Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tilde
firstly, i agree with your second paragraph, but i can't see how any change in a real world would not result in this in some regard.
|
Welfare is there (as you said) as a safety net when there are changes in the real world. When removing the safety net
is the change, then that's a bit different.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tilde
and to your first paragraph, how do you know this is a bit of a myth? do you work in the area of social welfare? i ask because like any reasonable person, you have made assumptions that people put all the money from the DPB into raising a child. from anectodal evidence in the media this does not seem to be the case. so why wouldn't a irresponsible person get pregnant on purpose to get additional income that is not spent on the child(ren)?
|
There are always going to be a small minority of people who abuse the system. Though this is the exception and not the rule, and the total removal of support for a child is a bit much imo.
The response to legislation which provides incentives and removed some barriers to work (family tax credit, reduced cost of childcare etc) shows that these mothers do want to work.
This research has a lot of findings which support this, particularly the part on "Impact on numbers of sole parents receiving benefit"
http://www.ird.govt.nz/aboutir/repor...e-parents.html