|
29th July 2009, 14:54 | #401 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 14:59 | #402 | ||
|
Quote:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/__data/asse...tails-m048.asx Quote:
|
||
29th July 2009, 15:11 | #403 | |
|
http://www.listener.co.nz/issue/3606...6D746332A3A947
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:12 | #404 |
|
What's the incentive for a single mother to go back to work when she currently gets over $700 for DOING NOTHING? I guess when one kids reaches an age where she will lose a benefit she'll go pop another one out?
|
29th July 2009, 15:21 | #405 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:23 | #406 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:24 | #407 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
29th July 2009, 15:26 | #408 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:26 | #409 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:32 | #410 | |
|
Quote:
The only real incentive would be to act as a role model for your children so they don't grow up to think that it's cool to be a bum. But then all you need to do is take a drive around any town centre in Mangere and see all the peasents spending tax payers money on McShit and cigarettes. I'm a white male who got credit crunched so now I'm studing at uni. I receive $150 from the government. I even got declined an accomodation supplement. I am doing alright though, not $700 alright but I am aight. So yeah, $700 is fucken insane for an unemployed person. |
|
29th July 2009, 15:33 | #411 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:33 | #412 | |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 15:37 | #413 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
"I distinctly remember leaving my God at home in my room where he won't interfere with my life." -Quan Zee Teng |
|
29th July 2009, 15:41 | #414 |
|
I've got no problems with welfare per se and if they're entitled to it, more power to them. I'd like to see it capped after a certain amount of years time though as it should never be a lifestyle.
Fucking annoying though that it's now a points scoring privacy story because she got her hands dirty on it rather than doing it backhanded as per usual. If the information is there on how much beneficiaries can get, what is the big deal if it's public knowledge on how much these two individuals do. Get the whole story out there and let's see what we can do for these women, rather than have the impression they're getting jack on welfare and this TIA loss is going to break them. |
29th July 2009, 15:46 | #415 | |
|
Quote:
IMO 700 (is this after tax?) would get sucked up pretty quick by a single parent family of 4 and also the 'good' single parents do a lot more than a 40hr week work (I read an article in one of the sunday papers a bit back which totaled the number of hours of work done over the week etc) IMO the real problem here is that the if you are going to pay people to be parents then it needs to be made sure that they are doing a good job.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
29th July 2009, 15:55 | #416 | |
|
Quote:
The only example i can think of a Labour minister in the last government releasing the confidential information of a private individual to the media was Lianne Daziel over the Sri Lankan immigrant girl. She resigned as a Minister as a result of that incident. |
|
29th July 2009, 16:04 | #417 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 18:14 | #418 |
|
loooooooooool
It turns out that the woman that's laying the complaint about her details being released was on fair go last year. She was complaining about some $400 hair extensions that she had done that weren't up to scratch. Oh yeah they interviewed her in her house where there was a lovely new living suite kitted out with a wide screen plasma tv. THANKS WINZ! |
29th July 2009, 18:20 | #419 |
|
Is that the one that now has a spokesperson and who's details were previously mentioned in parliament by Benson Pope?
|
29th July 2009, 18:20 | #420 | ||
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
29th July 2009, 18:26 | #421 |
|
Checkout the Radiolive audio when 5:15+ or so comes up. Maggie Barry interviewing one of the woman and the others new 'spokesperson', along with Annette King. 'More than likely' to blow up in Labours face again.
|
29th July 2009, 18:26 | #422 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 18:29 | #423 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 18:33 | #424 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
29th July 2009, 19:23 | #425 | |
|
Quote:
Note: I do understand that people have reasons like 'at least the rich work for their money' which is pretty average reasoning, but ok. It's just, why does it seem to be so common that people are much more upset about welfare abuse, that probably costs the country shit fucking all and makes absolutely zero difference in your life, but not be upset about the widening income gap which is placing serious pressure on the middle class, and on top of that the massive amount of tax avoidance by the wealthy. So some people abuse welfare? It's no different than writing off the cops because some are bad people. If you've got a better system backed by some solid support and reasoning, i'm seriously all ears and i'm sure a lot of people would be. It's better that we give some people money to eat than they steal it. It's gonna be one of those two for a lot of people, a lot of people are already fucked, they're not going to magically start acting how society wants them too. If you're so concerned about welfare abuse, have a cry about wanting more intervention in problem areas. Just crying about the occasional person popping up who may or may not be getting 'too much' is fucking dense. There's no reason National can't be more effective at reducing poverty than Labour (well...), i'd happily eat all my words if they did. But instead the focus seems to be 'cry about shit' then 'don't really do anything to fix it'. Though to be honest, John Key hasn't struck me as someone who abhores the benefit. |
|
29th July 2009, 20:24 | #426 | ||
Mrs Colin Farrell
|
Quote:
Haven't read the rest of the thread but surely somebody has called you out on this. Personally, 3 kids sounds like the worst job in the fucking world. With one kid you get the luxury of sometimes doing nothing, but 3? Fuck that. Goodbye any free time/personal life. Now, that woman is an idiot for having 3 kids in the first place, but give her at least some credit. "DOING NOTHING" she is not. But wait, it gets better!: Quote:
I used to think the same thing before I had a kid. You need mad Harry Potter skills to raise 3 kids on $700 p/w. Last edited by chiquelet : 29th July 2009 at 20:26. |
||
29th July 2009, 21:11 | #427 | ||
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
29th July 2009, 21:18 | #428 | ||
|
Quote:
I know of plenty of families where the husband earns less than 50k and supports his wife and 3 kids. Quote:
|
||
30th July 2009, 09:32 | #429 | ||
Nothing to See Here!
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
30th July 2009, 09:44 | #430 |
|
so do people on the DPB/Dole get WFF? if they do that would appear the fly in the face of the "working" portion of the scheme.
All for giving money back to people working who have kids, but not to the DPB'd, shit my parents raised 5 kids for 8~ years on the dole (in and out) without much trouble, we just didnt have anything new, ever, no biggie though.
__________________
please discontinue your lies. |
30th July 2009, 09:47 | #431 | |
Nothing to See Here!
|
Quote:
I don't like benefit cheats any more than the next person does, but like JP put it, a system where some people cheat it is better than no system at all. |
|
30th July 2009, 09:58 | #432 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Say you rent a 3 bedroom house in Auckland. That'll be about $300 a week in Manurewa, Mangere area. Then power which will be about $220 a month, water say $200 a quarter? and cellphone $40 a month. Per month: Rent: $1200 Power:$220 Water:$66 Cell: $40 Total Utilities/Rent:1526 Money leftover:2860 - 1526 = 1334 So she'll have $1334 approx left over to spend per month on food, clothing, sky tv, cigarettes etc Unless of course you want to say that she'll need to spend over $200 a week on food? then she'll be in a bit of trouble. But then of course she should be living within her means. And that means not eating the flash stuff. My Maori Aunty can feed over 7 people a week under $150 au. She cooks a pretty mean boil up. |
||
30th July 2009, 10:03 | #433 | |
Nothing to See Here!
|
Quote:
I actually prefer a more direct benefit system; i.e. you have 3 kids, so here's your 3 bags of rice, bulk pack of chicken thighs etc for the week, go nuts; but the administration/logistics costs probably make it a less efficient use of our tax dollars. Last edited by Saladin : 30th July 2009 at 10:05. |
|
30th July 2009, 10:08 | #434 | |
|
Quote:
Also each dollar that a person on the dole spends goes around the economy about 6/7 times so it's actually helping putting money back into the market creating jobs etc. Ruth Richardson and Bill Birch found out the hard way during the mid 90's when they slashed and burnt benefits. |
|
30th July 2009, 10:14 | #435 | |
|
Quote:
One example of the government making bad decisions is electing Christine Rankin as the head of the families commission despite her being divorced and remarried 4 times oooh yeah that's some real smart thunking there. Good example for the population! Good work, I wonder who's going to win American Gladiator tonight. |
|
30th July 2009, 10:16 | #436 | |
|
Quote:
|
|
30th July 2009, 10:21 | #437 | |
|
Quote:
The market dictates what people want. Not some low level government official. What a backward view |
|
30th July 2009, 10:28 | #438 | |
Nothing to See Here!
|
Quote:
The case you keep referring to is someone likely to be cheating the system, by having a live in partner earning an income and not declaring it; that's what's enabling the hair extensions and the plasma TV; so the size of the benefit itself is not necessarily too large. |
|
30th July 2009, 10:31 | #439 |
|
The point is she's entitled to a 56k salary. She has $1334 to spend on food and whatever else a month after she pays for her rent. That's too much imho. Especially when $400 hair extensions are involved
|
30th July 2009, 12:08 | #440 | |
Mrs Colin Farrell
|
Quote:
Car insurance $40 p/m = $9.24 p/w Petrol $20 p/w Wof/rego $6 p/w Contents insurance $5 p/w So you said she had $1,334.00 p/m left over. x 12/52 = $261.69 p/w left over. Wow, she now has $21 left over per week! And I haven't even counted in school stuff for the kids. And what if the kids get sick? Or what if? What if? |
|