Taxpayer support

What kind of a social security system allows this to happen?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3269511/Britain-s-Shameless-mother-twelve-rakes-40-000-year-benefits-reveals-spent-1-300-gifts-son-s-sixth-birthday-tells-taxpayers-ve-got-opinion-stuffed.html

I don't blame the woman for scrounging every penny she can, but this kind of lifestyle should not be possible at the expense of hardworking taxpayers.

Think id treat it with a lot of sceptcism. Its the DM which has an agenda. The person alo looks like she enjoys being a celbrity so the more she can enrage people the better. The benefits ought to be limited to 3 then 2 kids.

Id be interested to see the numbers of how they get their benefit because there will be a lot of creative journalism.

What kind of a social security system allows this to happen?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3269511/Britain-s-Shameless-mother-twelve-rakes-40-000-year-benefits-reveals-spent-1-300-gifts-son-s-sixth-birthday-tells-taxpayers-ve-got-opinion-stuffed.html

 

I don't blame the woman for scrounging every penny she can, but this kind of lifestyle should not be possible at the expense of hardworking taxpayers.

It annoys me. BUT, how many families are there in the UK like that? Can't be that many. It's an anomaly in the benefits system - not many will read that and think "now there's an idea......"

As much as I'd like to see her tarred and feathered, the kids seem happy enough and no doubt a chunk of them will follow in her footsteps. You'll never get rid of that mentality.

---------- Post added 13-10-2015 at 18:24 ----------

Think id treat it with a lot of sceptcism. Its the DM which has an agenda. The person alo looks like she enjoys being a celbrity so the more she can enrage people the better. The benefits ought to be limited to 3 then 2 kids.

 

Id be interested to see the numbers of how they get their benefit because there will be a lot of creative journalism.

Yes. Our press lie a lot. I'm amazed the headline related to the story - although channel 5 did all the leg work, all this journo did was watch a bit of telly and launch into them Daily Mail style. Easy money!

Funnily enough what tinfoil said.

the article claims she spent £12,000 on presents, but her child benefit for 12 kids amounts to £7700, so £4,300 to make up from elsewhere. Its possible she could have spen that much, but she would have to be feeding and clothing all 14 of them on the rest of her income. Apparently its on a TV prog, so watch it, but they tend to be detail light.

Part of the benefit is because she has 12 kids so they need a larger house. They are the exception not the rule. She is disgusting though and loving the attention. If she was as reluctant as she says she is, then she has managed to get herself in the papers and on tv. Its like White Dee all over again.

It annoys me. BUT, how many families are there in the UK like that? Can't be that many. It's an anomaly in the benefits system - not many will read that and think "now there's an idea......"

 

As much as I'd like to see her tarred and feathered, the kids seem happy enough and no doubt a chunk of them will follow in her footsteps. You'll never get rid of that mentality.

 

---------- Post added 13-10-2015 at 18:24 ----------

 

 

Yes. Our press lie a lot. I'm amazed the headline related to the story - although channel 5 did all the leg work, all this journo did was watch a bit of telly and launch into them Daily Mail style. Easy money!

I don't blame her. If I could claim as much as her, I would. It is the system that is the problem.

There are a great deal of families like this.

I don't blame her. If I could claim as much as her, I would. It is the system that is the problem.

There are a great deal of families like this.

Isnt there a cap on benefits?

Isnt there a cap on benefits?

It may be sensible to read the article before commenting.........

"

They managed to avoid the Government's £26,000-a-year cap on state handouts because Mr Prudham works enough hours to claim working tax credit.

"

The stories about welfare claimants are starting again.

This time it's working claimants. The media will have a conveyor belt of these families to trot out on a week by week basis to help the government justify the cuts to tax credits.

It will be important to plant the idea that families like this are representative of all working claimants, part of a full-on ideological attack on the working poor. The reality is that families like the one in the Mail will be a small fraction of 1% of all working claimants.

Dog whistle politics at its worst but it pushed the right buttons for the OP

The stories about welfare claimants are starting again.

 

This time it's working claimants. The media will have a conveyor belt of these families to trot out on a week by week basis to help the government justify the cuts to tax credits.

 

It will be important to plant the idea that families like this are representative of all working claimants, part of a full-on ideological attack on the working poor. The reality is that families like the one in the Mail will be a small fraction of 1% of all working claimants.

 

Dog whistle politics at its worst but it pushed the right buttons for the OP

This dog certainly thinks it's barking mad that we pay people more money in benefits at the expense of hardworking taxpayers. It's plain wrong.

You obviously feel people should earn more on benefits thn those working full time.

Woof

It may be sensible to read the article before commenting.........

"

They managed to avoid the Government's £26,000-a-year cap on state handouts because Mr Prudham works enough hours to claim working tax credit.

 

"

Ah I was wondering what the angle was. An article about a 'scrounger' getting around the government cap by claiming a benefit that the government are scrapping, something they are getting flak for because it's going to make a few million people considerably poorer.

Same old same old.

This dog certainly thinks it's barking mad that we pay people more money in benefits at the expense of hardworking taxpayers. It's plain wrong.

You obviously feel people should earn more on benefits thn those working full time.

Woof

Nope I don't obviously think that.

What I do think is that there system has loopholes and anomalies and that focusing on these niche cases doesn't help because they will represent a handful of cases that are not representative.

These stories are designed to get people like you het up and energised to take the desired message into social media. They whistle. You bark.

Yap yap!!

Nope I don't obviously think that.

 

What I do think is that there system has loopholes and anomalies and that focusing on these niche cases doesn't help because they will represent a handful of cases that are not representative.

 

These stories are designed to get people like you het up and energised to take the desired message into social media. They whistle. You bark.

 

Yap yap!!

OWWWWOOWWWWOWWWWLLL

Yep - it is quite commonplace.

Woof woof