pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 This story surfaced about a week ago. Greek economic crisis turns tragic for children abandoned by their families Birruva quote: Even before Greece's economic crisis engulfed his own home, Dimitris Gasparinatos found it hard to provide for his six sons and four daughters. His wife, Christina, who was struggling to make ends meet with his salary of €960 (£800) a month and welfare aid of about €460 every two months, was unhappy and desperate. Deep in debt, the couple owed money to the butcher, baker and grocer – the very people who had kept them going in the port of Patras, west of Athens. In their tiny flat, the family slipped increasingly into a life of squalor. "Psychologically we were all in a bit of a mess," said Gasparinatos. "We were sleeping on mattresses on the floor, the rent hadn't been paid for months, something had to be done." And so, with Christmas approaching, the 42-year-old took the decision to put in an official request for three of his boys and one daughter to be taken into care. Now, we know nothing about this guy's family history, whether any/much of it is self-inflicted, but over 500 families have recently asked to place children in care, and that number looks set to rise. Still, gotta pay those bankers off, right? That's whats really important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Ten children!? TEN!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I struggle to sympathise with anyone who barely earns £10k a year and thinks it's reasonable to have 10 children. The kids I feel sorry for yes, but not the parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 They should move to France, just the child allowances for 10 kids would net them about 1400 euros a month, bit more if any are over 16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I struggle to sympathise with anyone who barely earns £10k a year and thinks it's reasonable to have 10 children. The kids I feel sorry for yes, but not the parents. I guess, like Roman Catholics, they subscribe to the principles of their religion and church http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12279632 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I guess, like Roman Catholics, they subscribe to the principles of their religion and church http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12279632 So maybe the Church should provide for the offspring consequential to their teachings. Then again, if the Orthodox are anything like the RCs I wouldn't let them anywhere near children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Ten children!? TEN!? I struggle to sympathise with anyone who barely earns £10k a year and thinks it's reasonable to have 10 children. The kids I feel sorry for yes, but not the parents. I do have some sympathy with your views, but nothing like the sympathy I have for the 500 families asking for their kids to be taken into care. It is a damning indictment of our priorities (as if we needed any more). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 This story surfaced about a week ago. Greek economic crisis turns tragic for children abandoned by their families Birruva quote: Even before Greece's economic crisis engulfed his own home, Dimitris Gasparinatos found it hard to provide for his six sons and four daughters. His wife, Christina, who was struggling to make ends meet with his salary of €960 (£800) a month and welfare aid of about €460 every two months, was unhappy and desperate. Deep in debt, the couple owed money to the butcher, baker and grocer – the very people who had kept them going in the port of Patras, west of Athens. In their tiny flat, the family slipped increasingly into a life of squalor. "Psychologically we were all in a bit of a mess," said Gasparinatos. "We were sleeping on mattresses on the floor, the rent hadn't been paid for months, something had to be done." And so, with Christmas approaching, the 42-year-old took the decision to put in an official request for three of his boys and one daughter to be taken into care. Now, we know nothing about this guy's family history, whether any/much of it is self-inflicted, but over 500 families have recently asked to place children in care, and that number looks set to rise. Still, gotta pay those bankers off, right? That's whats really important. Should really of thought things through, before having ten kids, how are the bankers to blame for an over active cock? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 They should move to France, just the child allowances for 10 kids would net them about 1400 euros a month, bit more if any are over 16 People probably are already. There have been numerous reports of increased emigration from Greece, Ireland and Spain. Many of them will not have the capital to bugger off to Australia ( popular destination ) so will inevitably gravitate to the richer countries of the EU. I wonder if we'll see a sharp increase in Greeks, Irish and Italians here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I do have some sympathy with your views, but nothing like the sympathy I have for the 500 families asking for their kids to be taken into care. It is a damning indictment of our priorities (as if we needed any more). I do sympathise with the children. Don't get me wrong, but the parents should take responsibility to at least some sort of degree for bringing life into the world that they didn't have the contingency or resource to cater for!! It's the old 'is it a right or a privilage' to have children debate again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimond Geezer Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Putting aside the rights & wrongs of having 10 kids & whether you can support them or not, it must be terribly heart breaking for the family to have to choose 4 kids to "abandon". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Should really of thought things through, before having ten kids, how are the bankers to blame for an over active cock? Not really going to answer your first point. I did so on another post, and others have clarified the cultural situation over there. Whether that has any bearing, I don't know. Are those kids going to be better off in care or at their parents? What are the long term effects going to be? And let's not discount the influence of the bankers. The reason that Greece is in so much debt is because they were lent the money in the first place. I think we can both agree that it was a disastrous decision for both Greek and the bankers. But here's the thing, you can't get into debt if no-one will lend you the money. The Greeks are undergoing their austerity measures because the mega-rich want their money back. Needless suffering, in my opinion. Those kids need the money more than the banks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Not really going to answer your first point. I did so on another post, and others have clarified the cultural situation over there. Whether that has any bearing, I don't know. Are those kids going to be better off in care or at their parents? What are the long term effects going to be? And let's not discount the influence of the bankers. The reason that Greece is in so much debt is because they were lent the money in the first place. I think we can both agree that it was a disastrous decision for both Greek and the bankers. But here's the thing, you can't get into debt if no-one will lend you the money. The Greeks are undergoing their austerity measures because the mega-rich want their money back. Needless suffering, in my opinion. Those kids need the money more than the banks. So why are you blaming the bankers, blame their political system, that sought to spend beyond their means. To many jumping on the bankers, many in this country have borrowed beyond their income, are you saying they are not responsible? Sorry for the kids, but the parents are still to blame....ten kids ffs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 So why are you blaming the bankers, blame their political system, that sought to spend beyond their means. To many jumping on the bankers, many in this country have borrowed beyond their income, are you saying they are not responsible? Sorry for the kids, but the parents are still to blame....ten kids ffs! Who said anything about apportioning blame? Greece is under hard austerity measures, to pay back money to people who need it a lot less than they do. I take your point that Greece has gone way beyond its means. I can even accept that there are adverse financial consequences to having ten kids, and that people should think carefully about the number of offspring they can afford. What part did the kids who are going into care have in all of this? Did they sign up to the loans. Did they suddenly decide to appear on Earth independently of a parental decision? The kids are not responsible, and it is a sad day when a parent feels that the system can provide for his kids better than he can. Sadder still when people are incapable of showing an iota of compassion for their situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Putting aside the rights & wrongs of having 10 kids & whether you can support them or not, it must be terribly heart breaking for the family to have to choose 4 kids to "abandon". Absolutely, and how do you think the guy feels about himself? The head of a family is supposed to be the bread-winner and a shield for his/her family. Travesty all round, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Who said anything about apportioning blame? Greece is under hard austerity measures, to pay back money to people who need it a lot less than they do. I take your point that Greece has gone way beyond its means. I can even accept that there are adverse financial consequences to having ten kids, and that people should think carefully about the number of offspring they can afford. What part did the kids who are going into care have in all of this? Did they sign up to the loans. Did they suddenly decide to appear on Earth independently of a parental decision? The kids are not responsible, and it is a sad day when a parent feels that the system can provide for his kids better than he can. Sadder still when people are incapable of showing an iota of compassion for their situation. its a harsh world..and I would be peed right off if my hard work for my child to struggle through life was also paying for someone else's 10 of the little ones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Absolutely, and how do you think the guy feels about himself? The head of a family is supposed to be the bread-winner and a shield for his/her family. Travesty all round, really. greece or no greece...how anyone in anything other than a 3rd world country could be bread winner to his wife and 10 kids..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Block 18 Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 greece or no greece...how anyone in anything other than a 3rd world country could be bread winner to his wife and 10 kids..... would have to be a banker to earn enough to support that many kids Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimond Geezer Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 its a harsh world..and I would be peed right off if my hard work for my child to struggle through life was also paying for someone else's 10 of the little ones I assume you pay tax & NI, this goes towards the benifits people receive. You must be pretty annoyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I assume you pay tax & NI, this goes towards the benifits people receive. You must be pretty annoyed. agree..help those in the very mire...however, should someone be idiotic enough to have 10 kids whilst struggling to provide for 2 or 3...then they do not have my sympathy what so ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 greece or no greece...how anyone in anything other than a 3rd world country could be bread winner to his wife and 10 kids..... I can't do ten, but I have a mate who has 9 kids. She doesn't work. Her hubby supports them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I can't do ten, but I have a mate who has 9 kids. She doesn't work. Her hubby supports them all. well, good luck to them luckily we live in one of the richest nations on earth and provide an environment for that to happen..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Not really going to answer your first point. I did so on another post, and others have clarified the cultural situation over there. Whether that has any bearing, I don't know. Are those kids going to be better off in care or at their parents? What are the long term effects going to be? And let's not discount the influence of the bankers. The reason that Greece is in so much debt is because they were lent the money in the first place. I think we can both agree that it was a disastrous decision for both Greek and the bankers. But here's the thing, you can't get into debt if no-one will lend you the money. The Greeks are undergoing their austerity measures because the mega-rich want their money back. Needless suffering, in my opinion. Those kids need the money more than the banks. I disagree. It's easy to say 'poor starving children, evil greedy banks' but the bigger picture is far more complicated. I know I'm stating the obvious here, but a world wide banking collapse wont really help these Greek children. Moreover, there will be tens of millions more family accross Europe plummeted into poverty and struggling to support their children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I disagree. It's easy to say 'poor starving children, evil greedy banks' but the bigger picture is far more complicated. I know I'm stating the obvious here, but a world wide banking collapse wont really help these Greek children. Moreover, there will be tens of millions more family accross Europe plummeted into poverty and struggling to support their children. And why is that? Has the world any fewer resources? Did we suddenly lose the ability to grow, hunt or fish for food? You ask me to look at the big picture, and it's this. These kids, and others, are going to suffer to perpetuate a belief that our current financial system must be upheld. The present financial system has been around for 300 years. It hasn't existed forever, and like many of our pre-conceptions, needs to re-evaluated if it is going wrong. If loving parents are throwing their kids into state-run care facilities, then something has gone very wrong indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 And why is that? Has the world any fewer resources? Did we suddenly lose the ability to grow, hunt or fish for food? You ask me to look at the big picture, and it's this. These kids, and others, are going to suffer to perpetuate a belief that our current financial system must be upheld. The present financial system has been around for 300 years. It hasn't existed forever, and like many of our pre-conceptions, needs to re-evaluated if it is going wrong. If loving parents are throwing their kids into state-run care facilities, then something has gone very wrong indeed. If you had lived more than 300 years ago the chances are that like most of the (much smaller) population you would be living in abject poverty. The big bad financial system you are so dismissive of has actually produced a standard of living which is unbelievably more affluent. But to enjoy this any individual must take some responsibility for their actions. Like keeping it in your trousers if you can't afford to pay for any consequences if you don't. I'm a big believer in the welfare state helping those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own - but that's where it should stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 And why is that? Has the world any fewer resources? Did we suddenly lose the ability to grow, hunt or fish for food? You ask me to look at the big picture, and it's this. These kids, and others, are going to suffer to perpetuate a belief that our current financial system must be upheld. The present financial system has been around for 300 years. It hasn't existed forever, and like many of our pre-conceptions, needs to re-evaluated if it is going wrong. If loving parents are throwing their kids into state-run care facilities, then something has gone very wrong indeed. Yep. They had about 8 more kids than they can actually afford. Granted this isn't always the case, but you've picked a very poor example to back up your point. You talk about the current financial system being upheld. It needs to be reformed, granted, but allowing it to collapse completely would be catastrophic. You talk about still being able to hunt, fish and grow. That's all fine if you want to live in the stone age, but to maintain society as we know it we do need a functioning monetary system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 It's all very well berating people for having more children than they can afford. I bet the majority of people only have more children if they think they can afford it based on their current circumstances. OK there are exceptions to this for a number of reasons, but generally it's a truism. But many of those who thought they could afford to have another child or two could not have foreseen that their income would reduce or disappear, that their cost of living would rise whilst their wages didn't etc. etc. It's a fact of life that once you have children, they're with you until they're adults. In that time, anyone's circumstances could change beyond belief. I know this - I've been there. And a lot of people will 'be there' in our country too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16395019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 sorry BTF...having a 3rd or 4th child is food for thought..having your 9th or 10th is just plain stupid when you clearly can't afford it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 sorry BTF...having a 3rd or 4th child is food for thought..having your 9th or 10th is just plain stupid when you clearly can't afford it Quite right. Frankly, to afford to have 3 children is a job incredibly well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Me and my other half are trying to figure out how we can afford 1 kid without resorting to child care, and we both earn higher than average salaries. It's still wrong that there is so much hardship and the bankers are being pandered to in case they bugger off to China. You can only be blackmailed for so long before you say **** you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 sorry BTF...having a 3rd or 4th child is food for thought..having your 9th or 10th is just plain stupid when you clearly can't afford it I think you're missing my point. As I pointed out earlier, some families are large because of religious beliefs and whilst you and I might go against such a religion if we felt it irresponsible, not every family thinks that way. For example, I know of a RC family who had four children. At the time the children were born, they could easily afford to raise four (he worked in the film industry). But then, in the 1980s, the film industry went into decline and he lost his job. Not their fault and they couldn't turn the clock back. Luckily they scraped through and of those four children, two are doctors (one is a surgeon), one is a lawyer and one is a computer scientist. Lucky for us they were born really. Ten does seem excessive to most of us, but in other cultures it's the norm and is usually manageable. No-one has a crystal ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I think you're missing my point. As I pointed out earlier, some families are large because of religious beliefs and whilst you and I might go against such a religion if we felt it irresponsible, not every family thinks that way. For example, I know of a RC family who had four children. At the time the children were born, they could easily afford to raise four (he worked in the film industry). But then, in the 1980s, the film industry went into decline and he lost his job. Not their fault and they couldn't turn the clock back. Luckily they scraped through and of those four children, two are doctors (one is a surgeon), one is a lawyer and one is a computer scientist. Lucky for us they were born really. Ten does seem excessive to most of us, but in other cultures it's the norm and is usually manageable. No-one has a crystal ball. im not missing the point...the point in the OP was of a hard luck story of a bloke with 10 kids.....really find it hard to have any sympathy with someone with 10 kids.....I would guess that he would be up shyt creek if he turn the clock back to 2007...... I think it is outright, completely irresponsible to bring so many kids into the work without having the means of looking after them yourself as for religion...that is a choice he/they have made...they are not born with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 im not missing the point...the point in the OP was of a hard luck story of a bloke with 10 kids.....really find it hard to have any sympathy with someone with 10 kids.....I would guess that he would be up shyt creek if he turn the clock back to 2007...... I think it is outright, completely irresponsible to bring so many kids into the work without having the means of looking after them yourself as for religion...that is a choice he/they have made...they are not born with it Two points: How do you know they couldn't afford those ten children when they were born. The article indicates that his woes are due to the Greek economy. Who are you to deny this family the right to their religious beliefs? I might think the RC church wrong (or, in the case the Greek Orthodox church) to tell families they mustn't use contraception but if they choose to follow such a religion who are we to crticise them for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Two points: How do you know they couldn't afford those ten children when they were born. The article indicates that his woes are due to the Greek economy. Who are you to deny this family the right to their religious beliefs? I might think the RC church wrong (or, in the case the Greek Orthodox church) to tell families they mustn't use contraception but if they choose to follow such a religion who are we to crticise them for it. I am no one to deny his family religious rights...live by the sword, die by the sword and all that.... I would NEVER dream of having 10 kids.....that would be completely and utterly irresponsible of me as a parent and as a member of society as chances are, through my naughtiness, I will be asking god know how many people to support them...I don't think that is fair and deffo not a great life for the other 9 kids as the 10th comes out... imagine the hand me down clothes and bedroom sharing....shyt life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 They're not asking for support. They're explaining why they are having to put some of their children into care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 They're not asking for support. They're explaining why they are having to put some of their children into care. good luck to them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Two points: How do you know they couldn't afford those ten children when they were born. The article indicates that his woes are due to the Greek economy. Who are you to deny this family the right to their religious beliefs? I might think the RC church wrong (or, in the case the Greek Orthodox church) to tell families they mustn't use contraception but if they choose to follow such a religion who are we to crticise them for it. "Dimitris Gasparinatos found it hard to provide for his six sons and four daughters" In anycase, having an irresponsible amount of children when times are good and hoping there wont be an ecconomic downturn for the next 20 years is stupidity in the extreme. As far as I'm aware there is no religion which requires its followers to produce offspring in double figures. Yes some of them prohibit the use of contraceptives, but if you want to obey that rule then stop ****ging each other. Life is about choices. If you have a low income you can either be a devout Christian OR you sh*g like rabbits. Not both. This bloke is a f**king idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 All I've been trying to do is to try to understand why they are in this situation. I'm also thinking very much of the children, none of whom is at fault here. I suppose all cultures could go down the Chinese route and limit families to two children............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 And why is that? Has the world any fewer resources? Did we suddenly lose the ability to grow, hunt or fish for food? You ask me to look at the big picture, and it's this. These kids, and others, are going to suffer to perpetuate a belief that our current financial system must be upheld. The present financial system has been around for 300 years. It hasn't existed forever, and like many of our pre-conceptions, needs to re-evaluated if it is going wrong. If loving parents are throwing their kids into state-run care facilities, then something has gone very wrong indeed. Behave. What percentage, throughout Europe, of families are having to put their kids into care purely because of the financial downturn? At a guess 0.000000001%? The "present financial system" has done none of us too badly has it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 All I've been trying to do is to try to understand why they are in this situation. I'm also thinking very much of the children, none of whom is at fault here. I suppose all cultures could go down the Chinese route and limit families to two children............ Because he had 10 f**king kids! He could barely afford them when the sun was shining and the grass was green. Quelle surprise they're struggling now there's a recession. Gordon Bennett it's not complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deano6 Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 If you had lived more than 300 years ago the chances are that like most of the (much smaller) population you would be living in abject poverty. The big bad financial system you are so dismissive of has actually produced a standard of living which is unbelievably more affluent. But to enjoy this any individual must take some responsibility for their actions. Like keeping it in your trousers if you can't afford to pay for any consequences if you don't. I'm a big believer in the welfare state helping those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own - but that's where it should stop. Absolutely! I've been keeping it in my trousers since the crisis hit in 2008. Well, it's more their choice than mine, but we're all doing our bit for the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Two points: How do you know they couldn't afford those ten children when they were born. The article indicates that his woes are due to the Greek economy. Who are you to deny this family the right to their religious beliefs? I might think the RC church wrong (or, in the case the Greek Orthodox church) to tell families they mustn't use contraception but if they choose to follow such a religion who are we to crticise them for it. The RC religion doesn't force parents to copulate as far as I'm aware. It's possible to follow the RC (and other) faiths without producing double figure amounts of children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 "Dimitris Gasparinatos found it hard to provide for his six sons and four daughters" In anycase, having an irresponsible amount of children when times are good and hoping there wont be an ecconomic downturn for the next 20 years is stupidity in the extreme. As far as I'm aware there is no religion which requires its followers to produce offspring in double figures. Yes some of them prohibit the use of contraceptives, but if you want to obey that rule then stop ****ging each other. Life is about choices. If you have a low income you can either be a devout Christian OR you sh*g like rabbits. Not both. This bloke is a f**king idiot. Nail on head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Because he had 10 f**king kids! He could barely afford them when the sun was shining and the grass was green. Quelle surprise they're struggling now there's a recession. Gordon Bennett it's not complicated. Yeah, but it is one step down from rocket science... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Because he had 10 f**king kids! He could barely afford them when the sun was shining and the grass was green. Quelle surprise they're struggling now there's a recession. Gordon Bennett it's not complicated. I'm sorry to see that you've chosen to put such a slant on what I said. I wouldn't choose to have 10 children - I found having three tough enough. I was trying to understand why they would be in a situation where their culture considers it OK to have so many children. That's why I cited their likely religious beliefs. In the same way as many Catholic families in this country have large families. I do understand that they are in this predicament NOW because they have so many children. As were my Catholic friends (from a nice middle class family hit by the recession in the 80s). But, as I said before, no-one has twenty-twenty foresight and, equally, no-one has the right to tell them to ignore their religious beliefs because it doesn't fit with our ideals. It's not like they're asking any of us for help, is it. You are a heartless lot, some of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I'm sorry to see that you've chosen to put such a slant on what I said. I wouldn't choose to have 10 children - I found having three tough enough. I was trying to understand why they would be in a situation where their culture considers it OK to have so many children. That's why I cited their likely religious beliefs. In the same way as many Catholic families in this country have large families. I do understand that they are in this predicament NOW because they have so many children. As were my Catholic friends (from a nice middle class family hit by the recession in the 80s). But, as I said before, no-one has twenty-twenty foresight and, equally, no-one has the right to tell them to ignore their religious beliefs because it doesn't fit with our ideals. It's not like they're asking any of us for help, is it. You are a heartless lot, some of you. It's ironic saying we're heartless. If it was up to me, this bloke would be living with 2 or 3 children in relative comfort. However thanks to this blokes wreckless copulation he now has 10 children he cannot sustain. Preaching love and dedication for your children is one thing, you need the responsibility to back it up. If this bloke was in Britain, he'd be on the Jeremy Kyle show. He is one step up from the alcoholic, heroin addicted, teenage single mums on that programme, screaming and sobbing about how much they love their children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 4 January, 2012 Author Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Yep. They had about 8 more kids than they can actually afford. Granted this isn't always the case, but you've picked a very poor example to back up your point. You talk about the current financial system being upheld. It needs to be reformed, granted, but allowing it to collapse completely would be catastrophic. You talk about still being able to hunt, fish and grow. That's all fine if you want to live in the stone age, but to maintain society as we know it we do need a functioning monetary system. Functioning monetary system is an oxymoron. As long as any system allows individuals and corporations to accumulate vast sums of capital, you are always going to create inequality, meaning your "functional monetary system" comes at the cost of dysfunctional societies and human misery. Sure, some people have all the fun, but the fact remains that the vast amount of the world's wealth is in the hands of a very select few. Your functioning monetary system is a loosely federated hierarchy in which wealth flows upwards. When it comes down to it, the majority of society's problems come down to money. People will steal for it, kill for it, or move jobs overseas to make more of it. Look at the current financial crisis. The world is going crazy over what are essentially numbers in data-banks. I'd like someone to tell me how a country like America can really be in any trouble at all. They have everything they need to survive on their own land. Look at the EU. If we banded together and sussed out what we had, why couldn't we do that too? We might get a few less bananas, and might have to make our own TVs, but again - everything we need. It really is the biggest scam ever, and people believe it. In my opinion, the primary concern of this planet should be meeting the needs of the people on it. Some of the responses on here boil down to "Own fault. Not my problem. F**k him". You're entitled to that view, but I find it both abhorrent and quite apt. That's precisely what our "functioning monetary system" thinks of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 This is a very sad story. Sadly there is **** all any of us can do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 Functioning monetary system is an oxymoron. As long as any system allows individuals and corporations to accumulate vast sums of capital, you are always going to create inequality, meaning your "functional monetary system" comes at the cost of dysfunctional societies and human misery. Sure, some people have all the fun, but the fact remains that the vast amount of the world's wealth is in the hands of a very select few. Your functioning monetary system is a loosely federated hierarchy in which wealth flows upwards. When it comes down to it, the majority of society's problems come down to money. People will steal for it, kill for it, or move jobs overseas to make more of it. Look at the current financial crisis. The world is going crazy over what are essentially numbers in data-banks. I'd like someone to tell me how a country like America can really be in any trouble at all. They have everything they need to survive on their own land. Look at the EU. If we banded together and sussed out what we had, why couldn't we do that too? We might get a few less bananas, and might have to make our own TVs, but again - everything we need. It really is the biggest scam ever, and people believe it. In my opinion, the primary concern of this planet should be meeting the needs of the people on it. Some of the responses on here boil down to "Own fault. Not my problem. F**k him". You're entitled to that view, but I find it both abhorrent and quite apt. That's precisely what our "functioning monetary system" thinks of you. I guess Pap, you need to go find another country to live, one that is anti every thing you appear to dislike, Cuba for instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 4 January, 2012 Share Posted 4 January, 2012 I guess Pap, you need to go find another country to live, one that is anti every thing you appear to dislike, Cuba for instance. I don't think he will need to, the current monetary system is obviously f*cked. It's just a matter of time. It will go pop when the US just decide they don't owe anyone anything and delete the trillions owed off the computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now