Forums Forums National News £30k benefits are not enough...

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.