history repeats Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 There is an article in the sun today by David Blunkett. He proposes putting teen mums in hostels rather than giving them a free house for getting up the duff. He claims that one in ten houses are now taken up by teen mums. Dodgy Journalism at is doesn't quote sources for this info but can't really expect much more from the sun. Sorry no link Page 24 quote "These days they (single mums) total more than one in ten of all households with children compared to one in a hundred back in 1971." "This give us a house mentality has to become a thing of the past…." "If the family - and often their mothers are single parents too – cant or won't look after the offspring then we will simply have to go back to the idea of hostel accommodation." That gets my vote for sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 That gets my vote for sure. That's the idea. Of course like almost every other vote-grabbing plan this government has come up with, after they have your vote they'll quietly forget about the whole thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel Richtea Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 There is an article in the sun today by David Blunkett. He proposes putting teen mums in hostels rather than giving them a free house for getting up the duff. He claims that one in ten houses are now taken up by teen mums. Dodgy Journalism at is doesn't quote sources for this info but can't really expect much more from the sun. Sorry no link Page 24 quote "These days they (single mums) total more than one in ten of all households with children compared to one in a hundred back in 1971." "This give us a house mentality has to become a thing of the past…." "If the family - and often their mothers are single parents too – cant or won't look after the offspring then we will simply have to go back to the idea of hostel accommodation." That gets my vote for sure. How does being a single mother make you a charver? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 How does being a single mother make you a charver? Because most teenage single mothers on the dole are chavs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattsta1964 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Because most teenage single mothers on the dole are chavs? That'll rattle all the PC, museli chewing, liberals right up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 What about the single mums that want to stay single ie not wanting to get married, but live with the father...its called a partnership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel Richtea Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 How does being a single mother make you a charver? That'll rattle all the non-PC, steak eating, neo-cons right up! And lo! It came to pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 What about the single mums that want to stay single ie not wanting to get married, but live with the father...its called a partnership. Then they are not single mums, just unmarried ones. Nothing wrong with that, if they are cohabiting then there shouldn't be the need for the state to house and feed them (in theory). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOR33 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Lest we not forget, this is part and parcel of the "feminisation of society" attitude, use the fathers for a child, dump them and then cream off the state with your prized possession being looked after. Once the child is in the frame, the man is not necessarily "required" Don't know if anyone saw the excellent documentary by Michael Buerk on the roles of fathers and men in society....I for one never saw the effects and he has proven this right.....If there was this level of social benefits assistance for single mothers back in the 80's or 90's I'm sure the stats would be quite closer to what David Blunkett has said... I'm not against women or single mothers before the backlash comes but we are so constrained in this society to speak whats in front of us that we always side with what the politicians make us think is the "right way"......... Yes their are irresponsible fathers around but the trend towards women having their own way continues and the "family" unit being eroded away is gathering pace......... BRING FORTH THE FURY! LOL!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattsta1964 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Then they are not single mums, just unmarried ones. Nothing wrong with that, if they are cohabiting then there shouldn't be the need for the state to house and feed them (in theory). If only that was true!!!!!!!!!!! It usually means another 5 Waynettas are on the way and a bigger council house is required! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnumerate Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 I saw that article Blunkett also said that we have the highest levels of teenage pregnancy and the second highest rate of benefits. However he does NOT think there is a link (yeah right). Personally I think there is more chance of England winning every competition in every sport for the next 30 years than this Labour doing something about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 There is an article in the sun today by David Blunkett. He proposes putting teen mums in hostels rather than giving them a free house for getting up the duff. He claims that one in ten houses are now taken up by teen mums. Dodgy Journalism at is doesn't quote sources for this info but can't really expect much more from the sun. Interesting idea. But once they've put teen mums in the poorhouse who's next? The old people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willy Weasel Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Interesting idea. But once they've put teen mums in the poorhouse who's next? The old people? They're already there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel Richtea Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Interesting idea. But once they've put teen mums in the poorhouse who's next? The old people? They'll go in right after those who can't even afford to buy their own home. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOR33 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 I saw that article Blunkett also said that we have the highest levels of teenage pregnancy and the second highest rate of benefits. However he does NOT think there is a link (yeah right). Personally I think there is more chance of England winning every competition in every sport for the next 30 years than this Labour doing something about this. Just to reply to this, I live not far from where we have a large community of asylum seekers, whom I presume are now permanant here. When they arrived we saw a large number of young girls parading around and chatting to boys and what not...Ok nothing wrong with that, a year and half down the line, we all see the same girls(some looking like 15+) pushing prams, better clothing, smoking, etc etc etc........The lure of easy money and support is their not just for the residents of this once great nation but for those who are here as a last resort from some not so war torn countries!.....Like I stated "creaming" off the nation...... There will be an onging deline in ALL services in this country........this is not melodramatic but fact....just visit your doctors surgery or local A & E to witnes all this........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamnumerate Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Interesting idea. But once they've put teen mums in the poorhouse who's next? The old people? Very funny but why should single mums have luxury housing compared to workers ? Believe me not having to share a house would be a luxury that I will never afford because I have to pay for other people's housing. I even know immigrants who have come here to be single mums because it is a good deal here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOR33 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 I even know immigrants who have come here to be single mums because it is a good deal here. LOL!!! See previous!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattsta1964 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Funny when you hear a journalist on TV trying to explain to some filthdirtscum underclass slag that their entire life is paid for by an increasing minority of people who actually crawl out of their pit every morning, sit for an hour and a half on a potholed, jampacked motorway or stand on a train carriage with their nose jammed up someone's smelly armpit on their way to some soul destroying job. They just don't get it do they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkG Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 They just don't get it do they? But second or third-generation chavs have probably never seen anyone work in their life. They probably think even the people at the dole office and the people who cash their giro at the post office just go there every day for fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THOR33 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Funny when you hear a journalist on TV trying to explain to some filthdirtscum underclass slag that their entire life is paid for by an increasing minority of people who actually crawl out of their pit every morning, sit for an hour and a half on a potholed, jampacked motorway or stand on a train carriage with their nose jammed up someone's smelly armpit on their way to some soul destroying job. They just don't get it do they? That " filthdirtscum underclass slag " is seen as a little innocent female, who has a destroyed life because of a man...... she NEEDS the utmost support moneywise and all the free support paid for by the state....and who complains because theres no decent jobs about!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SarahBell Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 They'll go in right after those who can't even afford to buy their own home. Yup... Maybe the list should be: teen mums old people dolites obese people people needing any benefit for more than 1 month sick people old people who have saved people who don't earn enough to buy a house people who don't earn enough to rent a flat smelly people smelly old sick people criminals smell old sick criminals unmarried mums people who aren't married people who don't vote labour. anyone needing medical treatment anyone who won't work for minimum wage anyone who won't work for less than minimum wage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel Richtea Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Funny when you hear a journalist on TV trying to explain to some filthdirtscum underclass slag that their entire life is paid for by an increasing minority of people who actually crawl out of their pit every morning, sit for an hour and a half on a potholed, jampacked motorway or stand on a train carriage with their nose jammed up someone's smelly armpit on their way to some soul destroying job. They just don't get it do they? Dude - you're externalising some substantial internal issues in a public forum. Have you heard of phenomenology? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mattsta1964 Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 Dude - you're externalising some substantial internal issues in a public forum. Have you heard of phenomenology? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenomenology Wot are you gibbering about biscuitbrains!??? (Meant in an endearing way, not with malice ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timil Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 There was a major in America I can't remember which city who drew a line in the sand and stated that one year from today any single mother doesn't get any help with housing just a place in hostel etc. Result the graph for teen pregnacies looked like falling off a cliff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billy-g Posted August 30, 2006 Share Posted August 30, 2006 I'd vote for that. I personally know of women who have chosen to have a child just to get a home and money. I went to school with 3 I can think of. It may not be much money, but they KNOW they will always be taken care of as long as they have that child with them. Plenty of honest, hard working people live in multiple occupancy homes. Why not these girls? Why should they have an automatic right to a single occupancy home? Basically, if you cant move in with mum and dad (and no, no bigger council house for them) or support yourself, off you go. I have no moral problem with that. I doubt anyone who actually works for a living and exists in a traditional family unit would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.