• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • General Discussion Forums
  • General Discussion
Is anybody else sick of the Radfords??
<<
<
3 of 5
>>
>
Hobbes1966
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by TerraCanis:
“They've been on channel 5 several times, and been featured in many magazines and newspapers
They were on This Morning today
They have their own website”

Ah, that will account for why I've never heard of them![/quote]

Same here.
I do sometimes watch channel five but like with everything I watch, the TV only goes on when I'm watching something specific that I want to watch then I stop watching.
I keep up to date with the news but not by reading newspapers. I don't read magazine's either.

Seems they aren't as well known as was thought.... On DS anyway. The majority of us here have never heard of them.
DigitalSpyUser
17-12-2016
They look a nice bunch to me, what's the issue?
WhatJoeThinks
17-12-2016
I didn't bother reading this thread until now because I've never heard of the Radfords. The first page is funny.
Starpuss
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by netcurtains:
“
Originally Posted by Tellystar:
“
I only watch stuff on kodi and don't buy magazines so I guess that's why I've never heard of them.”

Originally Posted by TerraCanis:
“They've been on channel 5 several times, and been featured in many magazines and newspapers
They were on This Morning today
They have their own website”

Ah, that will account for why I've never heard of them!”

Yup.

I think it's safe to say it's very easy to not have heard of them. I don't think I've ever watched any thing on Channel 5 and the last time I watched This Morning was when I was trapped at home as a new mother in the Richard and Judy days.

I'd love to know what magazines and newspapers they are in though. Mainly so I can continue to avoid them
Doctor_Wibble
17-12-2016
Congratulations to the OP for bringing them to a wider audience
anne_666
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by Tellystar:
“They've been on channel 5 several times, and been featured in many magazines and newspapers
They were on This Morning today
They have their own website”

Never heard of them. I don't watch Channel 5 or daytime TV and obviously don't read the same magazines and newspapers.

I clicked on the thread to find out who they are. The obvious question is why didn't the OP provide any information.
karen_charnock
17-12-2016
They live near me and are a really nice family. Who cares how many kids they have, it's not like they don't work and claim benefits like some with loads of children. Noel gets early to open his bakery and still takes the younger children to school before going back to work.
Union Jock
17-12-2016
I didn't know they had kids which is just as well really because they're an odd looking couple.

If I had a phobia they'd be the last people I'd use for help.
jra
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by intoxication:
“I'm sure they are a very nice family but every Christmas it's always the same: "Britain's biggest family (they don't receive any benefits, btw!) has ANOTHER child. You won't BELIEVE how long it takes them to cook Christmas dinner!" No I wouldn't and I also don't bloody care! I'm sure they are a nice family and they come across pleasant and hard working but it's more of the fault of the newspapers and television programmes forcing them down our throats all the time!”

Yes they receive state benefits or state support for the children until they are 16 at least, maybe 18.

Education.
Child benefit.
NHS health care.
Dental treatment.
Optical care, e.g. glasses/eye tests.
Prescriptions.
(The above is probably not a complete list.)

All the above are generally free, regardless of family earned income. So, children are a huge burden on the state financially and environmentally in terms of Earth's population.

In other words, the more children that they have, the more the general taxpayer will have to pay in taxes.

Originally Posted by karen_charnock:
“They live near me and are a really nice family. Who cares how many kids they have, it's not like they don't work and claim benefits like some with loads of children. Noel gets early to open his bakery and still takes the younger children to school before going back to work.”

They'll be claiming child benefit for a start, and AFAIK that isn't capped yet, so the more children you have the more you can claim, so no.
Tellystar
17-12-2016
[quote=Union Jock;84901178]I didn't know they had kids which is just as well really because they're an odd looking couple.
If I had a phobia they'd be the last people I'd use for help.[Quote

Care to explain your odd comment?
Jason100
17-12-2016
Are they claiming every benefit available to them?
Tellystar
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by Jason100:
“Are they claiming every benefit available to them?”

Why shouldn't they?
francie
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by Jason100:
“Are they claiming every benefit available to them?”

Hope so, they pay into the system so why not.
WhatJoeThinks
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by Jason100:
“Are they claiming every benefit available to them?”

Bloody people claiming things that they're entitled to! Makes you sick, doesn't it?
Jo09
17-12-2016
I quite like them. It's not like they're having babies to not work. Fair play to them.
St Dabeoc
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by intoxication:
“You won't BELIEVE how long it takes them to cook Christmas dinner!"!”

I expect they keep stopping to have unprotected sex
jra
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by Jo09:
“I quite like them. It's not like they're having babies to not work. Fair play to them.”

Originally Posted by WhatJoeThinks:
“Bloody people claiming things that they're entitled to! Makes you sick, doesn't it?”

Originally Posted by francie:
“Hope so, they pay into the system so why not.”

Missing the point here guys. They're claiming or benefiting from what they're entitled to, but they don't need to have so many children in the first place, so are an extra burden on the state, as there are no disincentives really to have fewer children when it comes to state support, i.e. the list I posted above as examples.
francie
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by jra:
“Missing the point here guys. They're claiming or benefiting from what they're entitled to, but they don't need to have so many children in the first place, so are an extra burden on the state, as there are no disincentives really to have fewer children when it comes to state support, i.e. the list I posted above as examples.”

Not missing any point thanks. They support their kids - they look well cared for and happy. The father contributes as a tax payer and no doubt the older kids do or will do later on (if they're currently in further education etc.). Fair play to them.
Jo09
17-12-2016
I can understand why disincentivising people on benefits to have large families that the state has to pay for and workers typically can't afford.

If the a Radfords want another child they should go for it.
annette kurten
17-12-2016
i only opened the thread to see who they were.
annette kurten
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by St Dabeoc:
“I expect they keep stopping to have unprotected sex”

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
WhatJoeThinks
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by jra:
“Missing the point here guys. They're claiming or benefiting from what they're entitled to, but they don't need to have so many children in the first place, so are an extra burden on the state, as there are no disincentives really to have fewer children when it comes to state support, i.e. the list I posted above as examples.”

You're preaching to the converted. I don't have any children, and I have no intentions of starting a family in this vastly overpopulated world. For those children that do exist though, I don't begrudge them receiving their dues. After my dad died my mother was either too proud or too embarrassed to claim what was rightfully ours, so we made do with very little. With hindsight I'd say that was rather foolish.
stoatie
17-12-2016
Originally Posted by Union Jock:
“If I had a phobia they'd be the last people I'd use for help.”

I must admit, I know next to nothing about them, but is there a reason anyone else would be likely to go to them with help for a phobia?

I mean, that Gordon Ramsey. If I had a weird skin disease he's the last person I'd go to for help. Am I doing it right?
grimtales1
18-12-2016
Originally Posted by stoatie:
“Not 100% sure, but I think this may be the first time I've ever heard of them, unless I've just forgotten.”

I was just going to say the same thing. Who??
Lincs_Imp
18-12-2016
I'll join the chorus. Who?
<<
<
3 of 5
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map