should be able to help.

and they get all this:
subsidised cars, £500 cash as a bonus for signing up, a £3400 annual fuel allowance, car-maintenance vouchers ????


gawd who wants to trade lives me please

I'm not promising that you might survive past 24hrs...BUT...I am willing to give it a go

I could help you wheels if this is the case hun.
One of the courses I'm doing right now is to help families coping with disabilities, coming to terms and what help they'd be entiltled to, educationally, law and benefits.

Please say you have put in a claim for Disability Living Allowance?

Noooo, what I'm saying, is as working people without kids get none of this, maybe they can share the love, and make fair for everyone by giving us benefits as well?

;-)

ahhh i understand now sorry you'll have to excuse me...its the 17yrs of lack of sleep, it makes me far too envious at times

It's taken me the best part of 19mths to finally find out what I might be entitled to and apply for it. Whether I get it or not is another matter, but that's because I've been honest!!

As for all the benefits based around people having children - where's the benefits for me NOT having any!?! I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, having children is not a right, it's a privilege! However, I think that if you want them you should pay for them. I don't have or want kids so why the hell should I be expected to help pay towards someone elses brood!?!

[quote=Wench
As for all the benefits based around people having children - where's the benefits for me NOT having any!?! I've said it before and I'll keep saying it, having children is not a right, it's a privilege! [/quote]

I suppose at some time in the past child benefits were a hedge against falling populations, those who couldn't afford kids, wouldn't, but like everything it got taken to far.

Then that governmental fear was was negated in less than a decade by mass immigration, but the system was already in place and to remove it would increase child poverty.

@Wheels, With you not working you may be eligible for increased tax credits, I presume your missus works which is taking you out the system for other stuff.

No mate she worked for Jane Norman and they went into administration last month. So she didn't even get her months wage or redundancy. She's about to drop our Son in 3 1/2 weeks so she can't get a job and now isn't gonna get her maternity pay. bad times.

There's loads of traps on the Maternity pay that are easy to fall into.

A chat with citizens advice may help you. Sounds like your at he wrong end of the sh*t-stick at the moment, I hope something sorts out for you.

It's not that I begrudge people benefits...

Yeah ok, a basic flat, some basic food.

But why the fcuk should anyone who doesn't work have a car? A bus pass, maybe. Why the fcuk should someone who doesn't work have Sky? Basic freeview, maybe. Why should they have cigs, alcohol, scratch cards, and in fact anything that could be considered a luxury and above and beyond what you need to 'survive'?

They shouldn't.

Oh, and they should not be having kids, full stop, as that's another privilege and they should not be brought into such a world.

Sorry mate, but you hit the nail on the head, and its gonna have to come out again, cheese and all...

£30,000 a year for 11 people works out at just over £52 a week per person, you try living on that, its not easy.

Does it make any difference if the kids belong to one person or ten different people, they are still entitled to have a decent upkeep. Or are they just classed as unemployed

I live a fcuking cracking life on £32,000 basic a year, but I'm not stupid enough to think I could afford 10 kids!

£52 a person per week... I'm sorry DD but the fcuking idiot should NOT be having kids.

If they are unemployed and don't want to work then they should be entitled to no more than an existence. The kids, they have done nothing wrong other than be born to a pair of wasters, but it should be stopped before it gets to that point.

You've no idea what this woman is like, she might be bringing up 10 cracking kids which might help outnumber the f-wits of the type that were out rioting recently.

Our population is (or perhaps was) decreasing rapidly which causes all sorts of problems:- who is going to be earning money to pay for state pensions, schools getting closed all over the place etc

No £30,00 is not enough money for 11/12 people to live on per year - but why is this woman subjecting her children to poverty? She might have tried using contraception - yes contraception fails sometimes but not 10 times

Why the need to have so many children when you can't support them yourself?

I have a large family, I have 6 kids and had planned them as we could afford them ,have always been self employed and my husband had been in full time employment for 22 yrs til he was made redundant 15 months ago - he is trawling jobsites daily and is on the books of many agencies but to no avail. He has dumbed down his CV big stylee but nothing has come up within his industry and it heartbreaking for me to see him open rejection letters each week

We were sensible enough to take out mortgage insurance but when it comes down to losing your job you have to be in receipt of JSA to get your mortgage paid so that makes us no better than the rest - my husband doesn't want to claim the poxy £64 a week but it is a necessity to keep a roof over our head grrrrr

Rant over ...as you were

I might be winning the lottery this week.

Well your statement is 100% true, you might be!

You'd be amazed how good some kids are despite family circumstances but sadly the converse also happens as well.

There's anomalies occurring all over the show.

But I don't want to turn it into an argument, which I'm all too good at doing when I get going - I've said enough I think so I'll bid you goodnight and get my head down.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...-at-15-and-her-proud-mums-delighted.html

I'm not going to quote any of it because I can't pick a part that annoys me the most.

Delighted because she'll get a bigger council house?

Look at the other kids names!

Here's one that should not be breeding, the mother or the daughter!

I'm speechless!