She's a bit of a heifer - But I think I love Paula Bennett

[Winston001]

You will recall that a previous national govt tried more or less this exact same thing when Shipley was minister of social welfare. Didn't do a damn thing then either.

Exactly. I'm fairly right-wing but can't get into blaming beneficiaries for our economic problems. The dole and the DPB etc are not big payments. I know I could not pay all my bills on a benefit.

Yes there are complete losers out there, people who have made a lifestyle of being beneficiaries but I don't know how you'd ever catch them and what the solution would be. We do not want to become a fascist state where everyone is investigated and controlled.

[PrincessBandit]

Article on stuff this morning about single mum beneficiary who is $10 a week worse off by having a part time job. What on earth incentive is there for them to look for/get a job when financially they're going to be worse off? I know that there's the "pride in having work" thing, but when you've got a child/children to look after (not to mention surviving yourself) who would want to work but be worse off financially?

(and yes, I know some people in paid work probably don't get as much as the benefit; my question relates more to someone who has been receiving the benefit then taking a cut in $ by getting a job).

[Deano]

Lack of jobs to meet demand - not really an issue it it ?

As long as you're doing your best to get a job, making enquiries and going to interviews you should be sweet. No one says you have to try hard. I know someone who is playing their game - goes to a few job interviews for jobs which he doesn't want - dresses in black, doesn't shave, doesn't seem to interested = no job.

But he still meets the criteria. So it perhaps won't make a lot of difference.

I have no sympathy for the lifers that see the dole or sickness benefit as a lifestyle option - and in many cases are out doing crime as well.

If you're well enough to climb in through someones window and steal their tv, you can work.

Those are the people I want to see taken to task.

[Genestho]

My Mum was on DPB and it was hard yakker, we didn't have an extravagant life, infact we could count the last few cents for milk and bread, living week to week.

The good thing, or the good thing used to be, is that you would get help to start a business - upto $10k? (not sure if this was required to be paid back) and mentoring, (provided you did the footwork prior, feasible business plan etc) or you could get study paid for.

As long as those options are still available when the job market is scarse for unskilled and low paid workers, I don't see the problem.
Being a Mum, it's important to be on hand for your kids, particularly if you're on your own. You may only have 30 hours per week (calculate that on an average unskilled wage!) when the kids are in school, and evenings to work.

I have seen MANY women continuously rort the system, and it surprises and frustrates me, that they can continue to get back in!!

[riffer]

One thing missing so far is the effect of this on mental health. While it's a good idea to try and get many on benefits for non-genuine reasons back into some form of employment, without the necessary support for businesses you're going to have a number of people fighting for the few jobs around. Many women on DPB struggle with self-esteem and depression issues (it's really not easy solo parenting) and a lot of them can't handle rejection well - add to this that many employers are reluctant to take on solo female parents due to the inevitable unreliability (in the employer's mind) due to kids health coming first. I predict this crackdown may very well increase the workload on mental health providers and child advocacy agencies. Not to mention health services.

[JimO]

Article on stuff this morning about single mum beneficiary who is $10 a week worse off by having a part time job. What on earth incentive is there for them to look for/get a job when financially they're going to be worse off? I know that there's the "pride in having work" thing, but when you've got a child/children to look after (not to mention surviving yourself) who would want to work but be worse off financially?

(and yes, I know some people in paid work probably don't get as much as the benefit; my question relates more to someone who has been receiving the benefit then taking a cut in $ by getting a job).

the benefit should be lowered so its not a attractive lifestyle choice then

[oldrider]

I think I subsidise my grandkids as much as the government does.

True!

Unfortunately (or fortunately) I don't think that ever changes, good circumstances or bad, it's what we do as grandparents!

[rainman]

Yes there are complete losers out there, people who have made a lifestyle of being beneficiaries but I don't know how you'd ever catch them and what the solution would be.

There is already the function within WINZ to assess people's work readiness and encourage them back into work. If this is not performing well perhaps there are options to improve it, these should be pursued. But more likely the problem is just really hard to fix:
- If Good Bennie is trying hard to find work and can't (bad market), then kicking them further isn't going to help anything. I'm not on a benefit but I'm sympathetic to this problem - work is a bit hard to come by at the moment. (Thanks, Global Financial Capitalism!)
- If Bad Bennie couldn't give a shit and won't work, kicking them will also probably have no effect (if they're determined and passive-aggressive enough). Taking away their benefit just lifts the crime rate, which causes problems for the rest of us, and an increase in police costs.

Far easier just to have another round of populist bennie-bashing than actually try to improve things.

The good thing, or the good thing used to be, is that you would get help to start a business - upto $10k? (not sure if this was required to be paid back) and mentoring, (provided you did the footwork prior, feasible business plan etc) or you could get study paid for.

Mate of mine has just gone through the "start a business" thing with WINZ. They paid for all of the process but at the end decided that he couldn't get any assistance because the enterprise allowance is now asset tested (this may be a new cost-cutting measure from the current bunch of idiots in govt, not sure). He's in his 50's, well behaved, happy to work. No-one will employ him - that ain't going to change this side of retirement, to be honest. WINZ won't help him to get off the dole. His excess of cash assets might disqualify him for an enterprise allowance, but it won't feed him until retirement, and probably isn't enough to start a business on his own. Long term he will just get more dependent on the state, not less.

WINZ has little interest in training people - I know, I've had the discussion with them - and Paula pulled up the ladder for the tertiary allowance thingy for DPBers (which she herself used when she was in the same circumstances).

What we need is a policy of full employment and a plan to get there - not a cycleway. You won't get that from a Nat government in a global market.

the benefit should be lowered so its not a attractive lifestyle choice then

You are an idiot. I'm assuming you've never had to apply for a benefit either?

[scumdog]

Do as some States in the US do.

A place to stay
Food vouchers.

No Cash


oh, and not licence in some states where it is mandatory to have car insurance

i.e. unemployed = no cash income
no cash income = cannot pay for insurance
ergo shouldn't be driving
hence no licence.

Get a job and you get your licence back.

[oldrider]

One thing missing so far is the effect of this on mental health. While it's a good idea to try and get many on benefits for non-genuine reasons back into some form of employment, without the necessary support for businesses you're going to have a number of people fighting for the few jobs around. Many women on DPB struggle with self-esteem and depression issues (it's really not easy solo parenting) and a lot of them can't handle rejection well - add to this that many employers are reluctant to take on solo female parents due to the inevitable unreliability (in the employer's mind) due to kids health coming first. I predict this crackdown may very well increase the workload on mental health providers and child advocacy agencies. Not to mention health services.

True!

Also people such as IHC clients who love to work and contribute to society used to have piecework job lots provided for them at their sheltered workshops!

I say "used to" because the stupid Labour coalition forced minimum wage onto them and now all the work has dried up and they sit around doing fuck all useful!

Any small jobs that employers were able to give them away from their sheltered workshops have now been stopped because they have to pay them minimum wages too!

Most of these jobs actually cost the employers but they didn't mind subsidising them and tried to help the clients gain some work experience and self esteem!

ACT tried to bring in youth rates etc to help get employers past the minimum wage barrier but Key in his "wisdom" wouldn't support it, so a lot of youth will miss out on starter jobs now.

I offered to drive a digger for a guy starting out to help him get going but he was unable to take up the offer because he would have to pay me the minimum wage FFS!

All is not as it seems and it's usually the honest trustworthy people that end up getting it in the neck!

The country can throw this government out and the next lot wont be any better!

MMP will only give us another motley crew hell bent on pleasing each other rather than solving our problems effectively!

[Mully]

The country can throw this government out and the next lot wont be any better!

MMP will only give us another motley crew hell bent on pleasing each other rather than solving our problems effectively!

And that is one of the most accurate things in this thread.

For some reason, people think any Government is better than any other Government.

People fail to recognise that Goverments (in fact, parties) of any colour (Red, Blue, Green, whatever) are not there for the people. They're in it for themselves (money and/or glory) and their mates/whanau.

They'd be estatic if we'd just vote for them every three years, and then shut the fuck up. None of them give a rat's arse about the populace.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure some of them start out all bright-eyed and full of "do-good" vigour, but they all end up the same in the end.

And that goes for every level of the scum sucking bastards - not just Central Government.

[mashman]

To me, these are the real bastards... those that have $$$ to burn and still structure their affairs so that they get more from the govt... our more in fact... greedy greedy greedy fuckers... NO social conscience... granted some of the great unwashed are playing the system... but I would have a guess that they're trying to get more $$$ for food, booze etc... the simple, cheap pleasures in life... these wealthy cunts just want MORE money...

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-sto...r-tax-english/

[scumdog]

To me, these are the real bastards... those that have $$$ to burn and still structure their affairs so that they get more from the govt... our more in fact... greedy greedy greedy fuckers... NO social conscience... granted some of the great unwashed are playing the system... but I would have a guess that they're trying to get more $$$ for food, booze etc... the simple, cheap pleasures in life... these wealthy cunts just want MORE money...

Well SOMEBODY has got to be at the bottom of the dung-heap....shagging and smoking and drinking..

[rainman]

Thats not really correct. From a pure economics point of view, we choose our level of unemployment.

The tools are the minimum wage, and border tariffs.
...

So, you could tariff T-shirts at say $50. ...

This breaches many free trade agreements, so has been dropped.

At a minimum wage of $12.50, the NZ tee shirt manufacturer is out of business. But on average (economists claim) that the tax you payn tp provide the dole as an alternative, is less than the cost of buying the T shirts at the tariffed rate.

You could fix it overnight, by dumping the minimum adult wage. Then, full employment, albeit at $5 an hour would result.

Is that the NZ we want ?

A thoughtful comment: problem is, as you point out, there are no easy options. Trade tariffs are unpopular or not allowed by FTAs, high minimum wage (by third world standards) makes us uncompetitive globally, but dropping it or removing it will absolutely lead to hordes of people heading down the standard of living ladder in the direction of poverty. Greater inequality, higher crime, worse health outcomes... and all the rest. I don't think we will willingly accept that, or vote to keep in a government that initiates it.

Seems to me the only sane solution if you want local prosperity is to put up the walls, ditch the FTAs, and focus on more local manufacture and employment. You can tell I'm no fan of Ricardo. (Some implications for immigration here too, of course - somewhat ironically). But whether that's long-term sustainable or even do-able for a small, highly indebted, undefended island nation is another question entirely.

Chuck in the fact that oil supplies are declining and the world is likely to bounce in and out of recession for a long while (yes, it's a complicated issue, but still a fact), and our prospects for prosperity on this little island nation do not look good, particularly if we continue to focus on growing things for export, or even digging stuff up and selling it for (more questionable) profit.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a government that understood the issues, or even better, had the stones to start a dialogue with us about the hard work we need to put in to deal with the future?

Get a job and you get your licence back.

Might make that job-getting a bit more difficult, doncha think?

[mashman]

Do as some States in the US do.

A place to stay
Food vouchers.

No Cash


oh, and not licence in some states where it is mandatory to have car insurance

i.e. unemployed = no cash income
no cash income = cannot pay for insurance
ergo shouldn't be driving
hence no licence.

Get a job and you get your licence back.

Sounds very communistic to me. Work or have food stamps etc... if the distribution of wealth was even (ha ha ha ha) then I wouldn't have a problem with it, but it's not... the poor tread water whilst the rich get richer (their money earns interest)... How can you force someone into a job, let's say a bin person, and then pay them a pittance... now pit that against say a politician... there are huge differences in salary... can someone explain to me why the salary's are different, because I'm still looki9ng for someone to answer that particular question for me... who's more valuable to the community and that's the people community, not the business community?