National Thus Far - Page 103

Lightspeed · 19th March 2015, 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by pxpx

Nice try dude, but no. You're so fucking black and white there's no point continuing to engage with you.

So what are you saying? What I'm hearing are problems. Reasons for doing nothing. I'm not hearing genuine concern.

I appreciate I get emotionally triggered in this kind of discussion. I grew up in poverty in Northland - I got fed but I experienced a lot of children who weren't - and I also have a good understanding of child development. I understand the deep significance of child health and the multi-generation impact of a child growing up without their basic needs met. As such I struggle to be dispassionate in this discussion. I do try.

We also live in a political context where talking about problems in unpopular and discouraged, so I find myself reacting against that.

Lightspeed · 19th March 2015, 12:38

Lolololz, fucking John Key.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11419393

Quote:

Prime Minister John Key got Education Minister Hekia Parata to cold-call three low-decile schools at random today and find out how many children had come to school without lunch.

Yeah, because National has shown itself to be very open to bad news. Certainly, we couldn't find evidence of bullying behaviour by the party towards those who would speak out against the party line. /s

Quote:

"These are the facts," Mr Key said

Yes, the facts are you made some phone calls and got the answers you were looking for. The answers you wanted published.

The government could of course do some thorough research to ensure the health of our children. But your education Minister doing some cold calls, well that's just as good!

blynk · 19th March 2015, 12:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by pxpx

Parents need to be given the chance to be responsible, and there should be a safety net to catch those kids whose parents don't take that chance. That safety net is not this bill, which is inherently flawed by setting an arbitrary line in the sand: only Decile 1 and Decile 2 schools get the funding (unless the secretary otherwise says so)

Hungry kids everywhere, but you're shit outta luck if you're in a 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 school

Yes, that is true that there are hungry kids in all deciles, but I think the issue is that its not even being discussed. Im sure this could have changed to have different rules. Or somethings like 90% of Decile 1, 80% Decile 2, 70% decile 3 etc.
But now they is no discussion on the matter.

As for parents should just buy their own kids breakfast. I don't think many people can comment unless they are truely in that demographic.
Min wage jobs, probably struggling to get enough hours a week.
Rent, Power, Water, transport costs etc.
Sure its just $5, but that doesnt help when you actually have nothing left each week.

So the alternative to feeding the kids in schools, would be introducing the living wage. Bam, there goes that extra $5 a week that most people need to feed their kids.

[BT]MikeMan · 19th March 2015, 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

That's some marvellous insight you have there. Seriously. You appreciate the importance of feeding kids and you realise it's not that difficult.

The problem is many parents lack this insight - they may have grown up hungry kids themselves. And others find themselves under so much pressure that even small difficulties are overwhelming.

What it comes down to is what's more important: kids being fed or parents being responsible. I think even if we were to prioritise the latter, we would help future parents by focusing on the former.

No you do it by making the parents RESPONSIBLE and training them to be better parents.

It comes back to "Give a man a fish, feed him for one day. TEACH a man to fish and feed him for life"

Fixing the symptom does NOT fix the cause and never has.

If you allow/enable parents to be scumbags they will. Hold them to a higher standard, educate them on how and punish the ones that do not get it.

crocos · 19th March 2015, 19:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by [BT]MikeMan

No you do it by making the parents RESPONSIBLE and training them to be better parents.

Responsibility only works if they're smart enough and give enough of a shit to meet that responsibility, which some people just aren't.

Then there's also some that truly, genuinely do not have sufficient money once little things like paying for clothing, power and the roof over their head is allowed for. "Harden up and lrn2budget" is not the answer for that demographic.

spigalau · 19th March 2015, 19:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by [BT]MikeMan

No you do it by making the parents RESPONSIBLE and training them to be better parents.

It comes back to "Give a man a fish, feed him for one day. TEACH a man to fish and feed him for life"

Fixing the symptom does NOT fix the cause and never has.

If you allow/enable parents to be scumbags they will. Hold them to a higher standard, educate them on how and punish the ones that do not get it.

^ that man deserves a DB

Golden Teapot · 19th March 2015, 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by blynk

As for parents should just buy their own kids breakfast.

I think that parents should provide breakfast; whether it is bought or not is a matter for each family to decide having balanced the competing needs for their money.

There are not many families who having planned ahead could not provide a breakfast for little or no monetary cost. The problem of course is that having no money is often a pretty god proxy for having little or no skill in many areas including the aforesaid situation of needing to plain.

For those that need to buy but that have little money then a shop like fruit world could be the savior - they commonly have bulk eat-it-soon fruit going for between $1 and $4 for quantities that would do a family for breakfast for a week; I know because I feed my pig on this and she eats a hell of a lot.

Lightspeed · 19th March 2015, 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by [BT]MikeMan

Fixing the symptom does NOT fix the cause and never has.

In this case the symptom is also the cause. Poor child development leads to poor quality parents leads to poor child development.

In this case "teaching a man to fish" would often be re-parenting parents who have never experienced good parenting. This is hard and expensive. It's much easier parenting children than adults - childhood is the appropriate time for this before adult capacities and demands emerge.

Feeding kids is cheap and easy. Food isn't expensive, we have these institutions were kids congregate daily. It's not a novel model, it's something that's done to great affect across the world.

If we feed our kids, they'll learn to fish for themselves. Fishing isn't all that hard - but when you're hungry and desperate, even getting up in the morning can be a chore.

Making parents responsible for things they cannot be is borne by the children, not the parents. To me this is not acceptable and frankly irrational. It makes no sense to introduce children into a world of punishments. Not if we're hoping for a society we enjoy, that generates wonderful things rather than horrors.

Lightspeed · 19th March 2015, 20:00

To be clear the reasons why children are sent to school without food are complex. There are plenty of cunts out there with children, I appreciate how it might burn to think of such people getting anything.

And taking advantage of a relatively cheap and easy intervention like making sure kids are fed comes with complex benefits.

Savage · 19th March 2015, 20:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Lolololz, fucking John Key.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Article

A bill in her name, originally known as Hone Harawira's "feed the kids" bill was defeated in Parliament this evening, by 59 votes to 61 at its first reading.

I didn't know JK got to vote 61 times. For a moment, I almost thought that 60 other MPs had also voted against it! Thank goodness for LS pointing out the evil PM abusing all those votes he has to himself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Article

"Ms Turei and Mr Key have been having testy exchanges in the House over children who go to school without lunch.

Last week Ms Turei claimed that KidsCan had said that up to 90 per cent of kids in schools went to school without lunch every day - a statement she later corrected and apologised for."

How the fuck did she get as far as raising this in the House without figuring out that claiming 90% of kids don't get lunch at school is fucking retarded.

fixed_truth · 19th March 2015, 22:02

Quote:

Will he at least commit to his Government working with cross-party agreement to provide food in schools, given that KidsCan says that 23 percent, on average, and up to 90 percent of kids in schools are going without lunch every day?

Given that she mentions the 23% average first it's pretty obvious that she accidentally missed out the 'it works with' rather than she actually thinks 90% of kids in schools went to school without lunch every day.

Lightspeed · 20th March 2015, 09:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savage

I didn't know JK got to vote 61 times. For a moment, I almost thought that 60 other MPs had also voted against it! Thank goodness for LS pointing out the evil PM abusing all those votes he has to himself.

Wut?

Macca@Work · 20th March 2015, 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

That's some marvellous insight you have there. Seriously. You appreciate the importance of feeding kids and you realise it's not that difficult.

The problem is many parents lack this insight - they may have grown up hungry kids themselves. And others find themselves under so much pressure that even small difficulties are overwhelming.

What it comes down to is what's more important: kids being fed or parents being responsible. I think even if we were to prioritise the latter, we would help future parents by focusing on the former.

Todays Crock o Shite served up nicely.I get sick of watching kids walk out of dairys with pies for breakfast.Feed the kids and educate the parents.Not a biggy.

pxpx · 20th March 2015, 09:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Given that she mentions the 23% average first it's pretty obvious that she accidentally missed out the 'it works with' rather than she actually thinks 90% of kids in schools went to school without lunch every day.

Meh, it's just another time that the idiot has decided to run her mouth in parliament and then be forced to retract later.

Lightspeed · 20th March 2015, 10:34

This whole Roast Busters business is a serious indictment on the National government. National can't claim to be the ones responsible for our apparent rock star economy while at the same time being powerless over the functioning and behaviour of our police force.

pxpx · 20th March 2015, 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

This whole Roast Busters business is a serious indictment on the National government. National can't claim to be the ones responsible for our apparent rock star economy while at the same time being powerless over the functioning and behaviour of our police force.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IPCA Report on Roast Busters Case

Recommendations
• Carry out an audit of current cases being investigated by the Waitemata child protection team, to determine if any "individual shortcomings" still remained.
• Determine whether any practice or policy issues needed to be addressed, nationally and in Waitemata.
• Ensure police are properly taught about laws relating to sexual offending.

Don't see "change the government" in there, do you? The cops involved would have been useless no matter who was PM at the time.

Lightspeed · 20th March 2015, 11:37

lolololz

Please, tell us more about how it's the role of the IPCA to suggest who should be in government.

Maybe if National didn't have to spend so much time firing those it put in charge because of their misconduct the police would have some decent oversight?

Hahah, please carry on.

Juju · 20th March 2015, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

This whole Roast Busters business is a serious indictment on the National government. National can't claim to be the ones responsible for our apparent rock star economy while at the same time being powerless over the functioning and behaviour of our police force.

Do tell how the government would have avoided the situation. I'd love to hear your solutions.

Lightspeed · 20th March 2015, 11:40

Is interference with individual cases the only way the government can influence police behaviour and practices?

blynk · 20th March 2015, 11:40

No John Key didnt vote 60 times (they only have 60 at the moment I believe), but it was effectively his decision as he runs the party, he says no, then the party says no.

But notice that 60 people voted for it. That includes Maori, Greens, Labour and even National's little bitch boy ACT.

What does that tell you.

For Turei's comments, did you notice the big part of it. She apologised for quoting the numbers incorrectly.
Thats a shit load more that what John Key (and even Labour at times) would do. She realised that that was a mistake and admitted it.

But I guess the issue is that if John Key started apologising for all the mistakes he has made, there would be no time left in parliment for anything else this year.

Juju · 20th March 2015, 11:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Is interference with individual cases the only way the government can influence police behaviour and practices?

I ninja edited my comment as I misread your original statement. But even so, the government has to keep at an arms length from the police for a gabizzilion reasons. How you expect them to influence the attitudes of some bad apples while keeping at arms length...I don't know.

Lightspeed · 20th March 2015, 11:51

Funding and policy setting is one way. The day-to-day interactions the police must have with the government over various issues is the predominant way I would think. There will be police staff who have to report to government ministers and the ministers would need to respond to those reports.

If we are to believe the head of the police union (I assume not), the issue is partly due to resourcing priorities going elsewhere:
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/roas...t-care-6259270

If we consider the collapse of community rape crisis services and the ACC's sensitive claims service, we have a clear picture of National not considering people needing these services a priority.

Under National it's clear that the vulnerable people of NZ can literally get fucked.

Nothing · 22nd March 2015, 02:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Under National it's clear that the vulnerable people of NZ can literally get fucked.

Painfully true.

Lightspeed · 24th March 2015, 11:10

National doing their bit to keep up the narrative of poor == bad:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...-child-poverty

Fucking cunts.

xor · 24th March 2015, 13:55

The irony regarding lack of meals for kids is that obesity is most endemic in the poorest areas of Auckland.

Anecdotal evidence in my street suggests that beneficiaries have enough money to feed their kids with government money, whether they decide to buy food for their kids or a pack of smokes is another thing...

CCS · 24th March 2015, 14:10

Weet-bix and toast costs sweet fuck all. Ain't no motherfucker that can't afford Weet-bix and toast.

Ab · 24th March 2015, 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Weet-bix and toast costs sweet fuck all.

Well if it costs sweet fuck all it won't hurt to have the govt provide free weetbix and toast at school for the kids of shit parents, right? If the kids get more out of school by having full bellies at the start of the day and grow up to be good little citizens, they are less likely to be shit parents, thereby negatively feedbacking the shit out of this loop, right?

fixed_truth · 24th March 2015, 15:49

...then the terrorists win!

Delphinus · 24th March 2015, 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

Well if it costs sweet fuck all it won't hurt to have the govt provide free weetbix and toast at school for the kids of shit parents, right? If the kids get more out of school by having full bellies at the start of the day and grow up to be good little citizens, they are less likely to be shit parents, thereby negatively feedbacking the shit out of this loop, right?

Pretty much this.

Also sucks for the kids of shit parents that they suffer when the parents can't get it together. The children have zero ability to do anything about it.

CCS · 25th March 2015, 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

Well if it costs sweet fuck all it won't hurt to have the govt provide free weetbix and toast at school for the kids of shit parents, right? If the kids get more out of school by having full bellies at the start of the day and grow up to be good little citizens, they are less likely to be shit parents, thereby negatively feedbacking the shit out of this loop, right?

Paula Bennett seems to think the government is already providing breakfast in schools.

Besides which, I'm not convinced that breakfast in the morning is all it takes to turn a kid into a wonderful parent-to-be.

Spoon1 · 25th March 2015, 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Besides which, I'm not convinced that breakfast in the morning is all it takes to turn a kid into a wonderful parent-to-be.

Someone said that?

CCS · 25th March 2015, 19:14

Oh my gosh so sorry mister. Excuse my sarcasm. I forgot that dumb people have trouble with that. Substitute "wonderful parents" for "less likely to be shit parents". Make sense now?

Cock

Caesar · 25th March 2015, 20:21

It's good to see the hackavist group Anonymous is weighing in.

Golden Teapot · 26th March 2015, 08:41

I've no problem with a food in schools programme. There need be no net cost in funding this either. One could simply deduct the costs on a pro rata basis from the benefits of those beneficiaries whose children are supposed to be attending each school.

Spoon1 · 27th March 2015, 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Oh my gosh so sorry mister. Excuse my sarcasm. I forgot that dumb people have trouble with that. Substitute "wonderful parents" for "less likely to be shit parents". Make sense now?

Cock

Let me be more specific.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Besides which, I'm not convinced that breakfast in the morning is ALL IT TAKES to turn a kid into a wonderful parent-to-be.

It is quite obvious that it's not a cure-all and there are many other things that can help mould someone into a better parent. I was therefore asking the question in case you were responding to something I hadn't read.

So shall I assume you're against the idea unless it's the only thing needed to make kids better people?

Cock

CCS · 27th March 2015, 14:28

Sarcasm. Do you not get it? Or are you too aspergers-ridden?

Spoon1 · 27th March 2015, 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Sarcasm. Do you not get it? Or are you too aspergers-ridden?

Did you get mine?

Surprise - I wasn't sure if you were being sarcastic or not so I thought I'd ask a question.

Your answer should have been "No, I was just being sarcastic." but I guess that's too much to ask. Serves me right for being polite.

Carry on.

Lightspeed · 15th April 2015, 09:30

John Key: rules are for the poors.
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/john...elines-6286551

pxpx · 15th April 2015, 09:52

Fuck, off with his head, that's atrocious.

Lightspeed · 15th April 2015, 09:58

I think the collapse of pretty much any kind of service looking out for victims of sexual violence is atrocious.

This is more of the ongoing trend of National giving no fucks about the rules, unless they can impose them on others.

But at least they can run an election, AMIRITE?! That's what's important for a government.

24th March 2015, 14:10	#4106
CCS Stunt Pants	Weet-bix and toast costs sweet fuck all. Ain't no motherfucker that can't afford Weet-bix and toast. __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

25th March 2015, 19:14	#4112
CCS Stunt Pants	Oh my gosh so sorry mister. Excuse my sarcasm. I forgot that dumb people have trouble with that. Substitute "wonderful parents" for "less likely to be shit parents". Make sense now? Cock __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

27th March 2015, 14:28	#4116
CCS Stunt Pants	Sarcasm. Do you not get it? Or are you too aspergers-ridden? __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

19th March 2015, 20:00	#4089
Lightspeed	To be clear the reasons why children are sent to school without food are complex. There are plenty of cunts out there with children, I appreciate how it might burn to think of such people getting anything. And taking advantage of a relatively cheap and easy intervention like making sure kids are fed comes with complex benefits. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

20th March 2015, 10:34	#4095
Lightspeed	This whole Roast Busters business is a serious indictment on the National government. National can't claim to be the ones responsible for our apparent rock star economy while at the same time being powerless over the functioning and behaviour of our police force. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

20th March 2015, 11:37	#4097
Lightspeed	lolololz Please, tell us more about how it's the role of the IPCA to suggest who should be in government. Maybe if National didn't have to spend so much time firing those it put in charge because of their misconduct the police would have some decent oversight? Hahah, please carry on. __________________ Stay shook. No sook. Last edited by Lightspeed : 20th March 2015 at 11:38.

20th March 2015, 11:40	#4099
Lightspeed	Is interference with individual cases the only way the government can influence police behaviour and practices? __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

20th March 2015, 11:40	#4100
blynk	No John Key didnt vote 60 times (they only have 60 at the moment I believe), but it was effectively his decision as he runs the party, he says no, then the party says no. But notice that 60 people voted for it. That includes Maori, Greens, Labour and even National's little bitch boy ACT. What does that tell you. For Turei's comments, did you notice the big part of it. She apologised for quoting the numbers incorrectly. Thats a shit load more that what John Key (and even Labour at times) would do. She realised that that was a mistake and admitted it. But I guess the issue is that if John Key started apologising for all the mistakes he has made, there would be no time left in parliment for anything else this year.

20th March 2015, 11:51	#4102
Lightspeed	Funding and policy setting is one way. The day-to-day interactions the police must have with the government over various issues is the predominant way I would think. There will be police staff who have to report to government ministers and the ministers would need to respond to those reports. If we are to believe the head of the police union (I assume not), the issue is partly due to resourcing priorities going elsewhere: http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/roas...t-care-6259270 If we consider the collapse of community rape crisis services and the ACC's sensitive claims service, we have a clear picture of National not considering people needing these services a priority. Under National it's clear that the vulnerable people of NZ can literally get fucked. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

24th March 2015, 11:10	#4104
Lightspeed	National doing their bit to keep up the narrative of poor == bad: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...-child-poverty Fucking cunts. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

24th March 2015, 13:55	#4105
xor	The irony regarding lack of meals for kids is that obesity is most endemic in the poorest areas of Auckland. Anecdotal evidence in my street suggests that beneficiaries have enough money to feed their kids with government money, whether they decide to buy food for their kids or a pack of smokes is another thing...

24th March 2015, 15:49	#4108
fixed_truth	...then the terrorists win! __________________ 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.

25th March 2015, 20:21	#4113
Caesar	It's good to see the hackavist group Anonymous is weighing in.

26th March 2015, 08:41	#4114
Golden Teapot Love, Actuary	I've no problem with a food in schools programme. There need be no net cost in funding this either. One could simply deduct the costs on a pro rata basis from the benefits of those beneficiaries whose children are supposed to be attending each school.

15th April 2015, 09:30	#4118
Lightspeed	John Key: rules are for the poors. http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/john...elines-6286551 __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

15th April 2015, 09:52	#4119
pxpx	Fuck, off with his head, that's atrocious.

15th April 2015, 09:58	#4120
Lightspeed	I think the collapse of pretty much any kind of service looking out for victims of sexual violence is atrocious. This is more of the ongoing trend of National giving no fucks about the rules, unless they can impose them on others. But at least they can run an election, AMIRITE?! That's what's important for a government. __________________ Stay shook. No sook. Last edited by Lightspeed : 15th April 2015 at 09:59.