# Pregnancy as a 'career option'



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

WTF is this country coming to!!? 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5217634.stm


----------



## bilbos (Jan 16, 2004)

> "I don't want a career - I want to bring my little girl up and I still go out and have fun."


I think that says it all really. Just another excuse for being lazy and expecting the taxpayer to cover it.

And diluting the gene pool a bit more. :?


----------



## Widget (May 7, 2002)

bilbos said:


> And diluting the gene pool a bit more. :?


Seeing as you have no intention of improving the gene pool, you have no right in commenting.

That's not unfair of me, is it?

However, I do agree with you wholeheartedly.


----------



## scott28tt (Jul 30, 2002)

What a surprise - none of them are still with the fathers. It takes two parents to make a 'proper' family and provide the best possible upbringing for kids IMO.

Stupid young girls, far too young to make that kind of decision about their own life and to bring a baby into a world they themselves still know sod all about.


----------



## bilbos (Jan 16, 2004)

Widget said:


> bilbos said:
> 
> 
> > And diluting the gene pool a bit more. :?
> ...


No, it is not unfair of you at all.

My decision is based entirely on my ability to be a good parent, and I don't think I would make a good job of it, hence, no babies.

The article however illustrates "children" (because that is what they are at 14 & 15), taking no time whatsoever to consider their actions.


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

So this is what I pay my taxes for :evil:


----------



## KenTT (Feb 20, 2005)

Does this problem not self perpetuate :?:


----------



## vlastan (May 6, 2002)

What's next?

Their boyfriends claiming to prefer parenthood instead of a career and claiming benefits too? :x


----------



## Mrs Wallsendmag (Dec 13, 2005)

YELLOW_TT said:


> So this is what I pay my taxes for :evil:


Val says thanks [smiley=thumbsup.gif]( working for hmrc not being a fat lazy sponger  )


----------



## Leg (Jan 11, 2006)

Idiots breeding idiots, i say it again, intelligence tests before people are giving a breeding license. C J Cherryh saw it coming, after a fashion!


----------



## John C (Jul 5, 2002)

BBC said:


> Olivia has no regrets about having her daughter Ayeasha


Ayeasha?!

nuff said


----------



## StuarTT (May 7, 2002)

YELLOW_TT said:


> So this is what I pay my taxes for :evil:


My thoughts exactly:

and also this blokes in the answer section:



> Am I the only person who read this, whilst rushing my lunch at my desk, who thought 'why am I and other hard-working tax payers funding these people' ?? I work 11 hours a day and last year paid 40k a year in tax. Why should I have to pay for these mums to 'have fun' and stay at home simply because there 'was nothing else' that they wanted to do with their lives? I had Better get back to work, or they won't be able to afford to have the next baby...
> Tony, UK


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Â£63m, cut the benifits by 50% every year for the next 4 years.

Dont see why i should pay for someone to sit at home watching daytime TV as a career.


----------



## chiefscotland (Jul 22, 2006)

> Many young girls even see having a baby as a better option than a low-paid "dead-end" job, recent research for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation suggests.


These people need some drive in their lives, its pathetic.

A single mum will see the thick end of 20k plus a free house etc, I'm also sick of funding this rubbish.


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

What a load of shit so far....!

Who's fault is it exactly?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

saint said:


> What a load of shit so far....!
> 
> Who's fault is it exactly?


what is?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

saint said:


> What a load of shit so far....!
> 
> Who's fault is it exactly?


what is?

whos fault is what?


----------



## John C (Jul 5, 2002)

The great thing about this country is we don't have to fund these lifes. We can all choose to live somewhere else and avoid paying tax. Of we can stand for election and change this from within.

Perfect, we can all change this situation and if we are not happy about it then this it is due to the fact that we have chosen to do nothing about it.


----------



## saint (Dec 6, 2002)

bilbos said:


> > "I don't want a career - I want to bring my little girl up and I still go out and have fun."
> 
> 
> I think that says it all really. Just another excuse for being lazy and expecting the taxpayer to cover it.
> ...


And you the taxpayer has no say over this!? Thank your politician. 
The "mums" are only taking what they are entitled to via our state benefits schemes - and why not? What course would you take if you could either work for minimum wage or make more than that filling in a few claim forms?

Anyone here have a young child? Do you claim tax credits? Do you get child benefits? Do you claim the child bonds? Etc etc etc? Anyone here creative with their business expenses? Anyone here creative with their tax returns? It's all the same - just on different levels.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

I dont think people are blaming the girls they are blaming the system.

Can you change it? its not that easy a who in goverment would take on such a fight? no one - they would loose votes.

Is that right or wrong - depends on what side of the fence you are on.


----------



## The Silver Surfer (May 14, 2002)

saint said:


> bilbos said:
> 
> 
> > > "I don't want a career - I want to bring my little girl up and I still go out and have fun."
> ...


There is a subtle difference. If you are *working* and paying taxes etc. despite possibly tweaking your tax returns etc, you are still making some sort of contribution.

These 'mums' don't have jobs, don't intend to ever have a job, and don't ever make a contribution. They are quite happy to sit on their ar*se all day, making absolutely no effort whatsoever. :x

So, no, it's not all the the same.


----------



## digimeisTTer (Apr 27, 2004)

Toshiba said:


> I dont think people are blaming the girls they are blaming the system.


I blame the girls and i also blame the demise of the fucking education sytem and the fucking parents, most of whom seem proud that their 13 year old daughter has been fucked by a variety of scum (normally under their own roofs) and is now happy to "concentrate on looking after their baby"

Rinse and repeat :evil:


----------



## bilbos (Jan 16, 2004)

saint said:


> bilbos said:
> 
> 
> > > "I don't want a career - I want to bring my little girl up and I still go out and have fun."
> ...


After thinking about it, I shouldn't really be harping about this as I don't pay tax in the UK anymore.

The way the system is set up, it is "easier" to just have a child than go to work as you will "earn" more staying at home. However, there is a thing called self-worth, which I know I have, which wouldn't allow me morally to do that. I would rather go out and try and improve my situation rather than just sit at home sponging off the system. These girls have taken the latter route, which is a crying shame.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

They are just little slags looking for love.

Leave them alone. Tony and Gordon would only otherwise spend the Â£63M on a less than 5% contribution to a pointless overseas crusade somewhere in the middle East.

I am glad some of the little people are getting something out of the state.


----------



## A3DFU (May 7, 2002)

I think this is the essence of it

_These girls have never had their dreams nurtured, have never aspired to anything. Their choice to have a child wasn't the sober decision of an adult aware of the world's opportunity; it was the depressing outcome from a restricted mind that was never given the option to think that something incredible might come of their life. Poor girls._


----------

