Key 'out of touch' over hungry kids

[mashman]

You could build camps to keep all the oldies in to reduce transport, logistics and housing costs, and have these special shower blocks so that when their healthcare requirements get over a certain value, they could go and "take a shower".

We could of course work on Job creation to sort the other half and if they won't submit to an extensive list of conditions, we could move them into special work camps to reduce transport, logistics and housing costs and if they refuse to take a job that includes daily anal probes, drug and alcohol testing, and an RFID chip in the back of the neck to track movement and pruchasing habits and if they don't submit to this willingly we could build a special shower block so they can "take a shower" when they fail to meet these conditions, once, in one category.

Of course this isn't quite the final solution as our goal would be to reduce Government costs, so we could surgically implant a thermite bomb near the base of the skull of all children born under a certain economic threshold eliminating the need for the camps (parental net worth, number of posts on facebook, TC3 landowners in Christchurch, anyone from West Auckland, Glenfield, Naenae and Taita, and Hornby, anywhere more than 60 Kilometers from the 5 main centres) which would be set off by the nearby RFID chip if any non-prescription drugs were detected in the bloodstream, alcohol consumed, if they ate any meals that weren't bought from a major takeaway franchise (preserve the local Fish & Chip shop for the rich - they have fond memories of them from when they were state-house dwelling single-parented urchins, who didn't get where they are today by molly-coddling the undeserving), own a vehicle that isn't a Ford or a Holden or enrol at University.

Why not just have a thermite bomb placed in the vagina and when it senses semen it explodes? This works on many levels. Those who are irresponsible enough to have unprotected sex will not be able to have sex again, let alone children... this will remove the issue of overpopulation as you will need a bypass code inserted into your penis to stop the exploding vagina when you do find the one that you want to have kids with. STD's will drop dramatically. It may prevent some rape and fiddy kiddling too.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Why not just have a thermite bomb placed in the vagina and when it senses semen it explodes? This works on many levels. Those who are irresponsible enough to have unprotected sex will not be able to have sex again, let alone children... this will remove the issue of overpopulation as you will need a bypass code inserted into your penis to stop the exploding vagina when you do find the one that you want to have kids with. STD's will drop dramatically. It may prevent some rape and fiddy kiddling too.

You've read Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" then?

If not, you should:

http://www.bookdepository.com/Snow-C.../9780241953181

[Brian d marge]

What you going to do, put them all on the sickness or unemployment benefit? There isn't any work for them and most of them will have contributed to society already. Stop moaning and do your bit. Oh that's right you ran off to the land of the rising sun so you coward.




WTF do you care? you keep saying you aren't part of the society they helped build so you to can and stick your head in a bucket. There would be no buses nor health care without these old farts. And yet you insist on using early 1980s colours for your posts, you are soooo old fashioned.

I merely pointed out the facts that’s all, I’ve done my bit for NZ probably far more than you , so I can sleep at night with regard to that...

In all of these post , I refer to pretty much the same old things...why? cos that is whats happening, if you look , only from memory the "bludgers" were approx 1, 2 % , the oldies were nearly half
so its quite wrong to say the unemployed or the Maori , or ,,,were ruining the country

its an age old trick , to confuse the oldies to make them vote national , and divert the medias gaze

but then you don’t want to hear that because it doesnt sit well with your belief system

Stephen

notice I did not say the oldies weren’t entitled to the pension , not once have I ever said that

and I prefer 70s colours

[Brian d marge]

heres one possible solution



stephen

[lakedaemonian]

So if it's a good idea for the school system to go into the welfare food service and delivery industry, then I guess it would make sense for Work & Income to go into the rocketry business?

Surely if would make sense for Work & Income to start building rockets in order to create jobs just like it makes sense for the school system in the business of educating kids should go into the food service and delivery industry.

Should schools be in the business of feeding kids, absolutely not.

Schools are having a hard enough time trying to do a mediocre job at educating children....throwing another role and responsibility at an underperforming system is NOT the answer.

If a system is doing mediocre at best, the LAST thing you do is expand their role, responsibility, and mission.....that's called mission creep.....and that's just insane.

If anyone in the school system WANTS this job then they are guilty of empire building in my opinion.

-------

If the conversation is about hungry kids....that should be covered by the relevant agencies.......I'm not opposed to more support.....I'm just opposed to insanity.

[avgas]

Why should society "catch" kids that aren't being looked after by their parents? Coz it's the right thing to do.

Its funny mashy, usually you and I and Akzle are at ends as to who is right here. But I think when it comes to kids we hit a middle ground.
I do think we should help kids out. For one simple reason.
You can pick your nose but you can't pick your parents.

Food at schools is a good thing. Much better than money for smokes/piss/car loans.....etc.
Food at schools shows kids that their parents might be a bunch of fuckwits.

Now to prove I am still a non-loving arsehole...
"Ban the benefit! Feed the kids!"

[Ocean1]

notice I did not say the oldies weren’t entitled to the pension , not once have I ever said that

That's nice.

I once had a conversation with a senior polly about pensions. I asked him what the mechanism was which provided for pensions, and what how did it accomodate the population boom. He said surely I didn't think pensions were fully funded, paid from existing taxes. I said that I didn't know, hence the question, but that as a matter of principle I did expect that in fact, how else could it work with heavy population variations. He got all indignant, I was taking shots at his system, (yes, it was his system, then). I simply asserted that as far as I knew a portion of my taxes was being invested against the day I retired, I suggested to him that most of the country had similar expectations.

There's no such accumulated resource, of course, they blew it all buying votes from fuckwits. Not only that but in taxing me as one of the small majority of decent income earners based on wages and small business income they've effectively deprived me of the ability to provide for my own retirement.

At a national level the problem gets worse, this lot have begun to retire:

Wiki:

Baby Boomers control over 80% of personal financial assets and more than 50% of discretionary spending power., July 2011 They are responsible for more than half of all consumer spending, buy 77% of all prescription drugs, 61% of OTC medication and 80% of all leisure travel.

And if you're worried about our ability to pay for their upkeep then consider this: we'll be doing it without the contributions from what currently represents well over half of the personal income based tax take.

Next time someone offers you a bribe for your vote, ask what it'll cost your kids.

[Akzle]

geez.
i didn't think anyone would actually take that seriously. obviously there IS a genuine need.

for comic sans.

will they be testing beneficiaries for "legal highs" like if they smoke "chronik" at work.. which isn't illegal....

[husaberg]

geez.
i didn't think anyone would actually take that seriously. obviously there IS a genuine need.

for comic sans.

will they be testing beneficiaries for "legal highs" like if they smoke "chronik" at work.. which isn't illegal....

not all of them

Legal high ban passed by Parliament
Published: 5:23PM Thursday August 04, 2011 Source: ONE News
New legislation banning synthetic cannabis has been passed by Parliament.
The third and final reading of legislation reforming the Misuse of Drugs Act wrapped up around 5pm today.
It means cannabinoids used in products like Kronic are now illegal.
The Bill passed 104 votes to 15 with only Act, the Greens and Labour's Chris Carter opposing.
The law also puts further controls on the sale of drug utensils such as cannabis pipes

[mashman]

You've read Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" then?

If not, you should:

http://www.bookdepository.com/Snow-C.../9780241953181

heh, I can't read books... but that does look interesting.

[Brian d marge]

That's nice.

I once had a conversation with a senior polly about pensions. I asked him what the mechanism was which provided for pensions, and what how did it accomodate the population boom. He said surely I didn't think pensions were fully funded, paid from existing taxes. I said that I didn't know, hence the question, but that as a matter of principle I did expect that in fact, how else could it work with heavy population variations. He got all indignant, I was taking shots at his system, (yes, it was his system, then). I simply asserted that as far as I knew a portion of my taxes was being invested against the day I retired, I suggested to him that most of the country had similar expectations.

There's no such accumulated resource, of course, they blew it all buying votes from fuckwits. Not only that but in taxing me as one of the small majority of decent income earners based on wages and small business income they've effectively deprived me of the ability to provide for my own retirement.

At a national level the problem gets worse, this lot have begun to retire:

Wiki:


And if you're worried about our ability to pay for their upkeep then consider this: we'll be doing it without the contributions from what currently represents well over half of the personal income based tax take.

Next time someone offers you a bribe for your vote, ask what it'll cost your kids.

Yes indeed , only 2 or three % of the money in circulation is physical money , and applying the home owner , home budget , traditional way of thinking about finance , just doesnt work ,

in a nut shell , government prints money , and sells it to commertial banks at face value, = ten dollars - production cost = tax take of say 9.50 , this is what they used to build the welfare state back in the day
so if the tax take is simply not there ............you cant afford the welfare system

Next the banks take that ten dollars and loan it out ....but they "create the new loan " and charge interest , when the loan is repaid the original loan amount is destroyed and the interest you pay is kept ,

So to grow , ie NZ has a growth off 3% , you must increase the size of the debt by 3 %...( you see where Im going with this ,,,)

if you imagine the economy as a tin can with stones in side , rattling the can , moving the stones is economic activity ....to "grow " , you must add stones , exports , etc but those export were eventually created by someones debt.......( get back to work Africans and you lazy chinese)

So we have huge amounts of money , created from debt , including pensions all looking to speculate ....( ever wondered why the housing market is exempt from speculative regulation???? because banks can have their assets

So by using your house to grow your asset base is just making it harder for your children to get a house in the future ...... ( 1950 you needed one income, now its two)

Im not sure what pecentage of the tax take is invested in the pension , but I do know most modern countries are on the back foot ( Yubari here in japan has just anounced bankruptcy , 50 odd % pensioners and too much debt due to failed reforms ( IMF well done ) but it sure as hell aint covering the bill , ( I will look into this ) If the pensions were from private wealth , then we wouldnt be having this debate, but as most are state funded , and baby boomers have just peaked or are about to AND live longer , the tax, and investment take just isnt enough , thats why you hear governments crying ( I remember seeing the report back in 1994 ...)

Nope

The sooner we remove the speculative banks from essentials , and Jail a few bankers (aka) iceland , it will only get worse and these types of conversations will get more and more frequent which will lower the prices of the essentials such as housing and electricity,,,,,the better we all will be

Now lets get back to demonizing old people !!!!.......

Stephen

[ducatilover]

Yes indeed , only 2 or three % of the money in circulation is physical money , and applying the home owner , home budget , traditional way of thinking about finance , just doesnt work ,

in a nut shell , government prints money , and sells it to commertial banks at face value, = ten dollars - production cost = tax take of say 9.50 , this is what they used to build the welfare state back in the day
so if the tax take is simply not there ............you cant afford the welfare system

Next the banks take that ten dollars and loan it out ....but they "create the new loan " and charge interest , when the loan is repaid the original loan amount is destroyed and the interest you pay is kept ,

So to grow , ie NZ has a growth off 3% , you must increase the size of the debt by 3 %...( you see where Im going with this ,,,)

if you imagine the economy as a tin can with stones in side , rattling the can , moving the stones is economic activity ....to "grow " , you must add stones , exports , etc but those export were eventually created by someones debt.......( get back to work Africans and you lazy chineese)

So we have huge amounts of money , created from debt , including pensions all looking to speculate ....( ever wondered why the housing market is exempt from speculative regulation???? because banks can have their assets

So by using your house to grow your asset base is just making it harder for your children to get a house in the future ...... ( 1950 you needed one income, now its two)

Im not sure what pecentage of the tax take is invested in the pension , but I do know most modern countries are on the back foot ( Yubari here in japan has just anounced bankruptcy , 50 odd % pensioners and too much debt due to failed reforms ( IMF well done ) but it sure as hell aint covering the bill , ( I will look into this ) If the pensions were from private wealth , then we wouldnt be having this debate, but as most are state funded , and baby boomers have just peaked or are about to AND live longer , the tax, and investment take just isnt enough , thats why you hear governments crying ( I remember seeing the report back in 1994 ...)

Nope

The sooner we remove the speculative banks from essentials , and Jail a few bankers (aka) iceland , it will only get worse and these types of conversations will get more and more frequent which will lower the prices of the essentials such as housing and electricity,,,,,the better we all will be

Now lets get back to demonizing old people !!!!.......

Stephen

Wait, so money essentially just appears at the Govt. and bank's will? How does the bank get the money to buy the new $10?

The "economy" is a heap of shit.

[Brian d marge]

Wait, so money essentially just appears at the Govt. and bank's will? How does the bank get the money to buy the new $10?

The "economy" is a heap of shit.

not 100 % sure about what the government puts up , I think its debt , or bonds but basically yes the money "Just appears" and if you dont believe me Bankie moons first interview , he said exactly that , when asked where did the money come to cover the bailouts ,

Sorry but it is a load off dodo ( pun intended ) and we , the environment , and the water I drink mean jack sh!t to these people

Stephen

ps Ill try and find it later

[Akzle]

...in a nut shell , government prints money ,

...Next the banks take that ten dollars and loan it out .

...So we have huge amounts of money , created from debt

...Im not sure what pecentage of the tax take is invested in the pension

1) the government DOES NOT PRINT MONEY. that's done by a private corporation. (teh federal "reserve" ie)

2)no. the bank doesn't take 10$ and loan it out. if you want a loan from a bank you sign a bit of paper saying they'll give you 50$ now any you'll repay them, say 55$ next week (10% interest, ie)
the banks don't need capital to lend against. no shit. when you get a mortgage, your signature on the line creates the "currency", it IS NOT sitting "in the bank" waiting to be loaned out.

3)as indicated.

4) fuckall/ probably none

Wait, so money essentially just appears at the Govt. and bank's will? How does the bank get the money to buy the new $10?

nevermind complicating your thinking with this. stick to what you know:

The "economy" is a heap of shit.

[short-circuit]

So if it's a good idea for the school system to go into the welfare food service and delivery industry, then I guess it would make sense for Work & Income to go into the rocketry business?

Why? School meals - proper meals, made in industrial cafeteria existed for decades in the U.K. It aint hard. It isn't that expensive and it was done for a reason.