Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Re-uniting a dog with it's person is MEANT to feel great.. I don't feel that way :(

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    I think my problem with this, is that these dog owners won't keep their dogs safe or comply with the local law. To me that's completely irresponsible and not in the dogs' best interests long term either. I think it's ok for Tahlz and some of the rest of us to be upset about it too.

    I don't think that "no money" is much of an excuse either. Even homeless people can do better than that.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    605

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kristy.Maree View Post
    What I said was probably taken a bit out of context, I said I have $2000 for my dogs and horse, horse visits from the vet is a lot more expensive than dogs, if it was just the dogs then I would probably only have a few hundred set aside, I've had to have horses pts before because I haven't been able to afford the thousand dollars worth of surgery so I guess I've learnt my lesson and for peace of mind like to have money put away.

    You guys are all responsible owners, my comment was more directed at the people who live 'paycheck at a time' and only have like $50 to their name at any point in time... I know a few people like that and worry about what they'd do if their pets get sick, yet they still keep taking on more pets and it frustrates me!
    I know someone like that, She was hoarding. I called the RSPCA on her and they took some of the cats. She had like five... And most of them weren't desexed or microchipped or registered because she can't afford to pay for it ever because of her compulsive shopping.
    No one loves you like your dog does.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Toowoomba, QLD
    Posts
    1,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newfsie View Post
    Nothing to do with the original thread, but something to do with how it panned out
    I will just show two pictures..........it is not all about being able to afford dogs......love is often more important and maybe one day if something happens, someone will care enough to help these guys and their dogs. I know i would rather help someone who truly loves their dogs like this........

    I have paid the vet fees for a labrador belonging to a pensioner and I still pay his yearly vaccinations and sometimes some extra food I buy when I buy for my own........I rather do this then send another dog to the pound. We call him our foster dog

    Attachment 9426

    Attachment 9427

    I bet these guys do not have a dollar in their accounts, but they deserve the love of a dog
    I agree Newfsie, those people do deserve the love of a dog, they have nothing else but unconditional love for (and from) their dog. I would be willing to help a pensioner or homeless person with vet bills, food etc and thats great that you have your 'foster dog'

    It's the people who spend all their money on smokes, alcohol, expensive and unnecessary things etc etc (just examples- I have nothing against people who chose to smoke or drink) so they have nothing left and then whinge that they can't afford vet treatments etc for their dog that really make my blood boil.

    I think that we can all agree that a lot of dogs end up in pounds, shelters and rescue organisations because people take them on and then realise that they can't afford them. I understand that sometimes people have unexpected health issues or other situations arise which mean they can no longer afford their very much loved animal and there is nothing they can do about it, but a lot of times it is just people not understanding the financial responsibilty that is associated with having an animal.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,784

    Default

    I see what you say and I understand it...I am just saying do not ask for laws to cover this sort of stuff.........because that will mean a lot of people who would give their lives for their dogs are unable to have dogs. Dogs that end up in shelters are sometimes better off being away from the person who owned them. And by dogs getting away, escaping or running away, that is what happens....so sometimes we just have to let it happen and pick up the pieces if we can and sometimes we cannot do anything except feel sad for the dogs
    Pets are forever

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Logan, Brisbane QLD
    Posts
    806

    Default

    I know someone like that, She was hoarding. I called the RSPCA on her and they took some of the cats. She had like five... And most of them weren't desexed or microchipped or registered because she can't afford to pay for it ever because of her compulsive shopping.
    I think that is more of a sickness, and those people who do hoard animals you will find will actually spend every cent to their name on their animals and don't care for themselves. You will find the RSPCA are very lenient with people like this because these sort of people truly care for their animals and put their animals needs before their own, but they get so overwhelmed and get to a point where the welfare of the animals is not the best, though not intentional. It's quite sad, usually older people who are on their own and are lonely.

    I can also see where your coming from KM. For me it's people who can't afford the BASICS in order for them to live - Food, Water and Shelter. Registration is not really beneficial in order for the animal to continue living, which is where i thought your comment stemmed from. People also have different opinions of Vaccinations/Heartworm Treatment also, there are animals out there who live long lives without receiving either, so you can't really say they NEED those either. It's more if your intentionally harming your dog by not providing the basics of living because you cannot afford it and by intentional i mean you went out and got an animal knowing full well you cannot afford it. But life is not always so straight forward, say you lost your job tomorrow and had no spousal support and you had to use up your entire savings - does that mean you should have to give up your dogs?

    I think my problem with this, is that these dog owners won't keep their dogs safe or comply with the local law. To me that's completely irresponsible and not in the dogs' best interests long term either. I think it's ok for Tahlz and some of the rest of us to be upset about it too.
    Of course it's upsetting - i'm not a cold hearted b#$%!. But it's there is no actual basis of fact. I mean i've had Rex escape before, the first afternoon i locked them in my garage/pool area after my backyard was turned into a mud pit. He wiggled through the smallest gap between the floor and the roller door and that has only ever happened once. Now if somebody started ranting and raving about me being irresponsible because my dog got out, and that they might try kidnap him to get him away from my neglect there would be bloody hell to pay. I think the OP could have vented in a different manner. We don't know if it's true that these dogs get out all the time? We don't even know if they are a banned breed! I just think if you have such a problem with what you have encountered, then ring the council and let them do with it. Don't be some vigilante dog saver when you don't even know if they need saving!

    Edit to Post - Actually i had more of a problem with the posts made AFTER the original post. That's what made me think this thread was silly and over the top. It was the encouragement of going about the situation in the wrong way.
    Last edited by Kuri_89; 07-08-2012 at 08:13 PM.

  6. #36

    Default

    I think you summed it up very well kuri, the only part i disagree with is the vaccination/heartworm part

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    I know of a lot of people who put all their money into stuff they really don't need, ahead of things they do need - like school stuff for their children. There is a law handling that for some people, and the law is more wrong that what it's trying to fix - it's called "the intervention" and involves taking away control of peoples social security income and forcing them to spend it on food, clothes, shelter and school for their children. Currently it's limited by race and it's compulsory for those the government choose.

    I like the idea of stopping people from spending their social security on drugs like alcohol and cigarettes and other bad things - but I don't like the idea of forcing them. I think it would be better to give them incentives like we will pay you 10% more social security benefit, if you agree to put 80% of it into the good things spend control. And i think anyone on social security should be able to put their hand up for it.

    I think some people get stuck here -because they don't know how to get out of it. They don't know how to manage their money, or develop some ability to delay gratification. And the only way they can feel good is with drinking and smoking... It wouldn't be easy to change that.

    Almost everyone has some bad habit they'd like to change, but sometimes, we need a lot of help.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SE QLD
    Posts
    2,903

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    I know of a lot of people who put all their money into stuff they really don't need, ahead of things they do need - like school stuff for their children. There is a law handling that for some people, and the law is more wrong that what it's trying to fix - it's called "the intervention" and involves taking away control of peoples social security income and forcing them to spend it on food, clothes, shelter and school for their children. Currently it's limited by race and it's compulsory for those the government choose.

    I like the idea of stopping people from spending their social security on drugs like alcohol and cigarettes and other bad things - but I don't like the idea of forcing them. I think it would be better to give them incentives like we will pay you 10% more social security benefit, if you agree to put 80% of it into the good things spend control. And i think anyone on social security should be able to put their hand up for it.

    I think some people get stuck here -because they don't know how to get out of it. They don't know how to manage their money, or develop some ability to delay gratification. And the only way they can feel good is with drinking and smoking... It wouldn't be easy to change that.

    Almost everyone has some bad habit they'd like to change, but sometimes, we need a lot of help.
    Bit off topic... but funny you should mention that Hyacinth. Logan City Council is going to be one of the places trialling the new cards that restrict what people can purchase with their government payments...

    Logan is one of five national trial sites for income management via the new BasicsCard.

    The card is used like a bank card at several stores that had signed up to accept it to ensure money was not spent on alcohol, tobacco, gambling or pornography.

    Centrelink payment recipients identified as ``vulnerable'' by department social workers would be forced to use the card, while others could opt to use it to get better control over their finances. About 200 places, including schools and childcare facilities, petrol stations, supermarkets, hardware stores, department stores, second-hand stores and chemists in Logan would accept the card.

    Twin Rivers Food Co-op manager Noel Roberts said the store signed up to ensure customers still had access to discounted groceries if their income was being managed.

    ``I would assume there would be quite a few on the BasicsCard as a lot of our clients struggle from week to week,'' he said.

    ``It's a good thing and if we can help people who are on the card to stretch their dollars a bit further, to us it was a logical decision.''

    Will you be using the BasicsCard? Let us know, email masterss@qst .newsltd.com.au

    There is no psychiatrist in the world like a puppy licking your face.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •