Canadian Money Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
The head of the EU has apparently decided that going on vacations to sunny destinations is a basic human right, and is attempting to set up some kind of taxpayer-funded vacation benefit for those who can't afford to holiday on their own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,423 Posts
Discussion Starter #4

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,516 Posts
It's an aggravating story, but I'm not sure that much could be done about the situation, given that there are children involved that have to be provided for. The amount provided sounds excessive and perhaps there should be some economies of scale regarding benefits past a certain number of children. The parents are obviously extremely irresponsible, but it doesn't sound like they're abusive, so the children couldn't likely be removed by social services. And of course, we can't force someone to have their tubes tied. I'm sure something similar could be duplicated in Canada, if a person we're willing to keep having children.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
I'm sure something similar could be duplicated in Canada, if a person we're willing to keep having children.
Definitely happening ... I've heard stories of teenage girls (legal age) said that they want to / are having kids because they will get benefits from the government - where's the logic in that?

Also, if the point is about supporting the children - then there should be a better way than giving them ca$h that they could so easily blew on a mercedes, large screen tv, etc.

Far stretched, but there must be ways for the system to detect and stop supporting leechers to society.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,936 Posts
Yes, I for one am sick and tired of the single mom scam. There are WAY too many of these. Near my old work location you would see the stroller armada come out every afternoon around 2PM. Teenagers. And the cycle continues as those children grow up and in 13 short years we see a new generation of kiddies.

Look, I'm a responsible guy. Yes, I have fun behind closed doors. But I ALWAYS use protection and guess what? No illegitimate children! So because these brats didn't do so, the taxpayer has to now keep supporting these groups?

Look after your own children! If you can't afford it, don't have them!

I think it's about time someone starts crying foul to this single mom scam. It has been going on for far too long. These people are irresponsible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,054 Posts
I hate to do the math for you guys here

$42000/8/12=$437 per month each

As for this Mercedes they are driving my friend just bought an old Mercedes for $2000. A friend or family could have given it to them.

So while this article is provocative when you look behind the curtain this is barely a living wage.

It's the same here in Canada with single mothers and people on social services.

Only an idiot would think they are doing really well by scamming the government by having tons of kids. It's just not true. No matter how many kids you have you are barely scraping by. It's subsistence living at best. If it were really great they wouldn't need to go to food banks and buy furniture at rent to own places.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,516 Posts
That is 42000 pounds, not dollars. At one time the pound was double the Canadian dollar, but now I think it would be equivalent to about $65000.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,061 Posts
Ah well, life is better on the other side of the Atlantic. All my friends in Europe take 4-week vacations in summer and some of them work 35-hour weeks. The last time I took even a two-week vacation was in 1987.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,054 Posts
I did see that spidey but my point still stands even at 67000$

67000/8/12 =697 $ per month.

Not sure about you but I'd rather make more that 700$ per month.

This article is inflammatory and aimed at those who want to believe that this is true and who don't want to look at the numbers.

I personally would like to aim a little higher in life. This is subsistence living in my opinion. The woman is an idiot for thinking this is OK because she gets a big paycheck.

The money she gets 100% goes right back into the economy, rent, car insurance, food, diapers etc.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6 Posts
Agree with Berubeland - the article was written to please the readers of the Daily Mail, which is a rag along the lines of the Sun papers in Canada.

A mercedes people mover is basically a minivan - purchased used, I imagine.

When you start looking at the numbers, our welfare system in Canada doesn't cost us that much.

Certainly better than the alternative, which would be slum living like you see in third world countries.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,423 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Given that it is a big family living under one roof I don't see anything wrong with the numbers you are calculating. Yes $500/$700 per month per person for an individual wouldn't be enough. But for a family of 8? I think that is pretty good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,936 Posts
I hate to do the math for you guys here

$42000/8/12=$437 per month each
In 20 years that's a million dollars.

People need to work for what they want. This type of person should NOT have the right to continue producing babies when their plan is clearly to compel the taxpayer to foot the bill. Pay for your own life choices!

Scam.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,739 Posts
What's wrong with babies? We subsidize reproduction, through a variety of social programs and tax credits. Should we be surprised when people respond to these incentives? In aggregate, we need more babies, so maybe that young mother is doing us a service. Many wealthier families can't be bothered to produce enough children to replace the parents.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,686 Posts
What's wrong with babies? We subsidize reproduction, through a variety of social programs and tax credits. Should we be surprised when people respond to these incentives? In aggregate, we need more babies, so maybe that young mother is doing us a service. Many wealthier families can't be bothered to produce enough children to replace the parents.
I think so too. Those babies are future tax paying units. We need more of them if you want current healthcare and retirement benefits when we are senior citizens.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
419 Posts
I think so too. Those babies are future tax paying units. We need more of them if you want current healthcare and retirement benefits when we are senior citizens.


Which babies are you referring to, the babies wealthy people are not having, or social assistance babies?

Social assistance babies typically do not grow up to be tax paying units.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top