View Full Version : Wife Swap Channel 4
Is anyone watching this. A family of ten both adults unemployed and getting thirty seven & half thousand a year on benefits!
Their on more than ALLOT of people including the other family on their that work.
Is it any wonder that their are so many people who don't want to leave the dole and so many people wanting to come to FREE cash Britain.
Who are the mugs well do you pay taxe's.
This makes me sick :2up:
Stuart W
07-10-2003, 21:15
Sorry, have you actually thought that through?
37k per year for a family of TEN?
EIGHT of which will grow out of everything you buy them in a matter of weeks.
I am not sikened by UK citizens on benefit, I am sikened by benefit fraud. All the people who have some ilness or another to stop them working when in fact, they have cash in hand jobs.
If ever you are unfortunate enough to have to go on benefit, you will quickly realise that it is no easy ride!
Sorry, have you actually thought that through?
37k per year for a family of TEN?
EIGHT of which will grow out of everything you buy them in a matter of weeks.
I am not sikened by UK citizens on benefit, I am sikened by benefit fraud. All the people who have some ilness or another to stop them working when in fact, they have cash in hand jobs.
If ever you are unfortunate enough to have to go on benefit, you will quickly realise that it is no easy ride!
Also makes hard working people wonder why the hell their working when they can get more by signing on.
Just seen this on the channel 4 website Q&A,
http://www.channel4.com/life/microsites/W/wife_swap/shows/02/
Q: Do you think you learnt anything from doing the swap?
A: How well my husband and I get on ... and how much you can earn on benefits!
One of the many things wrong with this country :(
Sorry, have you actually thought that through?
37k per year for a family of TEN?
EIGHT of which will grow out of everything you buy them in a matter of weeks.
I am not sikened by UK citizens on benefit, I am sikened by benefit fraud. All the people who have some ilness or another to stop them working when in fact, they have cash in hand jobs.
If ever you are unfortunate enough to have to go on benefit, you will quickly realise that it is no easy ride!
I didn't actually see the program, but are you saying it was a family of ten getting £37K of benefits?
If it was a family of ten am I to assume it was two adults and eight kids?
If this is so and for eg: a couple were working they would know not to have anymore kids when they were not able to afford anymore! I have allways had the view that you shouldn't have kids if you cant afford to support them.
I know sometimes births are unplanned but I guess theres nothing to worry about if the state is handing out cash. :rolleyes:
I didn't actually see the program, but are you saying it was a family of ten getting £37K of benefits?
Yep, I was amazed also, £721 a week, not bad eh?
If it was a family of ten am I to assume it was two adults and eight kids?
Correct !!
I just wish my sperm count was higher than my IQ, maybe then I would be in the same position as that couple :D
Also makes hard working people wonder why the hell their working when they can get more by signing on.
Ok, so you think that family shouldn't get that "£37.5k" in benefits.
So how do you suggest they support their family when all those children need to be fed and clothed?
Clearly both parents can't go out to work because one of them is going to have to look after the kids, so one of them is going to have to get a job that *pays* 37.5k PA, aren't they? How easy do you think that's going to be??
Some people don't understand that this is the way the benefits system is *supposed* to work.
Now if they were working *and* claiming benefits, you might have a good reason to "get mad" (although personally I think the benefits system *should* be set up to allow that, at least in part), but the fact is that they are not committing any fraud to do this and it is entirely legal and above board.
If you want to "get mad" about something that's *really* a waste of money, complain about Portcullis House, for instance, where £231 million of public money was spent on a cushy new home for MPs to get them out of their cramped Whitehall offices.
Now that, in itself, isn't a bad thing, but that includes spending £150,00 0 on fig trees to go in the courtyard which, they claim will reduce the cost of cooling in the summer, as if a few fans would be so much more expensive to run or £440 for a reclining swivel chair for every MP (they could have virually just as good chairs for under £100) etc see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1191578.stm for more details.
Now *that* is a *real* waste of tax payers' money. Not a family claiming benefits they are entitled to.
Ok, so you think that family shouldn't get that "£37.5k" in benefits. Yes they should....now
So how do you suggest they support their family when all those children need to be fed and clothed? The general tone here (and I agree with it) is that they should have had the brains and conscience not to have so many kids!
Clearly both parents can't go out to work because one of them is going to have to look after the kids, so one of them is going to have to get a job that *pays* 37.5k PA, aren't they? How easy do you think that's going to be?? Not very easy(they would need more than that before tax!). Shouldn't have had the kids then then!
Some people don't understand that this is the way the benefits system is *supposed* to work. How should it work? We should support scroungers!? I know, I will have as many kids as I can and then claim off the state to support them. If I did that I would know that I was taking the mick, but it seems it's allright for others to do this
Now if they were working *and* claiming benefits, you might have a good reason to "get mad" (although personally I think the benefits system *should* be set up to allow that, at least in part), but the fact is that they are not committing any fraud to do this and it is entirely legal and above board. They still shouldn't have had those kids if they couldn't afford to keep them all. The fact that it is legal dosn't mean that we shouldn't get steamed thinking about it. It's wrong that the social security safety net is being used as a way of life.
If you want to "get mad" about something that's *really* a waste of money, complain about Portcullis House, for instance, where £231 million of public money was spent on a cushy new home for MPs to get them out of their cramped Whitehall offices.
Now that, in itself, isn't a bad thing, but that includes spending £150,00 0 on fig trees to go in the courtyard which, they claim will reduce the cost of cooling in the summer, as if a few fans would be so much more expensive to run or £440 for a reclining swivel chair for every MP (they could have virually just as good chairs for under £100) etc see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1191578.stm for more details.
Now *that* is a *real* waste of tax payers' money. Not a family claiming benefits they are entitled to. I don't agree with that either but were not discussing that are we??- Unless you want to start another thread....and I'll support you in that argument! :D
I just wish my sperm count was higher than my IQ, maybe then I would be in the same position as that couple :D
:rofl:
carlingman
07-10-2003, 23:55
Is anyone watching this. A family of ten both adults unemployed and getting thirty seven & half thousand a year on benefits!
Their on more than ALLOT of people including the other family on their that work.
Is it any wonder that their are so many people who don't want to leave the dole and so many people wanting to come to FREE cash Britain.
Who are the mugs well do you pay taxe's.
This makes me sick :2up:
Having not seen the program and looking at what has been posted would be inclined to agree.
Surely having a child must be a balanced decision barring accidents.
Expecting to have the state pay for the all the offspring from benefits is too much.
I would have thought that after two possibly three mishaps maybe the guy should have thought of a vasectomy or being the modern age the woman of sterilisation.
Some points that have been raised I agree you cannot expect both parties to work as with 10 dependants surely one must have to stop at home to raise them but it doesnt avoid the issue of making a rational decision.
All I hope is the program doesnt depict them playing the hard done by act.
:Peace:
Stuart W
08-10-2003, 00:00
OK, I agree with the "if you are skint, stop having kids" line of thought entirly.
But.... what if they were both working, self employed running their own business from home, had all the kids, then the company went under because a bigger company started up selling the same product.
They then lose their house as they can't pay the mortgauge.... screw em eh? shouldn't have had the damn rug rats.
Sometimes life just doesn't go the way you want it to.
We have six kids and there has been times when we have been forced to go on bebefits. Believe me, those times were damn hard and if someone had the audacity to tell me face to face that I shouldn't have so many kids if I'm gonna be on benefit, I'd happily smash their face right in for them. I work bloody hard to provide for my family and have done all sorts from lecturing ICT at college to collecting scrap metal. Sometimes the work just isn't there & benefits are the only thing left.
/climbs off soap box and appologises for ranting ;)
OK, I agree with the "if you are skint, stop having kids" line of thought entirly.
But.... what if they were both working, self employed running their own business from home, had all the kids, then the company went under because a bigger company started up selling the same product.
They then lose their house as they can't pay the mortgauge.... screw em eh? shouldn't have had the damn rug rats.
Sometimes life just doesn't go the way you want it to.
We have six kids and there has been times when we have been forced to go on bebefits. Believe me, those times were damn hard and if someone had the audacity to tell me face to face that I shouldn't have so many kids if I'm gonna be on benefit, I'd happily smash their face right in for them. I work bloody hard to provide for my family and have done all sorts from lecturing ICT at college to collecting scrap metal. Sometimes the work just isn't there & benefits are the only thing left.
/climbs off soap box and appologises for ranting ;)Thats really rough m8 but I suspect that the ten kids scenario discussed above is nothing like your case, call it a gut instinct. I am prepared to be wrong here :)
Look I watched the program. He worked for the council before getting made redundant (so he says). I very much doubt he made 37k working for them either going from the way he was. So like whats already been said if you can't afford them you shouldn't have them. So why do they. Well why not when the mugs we call taxpayers falk out for them all.
Lets face it their are familys of ten out their that work but dont make that much so why the feck should the DSS give them that much. Would any of you want to work if you were making that everyweek
watched the program tonight i was amased havent they herd of contraception or family planing most familys have 1or 2 children not 8
zoombini
08-10-2003, 11:57
The woman on that show was pathetic.
All the bitching, jealousness etc all came out at the end..
What a case she is.
Still, they had a nice house, nice tv & sterio, nice kitchen, nice doouble glazed windows etc.
What a pity that they could not be bothered to wallpaper the walls! But then they cannot get the council to do that for them.
The fella.. well every 2nd word started with an "F"..
Ok, so you think that family shouldn't get that "£37.5k" in benefits.
So how do you suggest they support their family when all those children need to be fed and clothed?
Clearly both parents can't go out to work because one of them is going to have to look after the kids, so one of them is going to have to get a job that *pays* 37.5k PA, aren't they? How easy do you think that's going to be??
Some people don't understand that this is the way the benefits system is *supposed* to work.
Now if they were working *and* claiming benefits, you might have a good reason to "get mad" (although personally I think the benefits system *should* be set up to allow that, at least in part), but the fact is that they are not committing any fraud to do this and it is entirely legal and above board.
If you want to "get mad" about something that's *really* a waste of money, complain about Portcullis House, for instance, where £231 million of public money was spent on a cushy new home for MPs to get them out of their cramped Whitehall offices.
Now that, in itself, isn't a bad thing, but that includes spending £150,00 0 on fig trees to go in the courtyard which, they claim will reduce the cost of cooling in the summer, as if a few fans would be so much more expensive to run or £440 for a reclining swivel chair for every MP (they could have virually just as good chairs for under £100) etc see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/1191578.stm for more details.
Now *that* is a *real* waste of tax payers' money. Not a family claiming benefits they are entitled to.
This is the part I hate. Fecking do gooders that think we should be paying for free loaders. Well we'll all have 8 kids and you and the other do gooders can pay us 37k a year for sitting on our arse's. Oh and dont forget to stick up for us while we do this, muppets
Stuart W
08-10-2003, 12:33
This is the part I hate. Fecking do gooders that think we should be paying for free loaders. Well we'll all have 8 kids and you and the other do gooders can pay us 37k a year for sitting on our arse's. Oh and dont forget to stick up for us while we do this, muppets
So what would you see done then?
Take the children away and put them in care?
Force one of the parents to get a £35k+ job?
Make them go and beg for money on the underground?
Seriously, I'm interestead, what would you recomend should happen to a family like this?
So what would you see done then?
Take the children away and put them in care?
Force one of the parents to get a £35k+ job?
Make them go and beg for money on the underground?
Seriously, I'm interestead, what would you recomend should happen to a family like this?
As I said, they should have had the intellegence or conscience not to have so many kids if it meant the state supporting them. Now that they have them all we can do is support them. :(
This is the part I hate. Fecking do gooders that think we should be paying for free loaders. Well we'll all have 8 kids and you and the other do gooders can pay us 37k a year for sitting on our arse's. Oh and dont forget to stick up for us while we do this, muppets
LOL! Where do I sign up?
So what would you see done then?
Take the children away and put them in care?
Force one of the parents to get a £35k+ job?
Make them go and beg for money on the underground?
Seriously, I'm interestead, what would you recomend should happen to a family like this?
Their housing gets paid for and from then they have to live on the bare minimum to survive. If working people have to do this then those lazy b@stards should do the same. I'm a workaholic. I've not had a holiday in 16yrs so hearing about those freeloaders made my blood boil. Give them £100 found aweek for cloths (no room for beer or anyother luxuries) and food vouchers. If they share their braincell they'll survive but also looking for a job to get more money!
timewarrior2001
08-10-2003, 13:13
For once I'm with S.W here.
These people have no chance of supporting their kids if benefits were removed. Then these people wanting the parents to go out and work would be responsible for either splitting up a perfectly happy family or cauing death through starvation of 8 children.
However.......these people should be condemed for having 8 children, there simply is no need to have so many children these days. I would hope that the gov would be able to insist on them having sterilisation ops to prevent any more children.
Defiant I suggest you stop talking out your arse and look into the matter, 37K a year isnt much to bring up 8 kids on, how much of that 37K provides a roof over the heads of the family? How much do you reckon a food bill for a family of 10 comes to a year? How much money do you think they need to spend on clothes? then figure out how much is left over, you will be very very very surprised.
They will receive the exact amount per child that someone with one or two kids does, the amount becomes astonomical because of the amount of children and the fact they will probably need 2 3 bedroom homes knocked into one.
For once I'm with S.W here.
These people have no chance of supporting their kids if benefits were removed. Then these people wanting the parents to go out and work would be responsible for either splitting up a perfectly happy family or cauing death through starvation of 8 children.
Right hope my missus got a good sleep last night because were busy tonight making money :rolleyes:
My wife is of the opinion that if you are already a long term burden on the state you should only be allowed 2 kids on the dole, the state should not give any more money than that.
You can just see what would happen if the gov set a deadline for that kind of rule- the scroungers would suddenly start trying to have more kids before the deadline! There would be a population explosion :D
timewarrior2001
08-10-2003, 13:47
My wife is of the opinion that if you are already a long term burden on the state you should only be allowed 2 kids on the dole, the state should not give any more money than that.
You can just see what would happen if the gov set a deadline for that kind of rule- the scroungers would suddenly start trying to have more kids before the deadline! There would be a population explosion :D
Oh right so it appears anyone with kids that happens to find themselves out of work automatically becomes a scrounger........charming I am sure.
I really hope you are lucky enough to never have to apply for benefit.
Oh right so it appears anyone with kids that happens to find themselves out of work automatically becomes a scrounger........charming I am sure.
I really hope you are lucky enough to never have to apply for benefit.
I wouldn't say that. I know familys on the dole and they do struggle but when you are a family of ten raking in 37k ayear of taxpayers money well yes you are a scrounger
Oh right so it appears anyone with kids that happens to find themselves out of work automatically becomes a scrounger........charming I am sure.
I really hope you are lucky enough to never have to apply for benefit.
Thats not what she/I said.
It just applies to long term/won't work scroungers, not the poor sod who is suddenly out of work but does his damndest (like SW) to get back into work. Anyway, it's all a pipe dream. The powers that be seem to enjoy burdening this country and it's overstreched services with deadwood, flotsam and jetsam.
For once I'm with S.W here.
How much do you reckon a food bill for a family of 10 comes to a year? How much money do you think they need to spend on clothes? then figure out how much is left over, you will be very very very surprised.
Looking at the large WS Toshiba TV with Sky, the HiFi system, new washing machine and dryer, all the beer and fags they went through it is obvious where a lot of the money had gone.
I know the Rochdale area very well and must say I liked the clever piece of editing that had this bloke walking past a sign for Uncouth Rd,
timewarrior2001
08-10-2003, 14:46
Looking at the large WS Toshiba TV with Sky, the HiFi system, new washing machine and dryer, all the beer and fags they went through it is obvious where a lot of the money had gone.
I know the Rochdale area very well and must say I liked the clever piece of editing that had this bloke walking past a sign for Uncouth Rd,
Well lets see, an old washer machine could not handle the work load of a family of 10, it would break down costing more to repair. A new washer machine is surprisingly inexpensive and CERTAINLY cheaper than going to the laundrette.
WS toshiba TV's often come in a package deal including Video and DVD player, usually for around £499 (a friend recently bought one from comet) now obtaining credit fomr somehwere like Crazy georges would be easy for this family and they would pay it in installments liek people who work.
Beer and fags, prob from France, price almost negligable.
Sky TV, well sorry but its prob used a hell of a lot for cartoons for the kids therefor making a maximum of £37 a month acceptable.
HiFi system, you can pick them up for next to nothing these days, could even be from cash converters for all we know, Same goes for TV and washing machine.
smicer07
08-10-2003, 14:56
That woman was an absolute disgrace to society, and her "husband" wasn't any better.
Incog here,just bookmarking so move along there,nothing to see here.
:)
Well lets see, an old washer machine could not handle the work load of a family of 10, it would break down costing more to repair. A new washer machine is surprisingly inexpensive and CERTAINLY cheaper than going to the laundrette.
WS toshiba TV's often come in a package deal including Video and DVD player, usually for around £499 (a friend recently bought one from comet) now obtaining credit fomr somehwere like Crazy georges would be easy for this family and they would pay it in installments liek people who work.
Beer and fags, prob from France, price almost negligable.
Sky TV, well sorry but its prob used a hell of a lot for cartoons for the kids therefor making a maximum of £37 a month acceptable.
HiFi system, you can pick them up for next to nothing these days, could even be from cash converters for all we know, Same goes for TV and washing machine.All true but it does seem to imply that the family is getting too much money if they have some left over for luxuries. I didn't realise that the social security safety net is for any luxuries at all. When I was little we couldn't afford a telly on what my parents earnt, videos weren't about and a stereo (or mono) was too expensive. Keeping booze in the house was an expensive luxury and to save money my dad would brew his own beer.
btw.....did they have a car?
bob_a_builder
08-10-2003, 16:06
Repeated 10:40 on Thursday for those who want to make their own mind up.
luxuries : thought I read somewhere a quote of £70/week for Bingo - can't find quote now so could be wrong.
Anyone else reminded of those Harry Enfield characters, The 'Slobs' or some such
Stuart W
08-10-2003, 16:15
All true but it does seem to imply that the family is getting too much money if they have some left over for luxuries. I didn't realise that the social security safety net is for any luxuries at all. When I was little we couldn't afford a telly on what my parents earnt, videos weren't about and a stereo (or mono) was too expensive. Keeping booze in the house was an expensive luxury and to save money my dad would brew his own beer.
btw.....did they have a car?
And when my mother was a little girl, she used to play with a stick and a hoop. She never had anything as fancy as a radio or anything, they used to go next door to listen to the news or catch up on a radio play.
When I was little, we couldn't afford a colour TV....
When my eldest was little, we couldn't afford a wide screen TV.
Now, I can't afford a flat screen TV, but I dare say my son will have no problem buying one when he is my age.
What I'm trying to poont out is, times change. You can't judge financial worth by household apliances unless you are using like-for-like time periods.
Repeated 10:40 on Thursday for those who want to make their own mind up.
luxuries : thought I read somewhere a quote of £70/week for Bingo - can't find quote now so could be wrong.
Anyone else reminded of those Harry Enfield characters, The 'Slobs' or some such
And well worth it for those that missed this. These arn't just over paid scroungers their neighbors from hell :Peace:
PS channel 4 have a forum on this here (http://community.channel4.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=162603557&f=361608372&m=762608982) with some interesting views
I do have sympathy with anyone with a large family that has fallen on hard times. When I was 10 with two younger brothers my father was killed in a motorcycle accident and my mother who had a longstanding heart condition spent years in hospital. This meant that we spent some time in care,
however this woman has 8 children, 5 are under the age of 4, she has not worked for over 10 years and her husband has been out of work for some time.
It is safe to assume that a large number of these children where conceived whilst both of the parents where on benefit. That is downright irresponsible.
This thread was about this specific case, those of you who did not watch the programme should watch the repeat, and then defend these people.
I feel most sorry for the children, living in a smoke filled, foul mouthed environment like this will not be the best start in life.
And when my mother was a little girl, she used to play with a stick and a hoop. She never had anything as fancy as a radio or anything, they used to go next door to listen to the news or catch up on a radio play.
When I was little, we couldn't afford a colour TV....
When my eldest was little, we couldn't afford a wide screen TV.
Now, I can't afford a flat screen TV, but I dare say my son will have no problem buying one when he is my age.
What I'm trying to poont out is, times change. You can't judge financial worth by household apliances unless you are using like-for-like time periods.I still think that electronic stuff like telly and video are luxury items that you should only possess if you can afford it.
timewarrior2001
08-10-2003, 17:00
I still think that electronic stuff like telly and video are luxury items that you should only possess if you can afford it.
A washer machine with a family of ten would be a necessity not a luxury.
TV's these days are not luxurious, neither are stereo systems.
Sky TV well as I said before under normal circumstances its classed as a luxury I guess, but with 8 kids I'd definately say it was essential.
The standard of living has gone up these days, I am currently unemployed, I am looking for work but I cant get any work.
Now I manage to run an E reg car, pay for 600K BB internet, pay my Car insurance and still find money left over to get to see my son in Luton and send gifts for him and then I still find money to smoke cigars and have a few pints.
I buy DVD's I spent £178 on a DVD player when I was working, I paid via Credit card, now I am not working should I not be allowed to use it, I certainly couldnt afford it now.
I regulalry go to the cinema, I buy Music CD's, I got engaged (£300 for the ring)
being unemployed does not mean you cant live a good and decent life.
I cant always go out and buy somehting when I want it, but with carefull planning it can be gained.
The difference for me is I am a carer for my disabled mum and I get a grand total of an extra £20 a week for "working" 35 hours as a carer.
(I live on £72.15 per week)
A washer machine with a family of ten would be a necessity not a luxury. I have not mentioned washing machines, I think that with 8 kids it is essential. It dosn't count as entertainment.
TV's these days are not luxurious, neither are stereo systems. True, but they do cost money as well as a licence fee.
Sky TV well as I said before under normal circumstances its classed as a luxury I guess, but with 8 kids I'd definately say it was essential.Don't be silly, it's not essential....what did people do as little as 20 years ago?
The standard of living has gone up these days, I am currently unemployed, I am looking for work but I cant get any work.
Now I manage to run an E reg car, pay for 600K BB internet, pay my Car insurance and still find money left over to get to see my son in Luton and send gifts for him and then I still find money to smoke cigars and have a few pints.
I buy DVD's I spent £178 on a DVD player when I was working, I paid via Credit card, now I am not working should I not be allowed to use it, I certainly couldnt afford it now.
I regulalry go to the cinema, I buy Music CD's, I got engaged (£300 for the ring)
being unemployed does not mean you cant live a good and decent life.
I cant always go out and buy somehting when I want it, but with carefull planning it can be gained.
The difference for me is I am a carer for my disabled mum and I get a grand total of an extra £20 a week for "working" 35 hours as a carer.
(I live on £72.15 per week)So you are not a scrounger then, you have been in work, are looking for work and I would argue that as a carer you should be properly paid by the state to do that, good for you!
I think that it's disgusting how thousands of people caring for relatives are often /usually ignored by the state in terms of money and support!
btw....congrats on the engagement :)
Is anyone watching this. A family of ten both adults unemployed and getting thirty seven & half thousand a year on benefits!
While I do agree that they shouldn't have had any more kids while unemployed, £37,500 is not an awful lot to run a house for a family of ten on (£3,750 per person).
And (Unlike China) we don't have rules on the size of families..
The general tone here (and I agree with it) is that they should have had the brains and conscience not to have so many kids!
Whether they should or not is another argument entirely.
We don't have legally enforced limits on the number children you can have, nor do I think we should.
The facts are that a) they have the kids and b) the kids need supporting, that's all there is to it.
How should it work? We should support scroungers!? I know, I will have as many kids as I can and then claim off the state to support them. If I did that I would know that I was taking the mick, but it seems it's allright for others to do this
As has already been pointed out, that amount of money doesn't go very far when you divide it amongst ten people.
This is the part I hate. Fecking do gooders that think we should be paying for free loaders. Well we'll all have 8 kids and you and the other do gooders can pay us 37k a year for sitting on our arse's. Oh and dont forget to stick up for us while we do this, muppets
Ah, and this is what passes for reasonable debate where you come from is it?
You should sign that - Angry of Tunbridge Wells and send it in to the Daily Mail letters page...!
Their housing gets paid for and from then they have to live on the bare minimum to survive.
Obviously *you've* never claimed benefit then, because that's exactly what you get: You get your housing costs paid for and the *bare minimum* that the *government* says you need to live on (and you can bet that that is the utter minimum they can get away with!).
I've lived on benefits. It's not a "cushy number", neither is it "free loading" or "scrounging", anyone who claims it is is simply declaring their ignorance.
Obviously *you've* never claimed benefit then, because that's exactly what you get: You get your housing costs paid for and the *bare minimum* that the *government* says you need to live on (and you can bet that that is the utter minimum they can get away with!).
I've lived on benefits. It's not a "cushy number", neither is it "free loading" or "scrounging", anyone who claims it is is simply declaring their ignorance.
I've been on benefits too so you can't try that one on me thanks :rolleyes:
The facts are that a) they have the kids and b) the kids need supporting, that's all there is to it. I agree, now that they have them they do need supporting, unfortunately.
As has already been pointed out, that amount of money doesn't go very far when you divide it amongst ten people.
But it still is a lot of money that the taxpayers have to supply. All because of a lack of brains/birth control/conscience. And it is taking the mick to have 8 kids and expect the state to support them.
Ah, and this is what passes for reasonable debate where you come from is it?
You should sign that - Angry of Tunbridge Wells and send it in to the Daily Mail letters page...!
It's not an argument but it's a good rant....and it gets to the point!
NEONKNIGHT
09-10-2003, 00:03
Wow! I don't know who is the more shocking, the people on tv or some of the extreme and to be honest, down right offensive views expressed in this thread.
I've been on benefits too so you can't try that one on me thanks :rolleyes:
What would you suggest the Government do about the family then, bearing in mind that there are no laws governing the amount of children we can have, and the Government are obliged to provide a minimum standard of living for all people.
Let them starve? Put the children into care (something which would cost the taxpayer more than the £3750 a year I quoted above)?
Having said all that, they should have stuck with the kids they had when the husband lost his job.
Wow! I don't know who is the more shocking, the people on tv or some of the extreme and to be honest, down right offensive views expressed in this thread.lol, I'm guessing that your in the 'liberal Guardian readers' team then team then :) (sweeping generalisation :D )
Having said all that, they should have stuck with the kids they had when the husband lost his job.Thats exactly my point! They were taking the mick having any more kids. I wouldn't dream of putting my desires before the greater good of the community. Unfortunately too many people today seem feel that they have a right to something for nothing and the powers that be seem to be only too happy to supply it.
NEONKNIGHT
09-10-2003, 00:27
lol, I'm guessing that your in the 'liberal Guardian readers' team then team then :) (sweeping generalisation :D )
LOL! :) I'm more of a Socialist/The Beano type of person !
Wow! I don't know who is the more shocking, the people on tv or some of the extreme and to be honest, down right offensive views expressed in this thread.
I'd watch the repeat tomorrow night before judging peoples views
NEONKNIGHT
09-10-2003, 07:46
I'd watch the repeat tomorrow night before judging peoples views
I watched it the first time.
TigaSefi
09-10-2003, 08:23
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,5-2003462386,00.html
LMFAO.... well who got morals now ? heheh
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,5-2003462386,00.html
LMFAO.... well who got morals now ? heheh
My goodness!
She may claim to have more morals but she certainly doesn't have manners!
And how moral is it to smoke 70 a day (between the two parents) when you've got kids with chronic asthma, and you yourself suffer from it too!
What gobsmacked me was they think the world would benefit from another 8 of them ????
The offspring will most likely turn out clones of their foul mouthed, idle parents who will contribute absolutely nothing to anything, but become a further burden on the reasonable, hard working, long suffering rest of us. :grind:
bob_a_builder
09-10-2003, 09:32
And how moral is it to smoke 70 a day (between the two parents) when you've got kids with chronic asthma, and you yourself suffer from it too!
May not be moral, but it does keep the disability benefit rolling in ...
"Lizzie ††she smokes up to 30 fags a day ††and her husband Mark, who has his own 40-a-day habit, get their benefits topped up with disability living allowance because some of their children suffer chronic asthma like their mum.
" (Quote from The Sun (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,5-2003462386,00.html) : so may be complete BS)
Nah, if they had said "Busty Lizzie" then it would be BS :D
zoombini
09-10-2003, 10:20
I hear that the woman is offering to pose topless for the papers?
Thats one paper I wont be buying then..
Very high morals indeed!
Despite having 8 kids & the costs needed to bring them up, this couple are obviously not intending to work, to claim as much as they can off of the state in the "scrounger" way. I know that many families have many children and try to work but just cannot & have to claim some benifits. However this couple appear not to be in that catorgory.
They appear to have no intention of either getting a job (or ever wallpapering the kitchen) or giving up smoking around the children.
The whole house is furnished with good furniture that appears to have been provided by the state. Its a damn pity that people who work all thier life cannot afford such items.
The children will be bought up knowing that its OK to not go to work, to claim everything off of the state, to swear profusly & to be abusive.
They too will be a burden on society like the parents.
They certainly have the streetname correct there.
zoombini
09-10-2003, 10:22
Any disability benifits should be stopped for people who smoke like that.
BUt then thats another thread...
May not be moral, but it does keep the disability benefit rolling in ...
"Lizzie ††she smokes up to 30 fags a day ††and her husband Mark, who has his own 40-a-day habit, get their benefits topped up with disability living allowance because some of their children suffer chronic asthma like their mum.
" (Quote from The Sun (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,5-2003462386,00.html) : so may be complete BS)
You watch the DLA disappear now though...
I watched it the first time.
Then I'd class you as a do gooder. One of the biggest reasons this country is in such a mess. Wasted Millions
I hear that the woman is offering to pose topless for the papers?
:sick:
They certainly have the streetname correct there.Just a bit of clever TV editing, there are only a couple of old terraced private houses on Uncouth Rd, the nearest council property is half a mile away.
I have often wondered how this road came by this name.:confused:
NEONKNIGHT
09-10-2003, 12:44
Then I'd class you as a do gooder. One of the biggest reasons this country is in such a mess. Wasted Millions
LOL! How sad, misguided and blinkered some people are.
LOL! How sad, misguided and blinkered some people are.
And how stupped some people are when they think the taxpayers should be paying for lazy b@stards like those.
That women could only managed one day of work on that show and that was a part time job!
orangebird
09-10-2003, 13:58
I have to say, I feel pity for their children, and nothing but contempt for the parents. How can they feel proud of themselves and the way they have brought up their children??? Do they actually value their children at all? Why can't one of them work?? My sister has four children, and both her and her husband work - they do get a 'top up' from the social, but at least they make the first effort.
I would like children - the one thing that would stop me from having the is not being able to afford them. To think you used to have to have a license to have a dog.... :rolleyes:
And how moral is it to smoke 70 a day (between the two parents) when you've got kids with chronic asthma, and you yourself suffer from it too!
Thats what I thought, they disgust me for that alone! And it's us that are paying for their habit! :dozey:
A breakdown from the Daily Mail,
Child benefit: £4,747. 60 per year
Carers allowance (for Marky Jay whois has chronic asthma) £5,691. 40
Income support for Mrs.B and children: £13,710 .84
Incapacity Ben. Mr.B who has depression £4,446
DLA for Marky Jay £5,051. 80
DLA for Vienna who is also asthmatic £3,754. 40
Total: £37,402 .04
Oh I feel so sorry for them :rolleyes:
Quote, Incapacity Ben. Mr.B who has depression £4,446
Depression???
To be honest I would be downright suicidal living with her.:rolleyes:
ian@huth
09-10-2003, 16:06
I haven't seen the program yet so I look forward to tonights repeat. I am quite surprised at some of the allowances that they get and the rates they get them at, they must know how to work the system. I would imagine that they actually get more than the figure quoted with things like council tax benefit and housing benefit which aren't listed in the £37k.
I haven't seen the program yet so I look forward to tonights repeat.
Did you catch it ianathuth
:sick:
Well just think, her hubby did the deed with her at least 8 times :sick:
Well just think, her hubby did the deed with her at least 8 times :sick:
yea no wonder he's always got a can in his hand lol
ian@huth
10-10-2003, 16:50
Well just think, her hubby did the deed with her at least 8 times :sick:
Probably not. Two of the kids looked like twins and living with her he probably popped down to the local quite often to get some peace and quiet leaving the door open for Uncles Tom, Dick and Harry. I wonder if she had it off with the Devon guy.
Did you catch it ianathuth
Yes I did and I must say that I was shocked and disgusted by what I saw.
I am disabled (Osteoarthritis and Parkinson's Disease) and do get benefit and Disability Living Allowance, but what a fight it was to get it. I get the higher rate of mobility allowance and the lower rate of care allowance and watching them during the program made me wonder how the hell they got what they did. One of them got both the higher rate mobility and higher rate care. They must certainly know how to work the system to get what they do which actually amounts to over £40,000 a year when you add in council tax benefit and housing benefit.
I know many people who have serious health problems that cannot get a fraction of the help that these people are getting and do really suffer from depression as a result. That guy didn't show any sign of depression during the program, quite the opposite.
ian@huth
15-10-2003, 13:08
This episode of wife swap is the subject of "Kilroy" on BBC one tomorrow (Thursday) at 9:00 am
zoombini
15-10-2003, 16:33
Rumours now are that she wants IVF to have another kid?
And that she demands her own chat show on TV..
"What a larf" !!
I must say that this weeks episode was far better, still it showed 1 fella up for being a lazy git & having the abusive language problem too.
Rumours now are that she wants IVF to have another kid?
And that she demands her own chat show on TV..
I've heard that after the show the DSS were getting a few phone calls about him. Seems he's been decorating for people.
Well after seeing how the system works he'll end up getting a slapped wrist and a giro
MadGamer
15-10-2003, 19:47
I missed it last night.
dieselking
16-10-2003, 16:58
People from Rochdale are fighting back. They writing letters to telly & radio companies pointing out that not everyone from the town are like those 2 lazy sods.
I can't believe they want more kids after having 8, especially as none of them work & they can't afford they ones they already have. Also why is she having IVF when she already conceive 8 kids naturally????? (dozy bloody woman :shrug: :shrug: she needs a brain transplant, not another baby LOL)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.