Unemployed father of 8 demanding bigger house from LA so he can have more babies.


plenty of parents with lots of kids these days on welfare benefits given the state of the economy and unemployment situation, its a sweeping generalisation to say they will all turn out as wasters. Limerick isn't the best place in the world right now for employment opportunities.
 


Wow, just wow. There are 7 of us now (9, but 2 passed, RIP) and we were brought up by 2 parents, neither of them could get work, although they tried their best. If anything, having to cope on the very little that we had, having had to at times be visited by SVdeP to give us some food to survive on, I can tell you that none of us turned out to be wasters. We are all in employment (bar my brother who is special needs), we all pay our own way. I've never taken a cent off the government that I wasn't entitled to. I pay my own debts, as do my family. So don't think that having parents that support their family through social welfare payments, will probably turn you into a waster. If anything, it has had the opposite effect on us, it makes us want to have a better life.
So give these kids the benefit of the doubt, you don't know them and you most certainly do not know how they will turn out.
 
"Mr Casey, from Glenbrook, Childers Rd"

Sounds like he's in the right place to me
 

First of all, I said probably, not definitely.

Second, yeah, there is a recession on NOW - but I doubt he had his 8 kids in the years since 2007. He claims in the article that his housing issue started 10 years ago, when he had 3 kids. So he has been looking for housing from the state during a massive economy boom (and bust), so why did he keep having more kids? Because he is irresponsible. He should have stuck with the 3 he had and worked to support them, but no, he kept having more and now he is crying he hasnt enough room for them. I cant get my head round an individual like this, the sense of entitlement and pure irresponsible behaviour just baffles me.

PaddyW said:
Wow, just wow. There are 7 of us now (9, but 2 passed, RIP) and we were brought up by 2 parents, neither of them could get work, although they tried their best.
Click to expand...

I dont know what age you are PaddyW but contraception was not available in my own parents time, so probably not in your parents time either.

This is not the case for the man having 8 children in the decade 2000 - 2010.

Im sorry, but there is no excuse in todays times for what this man is doing. Its irresponsible procreation and all the 'wow, just wow' in the world wont change that, a comparison to a generation or two generations ago is irrelevant.

And as for the kids being wasters - people seem to miss the word probably, but thats the word I used. Not definitely, probably.
 
This guy and his wife absolutely disgust me I have to say! . Myself and my OH have put family on hold for now because he is unemployed and we just can't afford it at the moment. We have a mortgage and bills and we don't want any hand outs. I don't know how accurate it is but I read on some of the boards that he hasn't worked since 2002? can he explain why he hasn't been able to get a job in the boom?, he seems to be clinging on to this hotdog story for dear life as if to prove that he tried his best but couldn't get anywhere! Rubbish- he tried once and failed (i'm sure he was gutted :roll eyes: ) and has sat on his a**e for the past ten years getting up only to make babies that he can't support.

He's damn lucky to have any house at the moment let alone a bigger one in a better area.
 
in fairness he seems to come across as a decent enough man but i dont think he should have anymore children. what people forget is that having children is not a right, its a lifestyle choice, noting more or noting less. if you cant afford them dont have them ... if you cant afford a rolls royce dont drive one and expect everyone else to pay for it!
 

Fair enough, I accept all your points and I know you did use the word probably, I even used it in my post.

As an aside, we all lived in a three bed house. 4 of us boys together, 3 girls together and the youngest in with the parents. I can't understand his need for a bigger house, we only had 3 rooms and it never bothered us, in fact some of my best memories come from having the craic in the room with the 4 of us in there, it was priceless. He should reconsider his need for more children, be happy with what he's got and look after them as best he can for now.

Oh and I was just 'wow'ing at the use of the words 'wasters'. The rest of your post is grand, I've no problem with it, but you can't say they'll probably turn out wasters, no one knows that and it seems a bit judgemental really. They may all turn out to be fine upstanding citizens that pay their taxes and do the right thing. They may even provide towards our pensions!
 

Its really the fathers attitude and sense of entitlement that made me say that (including the probably!) - its difficult to overcome the value system you learn from your upbringing. And this mans value system is all wrong.

Those kids are at an immediate disadvantage in life.
 
truthseeker said:
In my opinion someone like this, a waster probably producing more wasters, should have to agree to sterilisation in order to qualify for benefits. Its a massive mistake for the state to keep paying benefits for irresponsible reproduction.
Click to expand...
"A waster producing wasters" is at best a silly and blinkered comment. Sterilisation linked benefits is a step before eugenics. The State has a duty to all its citizens and children are citizens and the lifeblood of the State.
ney001 said:
He's damn lucky to have any house at the moment let alone a bigger one in a better area.
Click to expand...
Lucky indeed. But the State provides social housing at minimal rents for hundreds of thousands of people. If the Council indicated they would provide more suitable accommodation and it is doable then they should do it. 10 in a 3-bed is a bit of a squash and an squeeze; conversely, I know an older woman who lives alone in a large 4-bed council house. It strikes me as poor resource management by the Council.
 
Maybe he is a conservative Catholic opposed to all forms of contraceptives, I wonder would the Church be willling to support him and his family after all he is abiding by their motto to go forth and produce!
 
All very laudable sentiment michaelm but is there not a point where the state is entitled to turn around to citizens such as this and say "you know what, we've provided for you for the past 10 years and all you've done is take, take, take, how about you give something back instead of complaining now that you're not getting even more?". I don't doubt there are inequalities in how housing is allocated but I have absolutely zero sympathy for people like this man, I'm fed up woes such as these (entirely caused by the man himself) when there are so many other stories worthy of much more sympathy.
 
michaelm said:
10 in a 3-bed is a bit of a squash and an squeeze; conversely, I know an older woman who lives alone in a large 4-bed council house. It strikes me as poor resource management by the Council.
Click to expand...

Do the council actively manage situations like this?

Suppose a family breaks up and you have one person living in a three bed or maybe your example, an elderly person living alone in a local authority house

Would the council step in and ask them to move elsewhere, give up the large house and we'll allocate a nice cosy flat in the area.

But then if they do this would there be an outcry? Council moving people out of their homes

I don't know how it works.
Managing the stock is good but I'd imagine it could difficult to move people on out of a large council house. Those are desirable and there is a long waiting list
 
For sure. But I think families of this size are rare these days and those who might otherwise have modest earnings fall into a welfare trap. Anyone who can work should work but it shouldn't cost them to work.
micmclo said:
Would the council step in and ask them to move elsewhere, give up the large house and we'll allocate a nice cosy flat in the area.
Click to expand...
The woman I know asked to transfer to a 2-bed bungalow but the Council turned her down.
 

There is nothing silly and blinkered about my comment, its my opinion and its as valid as yours - which I think is ridiculously idealistic - yes yes itd be lovely if we could all sit around producing children and not work but guess what? My taxes pay for this guys laziness, and so do yours. He is morally irresponsible. Eugenics has nothing to do with it - this persons way of life is parasitical and he is being rewarded by the state for him lack of moral responsibility.

I dont buy into the whole 'lifeblood of the state' rubbish. This guy was the lifeblood of the state 40 odd years ago - and look at him now, a parasite.

Having a family that size that you cannot afford to feed or house or clothe yourself is just ignorant and irresponsible.
 
truthseeker said:
In my opinion someone like this, a waster probably producing more wasters, should have to agree to sterilisation in order to qualify for benefits. Its a massive mistake for the state to keep paying benefits for irresponsible reproduction.
Click to expand...

What an appalling assessment of this case.

What qualifications have you to call anybody or his offspring "Wasters"?

Would you agree to sterilisation for yourself under any circumstances?
 
Leper said:
What an appalling assessment of this case.

What qualifications have you to call anybody or his offspring "Wasters"?

Would you agree to sterilisation for yourself under any circumstances?
Click to expand...

Im sorry if you dont like my opinion of this persons behaviour. His behaviour is appalling. I dont need qualifications to make a judgement call on a story in a newspaper - its my opinion. You dont like it? Tough, I dont express it for your approval.

The guy doesnt work, doesnt support his family, keeps having more children he cant support - course he is a waster! What would you call him - a model of modern fatherhood? Total waster - gives nothing back to society, just takes and takes. Just to point out again - I didnt call his offspring wasters, I said they probably would become wasters.

I personally wouldnt behave in such an irresponsible way so feelings on my own sterilisation and this situation are irrelevant. I believe people shouldnt be rewarded by the state for continuing to have more and more children when they cant even afford to put a roof over their OWN heads, let alone over the childrens.
 
truthseeker said:
There is nothing silly and blinkered about my comment, its my opinion and its as valid as yours
Click to expand...
I stand corrected. I should have said 'measured and insightful' . We seem to live in a world where all opinions and choices are equally valid.
 
I didn’t like Truthseeksers comments about this guy being a waster but the more I read Truthseekers defence the more I have to agree that yes, he is a waster.
This guy wants his neighbours to give him their money to pay for the costs of raising his family. He’s saying “don’t spend your money that you earned on your family, give it to me instead for my children”. His choices have a direct detrimental effect on other people and he doesn’t care.
“The state” doesn’t have any money; it takes and spends its citizens money.
 

How anyone can view this guy as anything other than an entitled leech is beyond me,there is a whole sub class of wasters like him always with the hands out.

I am not talking about those made redundant in the depression either,I was unemployed once and know the pain of it and I know they are doing everything they can to find work but this class of a useless lump with his begging bowl strapped round his neck probably never did a days turn in his life.

He needs to be told where to go in no uncertain terms or indeed language.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register