Benefits

[bogan]

... money isn't everything!

But making a positive contribution to society counts for a hell of a lot in my books!

[FJRider]

... money isn't everything!

It pays the bills ..

[mashman]

But making a positive contribution to society counts for a hell of a lot in my books!

They're already doing us all a favour by helping to keep inflation down... they're not putting one of us out of a job either... pretty positive in my eyes ... give 'em a pay rise .

At the end of the day society has tinkered with benefit systems in various ways, all of which have proven to be failures. Why not make being unemployed a job, officially that is

It pays the bills ..

So does the govt

[scumdog]

Why not make being unemployed a job, officially that is

I like it - make those on the unemployment benefit do some work

[bogan]

They're already doing us all a favour by helping to keep inflation down... they're not putting one of us out of a job either... pretty positive in my eyes ... give 'em a pay rise .

At the end of the day society has tinkered with benefit systems in various ways, all of which have proven to be failures. Why not make being unemployed a job, officially that is

But is their effect on inflation greater than their effect on taxes? Have to look at the big picture.

In saying that, I think it is more the fault of the system not utilising all it's resources, rather than individuals screwing over the system. And yes, more tinkering is required, but future stable tinkering, not vote-buying tinkering.

[Winston001]

Simply as a matter of interest, in the United States, state income taxes include unemployment insurance. If you lose your job you are entitled to a certain number of weeks of the dole depending upon how long you worked, being a percentage of your original wage.

After that you go onto social welfare which is a lower payment but includes food stamps and other help. Still, being on welfare in the USA is a source of shame.

[mashman]

I like it - make those on the unemployment benefit do some work

ha ha ha haaaaaa... reverse psychology...

But is their effect on inflation greater than their effect on taxes? Have to look at the big picture.

In saying that, I think it is more the fault of the system not utilising all it's resources, rather than individuals screwing over the system. And yes, more tinkering is required, but future stable tinkering, not vote-buying tinkering.

the big picture ... nah, noone likes looking at it... so they "make" their own and blame the Models later on.

Well if they ain't willing to "offer" for first rate health and education for all (irrespective of cost, tui), wtf do they expect. Aye, gotta agree there, the system is utterly pooked.

[blue rider]

Simply as a matter of interest, in the United States, state income taxes include unemployment insurance. If you lose your job you are entitled to a certain number of weeks of the dole depending upon how long you worked, being a percentage of your original wage.

After that you go onto social welfare which is a lower payment but includes food stamps and other help. Still, being on welfare in the USA is a source of shame.

explain this to me please

if I work and pay my taxes, i pay into the pot from which 'social welfare' "un-employment benefits' 'sickness benefits' etc are paid out.

everyone working is paying taxes towards these services so that in times of hardship, i.e. sickness, un-employment etc I/they can apply for these services. This will prevent me/them from loosing my/their house and feed the familiy, which surely is better than homelessness and begging in the streets


If one quits their job in New Zealand/Europe or the States for that matter one will have a stand down period and not receive a dime.
If the company that one works for re-structures or closes and people loose their jobs they can and should apply for a service that they have helped fund while being in gainfully employed!

Where is the shame in that?

social welfare is in the interest of the taxpayer....as social unrest due to poverty is not the solution.
it is a service that is paid for by the Taxpayer, being a taxpayer myself, I rather have the unemployed, sick and otherwise needy or unable, in housing and food, than homeless and hungry roaming the streets.

[Katman]

I understand why someone would choose to be a doley.

I heard the shuffling of feet coming towards the office one day and a head appeared through the door with the words "You gotta job?" I said "Sorry mate, I don't". He then replied "Can you sign this?"

I wanted to tell him to sit down and I'd tell him why he'd never get a job - but then figured neither of us actually cared.

[Winston001]

explain this to me please

In most OECD countries having a social welfare safety net is an accepted part of social democracy but only because these are rich countries. Its worth remembering that about 4 billion people have no such support at all.

There used to be a sense of shame at accepting charity: the dole etc fall into that category. There are people on here who have refused the dole as a matter of pride and found jobs - any job, to keep their self-respect.

However whatever the perspective might be in the USA, there shouldn't be shame in NZ for accepting state support. If there is a problem - arguably there isn't one - it is the families who regard benefits as a way of life. That is worth changing for their sake as well as the rest of us.

[Smifffy]

Jantar's great post

Mostly agree.

I'd like to see able-bodied people on benefits doing something.

They don't all spend all their time looking for or training for work, and in some cases there just aren't "real" jobs for them.

Picking up rubbish, gardening for old folk, cleaning graffiffittti. Whatever.

I think it's going to be an unavoidable fact of life. More and more people, more and more technology, fewer and fewer people needed.

Nah Bro. Better to do the graffiti and drop the litter, it fits in better with closing time hours.

Given those things... if society wants to build and play in their little holier than thou sand pit, they're required to support those who do not. Or they'll just take it anyway.

Personally I'd prefer that they did come and take it themselves, instead of having the government do their pinching for them. At least then I might get the opportunity to at least wing a few.

So how does the school leaver get steel fabrication experience?

Starts by sweeping the floor? Even back in the days when work was plentiful, many people that went into the trades were sweeping workshop floor before they left school. Some enlightened employers would also take them on through the holidays, but an apprenticeship might also be dependant on getting good marks as well.

Perhaps I am just cold and heartless. But for me its simple.

Work or Die.

You want support? Get married or live at home - why should society be your crutch. You are a man/women of your own decisions........you make bad ones you should be fucked the arse. Not everyone else. It was your decision.

If the govt really wants to help, customize a job for every person. Get the wheelchair enabled behind a desk, the retards picking up rubbish and the mums delivering powerbills. Its not all rocket science.

Max benefit payment made in a row is 5 weeks. That is all the rest of us get before we lose all our money.

Food for thought

I understand having to give money to those who cant work because they have had an accident, or need to stay at home and look after something that fell out of their vagina, or are black.

What I dont understand is why the fuck we have to give money to couples where one or both of them are working.

Your wages dont cover the cost of the next kid you want, or daycare? Toughshit, keep it in your pants then, or budget like everybody else who wants something.

Like the guy I know on 100k pa who is getting over 3 hundy a fortnight in working for families while Mum is at home?

I know a of people who just can't get work, very well presented uni graduates, applying for pretty much anything. One just got his first bit of work in over a year, teaching people how to use some new pay and display meters for two weeks (the interface is retarded ). If these guys are struggling, what hope is there for career beneficiaries who have been kicked off the dole? We won't have to pay for them anymore, but it doesn't solve anything, one could even argue crime could rise which would cost us more.

Slash minimum wage to encourage national production over exporting raw material and importing goods. Or if there are only a finite number of jobs to go around, implement some population control (sterilisation for criminals etc).

And stop the politicians selling NZ's future for a few election votes!

When they chose their degrees did they ever consider the employment prospects and job market in those fields? I know companies that go every year to the unis in order to try and attract graduates to work for them, not many bachelor's of sport's performance or Master's of Women's studies get hired though, I will admit.

WORK IS CRAP !!! Who's bright idea was that? What a stupid way to organise a society.

There is no diginity ion labour any more (well for a very few artisans and a couple of other professions there might be)

Mostly it was organised for the benefit of the capitalist class to exploit the others ... why the fuck should I value working for the man to make a profit and drive a Merc or Roller and pay me shit wages so I can barely survive ?????

Never a truer word spoken brother. Just let me keep working for that man in his Roller, and let me keep those wages, and anyone who doesn't want or like to work can make their own arrangements, without being entitled to any of my hard earned.

Not enough jobs? So why are there so many people working 48+ hours a week? If people weren't so greedy doing loads of overtime, there'd be enough working hours to go around.

You mean like the taxi drivers in Auckland, doing the jobs that Kiwis just won't do?

... No money? that only leaves crime or death, or a mixture of both depending on desperation levels... why not just shoot people who don't have jobs and be done with it, instead of wasting air and fuckin society up with their antics.

I think the cops have already started that

I'm with James 2 here - plus drug-testing for those on the dole - after all they ARE meant to be job-seeking and being a stoner is not a pre-requisite for many jobs I've heard of.

Agreed, driving past the front of the local courthouse the other day, the thought also occured to me that every person blocking the stairway and smoking, could be asked to contribute to their legal aid bill to the tune of 1 pack of smokes a week, for the duration of their trial. The country would save a shitload.

... money isn't everything!

That's true for a lot of people. Mostly the people that want to take my money off me.

explain this to me please

if I work and pay my taxes, i pay into the pot from which 'social welfare' "un-employment benefits' 'sickness benefits' etc are paid out.

everyone working is paying taxes towards these services so that in times of hardship, i.e. sickness, un-employment etc I/they can apply for these services. This will prevent me/them from loosing my/their house and feed the familiy, which surely is better than homelessness and begging in the streets


If one quits their job in New Zealand/Europe or the States for that matter one will have a stand down period and not receive a dime.
If the company that one works for re-structures or closes and people loose their jobs they can and should apply for a service that they have helped fund while being in gainfully employed!

Where is the shame in that?

social welfare is in the interest of the taxpayer....as social unrest due to poverty is not the solution.
it is a service that is paid for by the Taxpayer, being a taxpayer myself, I rather have the unemployed, sick and otherwise needy or unable, in housing and food, than homeless and hungry roaming the streets.

I think we are predominantly talking about the people who are relying on the tax contributions made by their great-grandparents to fund their social welfare payments....

[blue rider]

In most OECD countries having a social welfare safety net is an accepted part of social democracy but only because these are rich countries. Its worth remembering that about 4 billion people have no such support at all.

rubbish....
NZ had social welfare for quite some time, since 1930 the Unemployment act...
"Social welfare in New Zealand is mostly funded through general taxation. Since the 1980s welfare has been provided on the basis of need. The exception is the universal superannuation."
wikipedia http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/ne...y&p=1130142349


For the germans we had un-employemnt benefits thanks to the "Eiserne Bismarck" whom no-one could call a socialist wall flower...

Paternalistic welfare state
"Germany had a tradition of welfare programs in Prussia and Saxony that began as early as the 1840s. In the 1880s his social insurance programs were the first in the world and became the model for other countries and the basis of the modern welfare state.[40] Bismarck introduced old age pensions, accident insurance, medical care and unemployment insurance. "

wikipeida http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_Bismarck

the US of A had F D Roosevelt and the "New Deal"

all sound conservative politics in my eyes and understanding

There used to be a sense of shame at accepting charity: the dole etc fall into that category. There are people on here who have refused the dole as a matter of pride and found jobs - any job, to keep their self-respect.

This is no charity, the programme are paid for by the tax payer, all taxpayers....not just the ones who might be for a Darwin type of society were the fittest is the only one to survive. And for those who refuse the dole in times of hardship, have they thought about their families? Those who depend on them?
Pride before hunger is an ugly bed fellow.

However whatever the perspective might be in the USA, there shouldn't be shame in NZ for accepting state support. If there is a problem - arguably there isn't one - it is the families who regard benefits as a way of life. That is worth changing for their sake as well as the rest of us.

The 2nd/3rd generation welfare abusers, how many are there, how much money is spend on them.....real dollar figures not just simple propaganda. The same counts for the loose women and girls that have babys to get a benefit, all on their own without the help of a man....it just does not add up.

And before we start stoning people for being lazy, might we spend time and have a look at were those generations of unemployed/unemployable dole abuser live, how was the schooling they recieved etc.
Their might be method to madness.
In any case there is no profit for business in 100% employment as wages usually go up and finding staff is a bit harder than in an economy were good jobs paying living wages are spare. We need under educated cheap labor to do certain jobs, always did, always will, and the more unemployed people a country has the cheaper wages get....!

The proposals coming from the Welfare Reform Group are all about shaming....
forcing people to be spot tested for drug abuse?
Are poor people now all criminals?
Are all single mothers dope heads? Are all single dads P cooks?
Will we as a society really allow for people to be treated like criminals before they have committed a crime, to make sure they are humbled, scared, humiliated and just don't apply for that benefit they should apply for?
And this is in the interest for whom? ?
So no money for societal welfare, but money for random drug testing of poor people needing financial assistance?

I just don't get how this can be considered sound politics.

[Winston001]

Paternalistic welfare state
"Germany had a tradition of welfare programs in Prussia and Saxony that began as early as the 1840s. In the 1880s his social insurance programs were the first in the world and became the model for other countries and the basis of the modern welfare state.[40] Bismarck introduced old age pensions, accident insurance, medical care and unemployment insurance. "

wikipeida http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_von_Bismarck

the US of A had F D Roosevelt and the "New Deal"

all sound conservative politics in my eyes and understanding

The New Deal under FDR was a Democratic policy = Labour = Leftist/Socialist.

I'd never have thought of Otto Von Bismarck as a socialist but in terms of those times, he introduced very advanced social democrat policies. By contrast even today the USA struggles with arguments over such welfare programs.

And before we start stoning people for being lazy, might we spend time and have a look at were those generations of unemployed/unemployable dole abuser live, how was the schooling they recieved etc.
Their might be method to madness.

Agreed. I'm only posting here to enter a few facts. I have no interest in beneficiary bashing.

In any case there is no profit for business in 100% employment as wages usually go up....We need under educated cheap labor to do certain jobs, always did, always will, and the more unemployed people a country has the cheaper wages get....!

You see, this is one of the canards thrown recklessly around in discussions on employment viz. "politicians need 4% unemployment to make the economy work".

Utter nonsense.

A few decades ago it was suggested (Keynes?) that a certain level (4%) of unemployment was inevitable in modern society. This was twisted by political leftists into saying that unemployment was required - a clever but dishonest reinterpretation.

Research of past societies indicates that full employment as we enjoy is a 20th century phenomenon. Having no paid work, relying on poor houses and charity has been normal for centuries. More than 50% of people lived in the countryside where basic food and shelter could be obtained.

Proof? Go to India and watch the poor. Twisting branches off trees for firewood, begging, picking up dung, cleaning doorsteps, whatever it takes, just to get through another day. If there is a job it pays 40 rupees. ($NZ1/day).

Its far worse in Africa.

[scumdog]

And before we start stoning people for being lazy, might we spend time and have a look at were those generations of unemployed/unemployable dole abuser live, how was the schooling they recieved etc.

Or the schooling they DIDN'T receive.

Often by their own actions.

More than a few mums just see school as a way to get the kids out of the house (do the kids actually GO to school?)

And some kids make no attempt to learn while at school and disrupt others if they go there at all.

And some kids are actively discouraged from attending school or learning if they do go to school.

So they set themselves on a path to being a leech on society.....

[Spearfish]

what i don't get by those that propose the doing away of "benefits", what type of society do they envision?






DPB
females don't drop babys because they have got nothing else to do, and all by themselves! Usually it involves a man, someone has to donate the sperm.
Well at least I have yet to meet a women who had a baby because she was bored, and thought the benefit was a great incentive.

How about, sex ed in school (honest education, not some abstinence only horse manure), access to condoms (for the boys, someone teach the boys to keep it dressed!), the pill for the girls, and abortion legal and without any moral guilt and shame attached.
And this for all children regardless of their religion. That might help reduce unwanted pregnancies and the need for a mother/child benefit.

I hope that men realize that a women afraid of pregnancy=poverty will not have sex.....married or in a relationship or just as a one niter.....the times of headaches again...?

I would love to be able to agree with you.....many, many of the girls in west auckland don't have much self worth and come from families with even less, unfortunately they see the DPB as a better supply of money at over $650 (plus the other bits they get) per week compared to the "job seekers" Dole.
I didn't really go along with the idea of women/girls using DPB as a career option until I caught up with a mate who is concerned for is daughter, every month so far this year atleast one of her friends has dropped a sprog just to go on the DPB, they network, encourage each other and are pushing it as a real option for their friends.
Him and his wife have raised an intelligent, confident young lady who can do anything she puts her mind to so fingers crossed she can get through this "stage" without taking the easy(?) path and opting out of her own future.