Dole Mother could get £60,000 a year benefits slashed

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Dole Mother could get £60,000 a year benefits slashed after being paid thousands to appear boasting on TV show 'On Benefits and Proud'



Heather Frost, 37, received £2,000 to appear on Channel 5 programme
Tewkesbury Borough Council say it is their 'duty' to investigate comments
Also admitted paying for stolen goods behind the door during a clip
She lives with her 11 children and has never worked in her life
Caused outrage after council offered to build her a £500,000 eco-home





Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...


This woman just makes a joke of the benefit system. I watched the show and was disgusted with her and her lazy guy she lives with. Many are unemployed through no fault of there own and live from day to day and some are even forced to go to food banks because they haven't enough to live on or feed their family, yet this excuse of a woman exploits the system.




posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 11:26 AM
link   
And now there are 11 more of them who will do the exact same thing. Devolution at it's finest.



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Disgusting.

But whos the one at fault?

Her for having a large family on the governments money, because she can?

Or the person (me tax payer) being 30 and having no kids yet because i cant afford them while i work?



Some times i wish i had knocked my first girlfriend up when we were 16.


edit on 25-10-2013 by Biigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Shes needs to get a job. How, with 11 children? I don't know, It's her responsibility as is the Father/Fathers.



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 12:16 PM
link   

C21H30O2I
Shes needs to get a job. How, with 11 children? I don't know, It's her responsibility as is the Father/Fathers.


Quite.

But surly its also completely irresponsible to keep having more children that you cant support because you have never had a job - yet they keep breeding, and the hard working tax payers struggle with their own family's while subsidizing hers.

Ride the gravy train till it gets derailed, then what? 11 kids and no income?

What gets me angry is they arnt struggling at all. 11 kids no jobs and a yet big flat screen TV xbox as well as a house big enough for everyone plus food clothes etc.

One of my good friends lives in a single room he rents in a house and gets to see his daughter occasionally, always had a job always paid his taxes never been in trouble. Hes struggling because he tries to play live the way everyone's meant to - support your family on from your own means.

Somewhere Darwinism got flipped.



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 02:32 PM
link   
In one interview she claimed it was her 'human right' to have as many children as she

wanted...notice she said 'wanted' and not 'can afford'


I might be inclined to agree with her if both she and the father/fathers supported

them, and didn't expect the tax payer to fund them, and house them.


Many young girls use pregnancy as a passport to a tenancy to social housing, and

being independent of parental authority. If the age was raised to 21 yrs before they

were entitled to take on a tenancy, it just may make them think twice!


I would have liked to have had couple more children, but couldn't afford them. Maybe

there should a limit as to how many children a person can claim benefit for say

two or three?


I believe she has had six of the children in the last eight years with two being born

in the same year.


The over generous benefits system has nurtured this form of entitlement!



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 02:35 PM
link   

C21H30O2I
Shes needs to get a job. How, with 11 children? I don't know, It's her responsibility as is the Father/Fathers.







Lol ... I think she needs another hobby!!



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I personally have no issue with any woman wanting to have a family small all large, what i believe though is if you want that family YOU pay for it...

Iv worked with many women in the field of nursing or social services that have put themselves through University and better themselves as single mothers and my admiration for them is unbound.

People like this woman are a ferking disgrace and all i mean all of them should at least be out there working to support their kids and not fleecing the system which was originally set up for those in dire need.

Weavs



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 02:43 PM
link   

eletheia
In one interview she claimed it was her 'human right' to have as many children as she

wanted...notice she said 'wanted' and not 'can afford'


That is a terrible attitude isnt it.

I want a private jet, can i expect the gov to get me one even though i dont contribute anything?


It should be considered a violation of human rights, to bring a child in the world purposely with absolutely no personal responsibility for it.

Also what do those kids think about their mother?
"well she had a nice big family and gets to sit around all day and let other suckers work, so thats what im going to do"

Great, started with one problem, now we have a potential for 11 more to have 11 more. guess what, that breaks a country and was not what built it. Blind greed and ignorance.



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Personally I think that anyone who has children should only get allowance for 2 kids only as that might stop many who have multiple ones just for the money they get.
I know a lot who do that just to get cash each month for them. I know one personally that has a baby once a year, an abortion the next year, then a baby again and so on! Her kids are dressed terrible and her man is not working either. They spend the money on carry out meals, taxis, going out etc.
I might be old fashioned, but I think 2 is enough to have. I have 2 and never wanted anymore than that.



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
This woman, who is not the norm, manages to tar all mothers who are unemployed with the 'scumbag lazy scrounger' brush. What is the answer without going down the Nazi forced sterilisation route? That I don't know.

However, those calling for a limit on how many kids someone could have or how many can have benefit need to realise that not all unemployed women with over 2 kids starts off not being able to afford them. Many families start just fine and then either break up, or lose their job or the partner loses their job etc. and then find themselves with 2, 3 or 4 previously affordable kids they can't feed and clothe properly.
However, having said all that, this woman really is taking the 'p' and how stupid can anyone be to then go on that awful TV show and brag about it and admit buying stolen goods etc....... OMG!



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by scotsdavy1
 


...But, but, but... isn't a woman's right to have as many Lambourginis as she likes? So, shouldn't that garage with 9 sports cars at 500,000 each all be paid for by the state?



posted on Oct, 25 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   




Some quick clips, couldn't find anything longer. She sounds like a winner. 'No law about how many kids you can have.' Well, perhaps there should be.

Here's the son of a former neighbor describing what his mother went through living next door.



What are you supposed to do with these scumbags? It's not the kids fault, so cutting benefits seems cruel to them. Supervise her purchases? Go over all her accounts with a fine tooth comb? That's going to just add to the tax burden. Force her to give up her kids? I actually think that might be the best thing for them. If you have that many kids there's no way you're paying enough attention to each individual. I can't imagine many are going to turn out all that well sad as it is to say.

I can kind of understand how some people have 2 kids 'accidentally' and need help. I can't understand it at all after 4, unless you lose your job or something. With as many as this 'lady' has birthed you know she's just doing it to milk the system. I don't want forced abortions or sterilization but something has to change before more and more people start just saying screw it and getting pregnant (yes I did that on purpose and know it was lame).



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Domo1

What are you supposed to do with these scumbags? It's not the kids fault, so cutting benefits seems cruel to them. Supervise her purchases?


Simple solution...just reintroduce the Winston Churchill system.

Whilst Prime Minister, Winston Churchill introduced "Luncheon VOuchers"

Each one was worth 15p (about 10 cents) and the modern version of his rules wouldbe to allow these ONLY for purchases of food that bears NO VAT (sales tax), in other words, essential food stuffs.

By introducing these to replace some benefits, it would be delationary reducing rents through dampening down demand and hence reducing the cost to the taxpayer whilst ensuring that everyone and every child had a good meal and healthy food to eat.



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   

CthulhuMythos
This woman, who is not the norm, manages to tar all mothers who are unemployed with the 'scumbag lazy scrounger' brush. What is the answer without going down the Nazi forced sterilisation route? That I don't know.

However, those calling for a limit on how many kids someone could have or how many can have benefit need to realise that not all unemployed women with over 2 kids starts off not being able to afford them. Many families start just fine and then either break up, or lose their job or the partner loses their job etc. and then find themselves with 2, 3 or 4 previously affordable kids they can't feed and clothe properly.
However, having said all that, this woman really is taking the 'p' and how stupid can anyone be to then go on that awful TV show and brag about it and admit buying stolen goods etc....... OMG!





I don't believe anyone on here is tarring all unemployed mothers with the 'scumbag

lazy scrounger brush, but why precisely is he not working to support them? There

have been eight children born while living there in just over eight years, and as

neither of them were working, who did they presume was going to financially support

them all?? and provide extra living space to accommodate their fast expanding

family! Wasn't one of the things she said "I am entitled to a bigger house.

" WHY? would that be? Her sense of entitlement is breath taking!!! She has

never worked and he only for a very short time. So that answers your theory of

*quote* 'she or her partner loses their job etc. and then find themselves with

2,3 or4 previously affordable kids they can't feed and clothe properly' She has

never worked he has worked little in all that time and produced

8 more children in the eight years that they have lived in a house they complain

is not big enough
.... so why did theythey go on producing a child on a yearly basis

under those conditions??..................

Oh I forgot! she is entitled to have as many children as she wants!


However on the other hand I do know quite a few 'single mothers with one to

three children who work to support their children and some do so

without any help from the fathers who have done a disappearing act, and they

don't feel the necessity or entitlement to sponge of the taxpayer.



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by eletheia
 


LoL Yes, eletheia you have that
spot on my friend!



posted on Oct, 27 2013 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Biigs
 


Biigs, I agree my friend. 100%... Welfare was never meant to be a career opportunity!





new topics
top topics
 
2

log in

join


Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant
read more: Ora.TV's Off The Grid with Jesse Ventura and AboveTopSecret.com Partner Up to Stay Vigilant