Homeless mother of 5 wants social housing

[PGF2016]

I think our collective behavior, that means seriously disabled children are left in crowded conditions are deplorable.
Her behavior, you mean having sex, that is of course acceptable. Giving birth, perfectly acceptable.
Do I wish her children were brought into a more stable environment, absolutely.
But the situation is, as it is. I assume you find her 'behavior' unacceptable?
What do you propose to do about it now, and what do you propose should be done for future instances of this 'behavior'?

Thanks for answering questions I didn't ask.

You can be peeved off all you want, but your taxes are so insignificant in paying for her needs.
In fact, as I understand it, she doesn't have a house of her own, so not only are your taxes insignificant, they are not actually paying for her needs.
On the other hand, she looks after her disabled child. How much would it cost the tax payer for full-time medical care? This would be required if she wasn't being responsible and didn't look after her child.
My guess is she is saving the State, and you, a small fortune. So show some gratitude.

You're missing the point. Her's is one case of many. If all those irresponsible people were more responsible then the money that's wasted on them could go towards more productive uses. Like helping those who are sick through no fault of their own.

And no... I'm not perfect. No one is. But there's far too little help available for those who need it through no actions of their own.

 

[Firefly]

If all those irresponsible people were more responsible then the money that's wasted on them could go towards more productive uses

Socialists have a big problem with the concept of limited resources. The answer is easy....just tax the "rich"

 

[Delboy]

Money trees!

This is the section of society where socialists mostly seek their mandate from so you should not be surprised by the deflective/absurd answers/analogies your are getting on this and other epic threads which have arisen here recently.
Though I am surprised that so many long established and intelligent posters would continue to engage with such a level of debate!

 

[TheBigShort]

Her behavior, you mean having sex, that is of course acceptable. Giving birth, perfectly acceptable.
Do I wish her children were brought into a more stable environment, absolutely.

Thanks for answering questions I didn't ask.

My answer to the question you did ask is above. Perhaps you would care to answer mine?

I assume you find her 'behavior' unacceptable?
What do you propose to do about it now, and what do you propose should be done for future instances of this 'behavior'?

You're missing the point. Her's is one case of many. I

How many?

If all those irresponsible people were more responsible then the money that's wasted on them could go towards more productive uses.

You know you could apply that statement to the whole population?

 

[TheBigShort]

Socialists have a big problem with the concept of limited resources. The answer is easy....just tax the "rich"

Ah, Comrade Firefly, I thought we were making progress with you after you declared your support for our social democratic model in the previous topic. You know, the one that supports Marxist ideology. What was it called? "Why do people who work hard pay for everything?"

 

[PGF2016]

Money trees!

This is the section of society where socialists mostly seek their mandate from so you should not be surprised by the deflective/absurd answers/analogies your are getting on this and other epic threads which have arisen here recently.
Though I am surprised that so many long established and intelligent posters would continue to engage with such a level of debate!

Point taken.

 

[TheBigShort]

Point taken.

Are you bailing out now? Without answering my questions to you?
That's unfortunate, if I come across the homeless woman with 5 kids I'll be sure to wag my finger and frown at her on your behalf!

 

[Purple]

Get of your high horse (no pun intended), but your personal tax contribution to society is so inadequate, barely relevant, to anything in that woman's life. This notion that 'your' taxes pay for 'everything', for everybody is delusional.

The Horseman didn't mention their own taxes, they said "We" are looking after them. Since she is in no way providing for herself or her children then logically others are doing it for her. Those others are the "we".

 

[TheBigShort]

We" are looking after them. Since she is in no way providing for herself or her children then logically others are doing it for her. Those others are the "we".

With respect, "we" are not looking after her or her children. She has not been provided with a house, she has been moved from the housing waiting list, to the housing emergency list.
From the interview on PK, it appeared she was providing the bulk of healthcare to her child with cerebral palsy. If she was receiving adequate care from the State (or anyone else), the child would at least have a bed.
There is apparently between 11 and 14 people living in the two bed house that they are staying in. "We" as in the 2m+ working people who pay for everything, are, between us all, paying diddly-squat in taxes for this woman and her children.

In the meantime, AIB, 25% holding sold earlier this year will not pay any corporate tax for 20yrs. Not because it isn't profitable, it is, but because it is the law.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breaki...-corporation-tax-for-20-years-ceo-807486.html

 

[Andarma]

The lack of compassion on here is astounding at times. The couple in this story, yes that's right there is a partner in all of this who seems to have been forgotten about here, are in dire circumstances. If they're not entitled to housing them who the hell is?

 

[The Horseman]

The lack of compassion on here is astounding at times. The couple in this story, yes that's right there is a partner in all of this who seems to have been forgotten about here, are in dire circumstances. If they're not entitled to housing them who the hell is?

Can you not understand why people feel the way they do on this thread. On the face of this we have a 28 yr old person and her partner who have five children between them. One of which was conceived while they were homeless. They say they are living in cramped conditions but yet added to their family despite the fact they were homeless and therefore added to an already difficult situation.

They then feel compelled to use the national media to plead their case. We also recently had another case where a 32 yr old mother of two was on the housing list for 12 yrs with two children aged 4 and the second was 4 months. This person decided when they were 20 yr old to go on the housing list rather than trying to get a career etc. I suspect there are many more of these cases which then ruins it for those who actually deserve help ie those who tried to better themselves and failed rather than those who don't try at all.

So if you look at these two cases as examples you have situations where people have decided to act in selfish ways and expect the rest of us to pick up the tab. Do you not see the frustration of those who try to better themselves so they are not a burden on the State (and by extension the tax payer).

 

[TheBigShort]

if you look at these two cases

I'm happy to look at these two cases. Beforehand, I was wrong to reference your personal tax contributions earlier.

On the face of this we have a 28 yr old person and her partner who have five children between them. One of which was conceived while they were homeless. They say they are living in cramped conditions but yet added to their family despite the fact they were homeless and therefore added to an already difficult situation.

I'm not going to sit here and advocate that the situation she is in is desirable or ok. But people do make mistakes, and all we know about this woman is what we heard on radio.
I don't know if her partner is father to all her children, or if she had a different partner before bailing out on her? Leaving her with children to bring up? I don't know if she a job previously and subsequently lost it?
She did reference that she was paying rent to a landlord in accommodation that was unfit for habitation. So should she have stayed, paying rent, in a location that is unhealthy for children?
Aside all that, there could multiple other factors to consider as to why she is in the situation that she finds herself in.
We do know however that she has a child that has cerebral palsy and requires full-time healthcare. We know that child doesn't even have a bed.
So, to answer your question, no I can't understand why people feel the way they do on this site.

We also recently had another case where a 32 yr old mother of two was on the housing list for 12 yrs with two children aged 4 and the second was 4 months. This person decided when they were 20 yr old to go on the housing list rather than trying to get a career etc

Do you think that someone on the housing waiting list should cancel their lives in terms of starting a family?
Deciding to go on housing list v trying to get a career are not comparable options. It is not an option for people to choose in.
Some people are from deprived socio-economic backgrounds, they don't have the education, the confidence, the abilities to compete with everyone else. It is a problem no doubt, but probably best that you propose your solutions at this point.

 

[The Horseman]

I'm happy to look at these two cases. Beforehand, I was wrong to reference your personal tax contributions earlier.

You apology is accepted ( I suspect you feel as strongly about this issue as I do but from different sides of the fence).



I'm not going to sit here and advocate that the situation she is in is desirable or ok. But people do make mistakes, and all we know about this woman is what we heard on radio.
I don't know if her partner is father to all her children, or if she had a different partner before bailing out on her? Leaving her with children to bring up? I don't know if she a job previously and subsequently lost it?
She did reference that she was paying rent to a landlord in accommodation that was unfit for habitation. So should she have stayed, paying rent, in a location that is unhealthy for children?
Aside all that, there could multiple other factors to consider as to why she is in the situation that she finds herself in.
We do know however that she has a child that has cerebral palsy and requires full-time healthcare. We know that child doesn't even have a bed.
So, to answer your question, no I can't understand why people feel the way they do on this site.



Do you think that someone on the housing waiting list should cancel their lives in terms of starting a family?
Deciding to go on housing list v trying to get a career are not comparable options. It is not an option for people to choose in.
Some people are from deprived socio-economic backgrounds, they don't have the education, the confidence, the abilities to compete with everyone else. It is a problem no doubt, but probably best that you propose your solutions at this point.

If she presents herself as homeless she would be accommodated either in a hotel room or one of the hubs. While not ideal initially it would provide a bed for her family. Yes there probably are other factors that have led her to this situation some she had no influence on and some she had influence on. You refer to the child that has Cerebal Palsy on your replies but you never seem to reference the fact that she had another child while homeless.

Also you question whether people on the housing list should cancel starting a family. The point I made was why not try for a career and try house yourself and if that fails then go on the housing list. The second example I gave shows that this person did not even try to get a career, they decided to go straight on the housing list. Getting a career does not happen just over a four year period (assuming this person left school at 18 and left college at 22).

Being from a deprived social economic background does not hinder people from college. Most if not all qualifications can be delivered online. I came from a working class background, left school at 16 (back in the late 80's during the last recession) to get a job to contribute to the household. I went to college part time while working full time in my mid twenties, got a degree, a masters and am currently studying for a professional qualification.

You ask for solutions, the current system does not work, the social welfare system needs a fundamental overhaul. I don't have an issue with the sick and the elderly, I do however have an issue with those who blatantly play the system. Children's allowance should have a financial cap at 2 children, if you have any more than you get food stamps. Council property/differential rents should reflect the local rents. Limits should be regularly reviewed in line with current conditions, any damage (beyond normal wear and tear)to council property the tenant should make a contribution to the cost. If you don't pay your rent you are either evicted or alternative accommodation is provided at a figure the tenant can afford again with some reference to the local rents in the area.

If you refuse to pay your rent either the rent is taken directly from your welfare payment or you are evicted.

 

[Firefly]

I came from a working class background, left school at 16 (back in the late 80's during the last recession) to get a job to contribute to the household. I went to college part time while working full time in my mid twenties, got a degree, a masters and am currently studying for a professional qualification.

Fair plain and well done to you!

 

[Andarma]

I'm not going to speculate on why this particular couple has five children. I don't know if they're working at the moment or not, or if they have in the past.

Having a family is a normal part of life. Some people want a large family, others don't. Some start off younger, others don't. There's not a lot you can do about an unplanned pregnancy in this country. I really dislike the prevailing theme on AAM that people in social housing should be treated like pawns. Send them to the other side of the country if there's an empty house there! Turf them out if they have a spare bedroom! Let's police their spending habits - no treats for you!! I foresee a suggestion of compulsory sterilisation for the unemployed.

 

[Purple]

She did reference that she was paying rent to a landlord in accommodation that was unfit for habitation. So should she have stayed, paying rent, in a location that is unhealthy for children?

I don't buy that at all. The RTB would be all over the Landlord. I work with a guy who owns an apartment which he rents out. The tenant wrecked the place and then complained that it wasn't up to scratch. The RTB insisted that he repair everything, despite the fact that the tenant damaged it and wasn't paying the rent. Threshold were also involved. So, she could have stayed put and used the State services to force the Landlord to bring the place up to standard.

Some people are from deprived socio-economic backgrounds, they don't have the education, the confidence, the abilities to compete with everyone else. It is a problem no doubt, but probably best that you propose your solutions at this point.

I agree. Where I have a problem is the poverty industry pretending that the root cause of all of this is economic. It isn't. Poverty is a symptom of a social problem, or basket of inter-related social problems. While all the emphasis is placed on treating the symptom the root causes will never be tackled.
My solution is education, mainly primary school level. Build more schools in the small number of areas where most social problems are concentrated, hire more teachers, lower the pupil-teacher ratio to 12 or 16, have breakfast clubs and homework clubs and teach the kids how to cook and vote and basically try to replace the parent with the school as the primary influence on the children because the root cause of all of this is bad parenting. That may not mean the parents aren't trying, it may not even be the parents of the particular child, but poverty is a result of a culture which is dislocated from, and incompatible with, mainstream society.

 

[Firefly]

Where I have a problem is the poverty industry pretending that the root cause of all of this is economic. It isn't. Poverty is a symptom of a social problem, or basket of inter-related social problems. While all the emphasis is placed on treating the symptom the root causes will never be tackled.
My solution is education, mainly primary school level. Build more schools in the small number of areas where most social problems are concentrated, hire more teachers, lower the pupil-teacher ratio to 12 or 16, have breakfast clubs and homework clubs and teach the kids how to cook and vote and basically try to replace the parent with the school as the primary influence on the children because the root cause of all of this is bad parenting. That may not mean the parents aren't trying, it may not even be the parents of the particular child, but poverty is a result of a culture which is dislocated from, and incompatible with, mainstream society.

This is the best post I have read on AAM in a very long time.

 

[TheBigShort]

I don't buy that at all.

The problem with that view is that we are then into cherry-picking the parts of her story we don't like, to admonish her and the situation she is in, and ignoring the parts that perhaps we don't want to hear, because it may spoil the narrative.
You mentioned the states agencies etc. The implication is that those state agencies are so well resources and efficient that all this takes is a simple phone call?
Wasn't there fatalities last month in Rathmines in a house that was carved up into eight units? I thought this thing was supposed to be in the past?

My solution is education, mainly primary school level. Build more schools in the small number of areas where most social problems are concentrated, hire more teachers, lower the pupil-teacher ratio to 12 or 16, have breakfast clubs and homework clubs and teach the kids how to cook and vote and basically try to replace the parent with the school as the primary influence on the children because the root cause of all of this is bad parenting. That may not mean the parents aren't trying, it may not even be the parents of the particular child, but poverty is a result of a culture which is dislocated from, and incompatible with, mainstream media

I would be hard pressed to disagree with any of that, other than to say it will cost money (short-medium term) to get it up and running to avail of the benefits long-term.
But considering what people are like around here if they whiff an opportunity to spot taxes being 'wasted', then I would be surprised if it found much support.
But overall, you have proposed a solution that makes sense, seems doable, and shouldn't result in exacerbating the housing crisis.

I should add, it is a refreshing viewpoint from the general bile typically regurgitated about taxes.

 

[Purple]

The problem with that view is that we are then into cherry-picking the parts of her story we don't like, to admonish her and the situation she is in, and ignoring the parts that perhaps we don't want to hear, because it may spoil the narrative.

Can't that be said of every side in this debate?

 

[Purple]

Wasn't there fatalities last month in Rathmines in a house that was carved up into eight units? I thought this thing was supposed to be in the past?

Had the house been reported to the RTB? They can't fix things that they don't know about. What I do know is that the institutions of the state are hostile to landlords and assume the tenant is in the right until proven otherwise so that aspect of her story doesn't hold water.