That's it. Not voting for Nat

[jrandom]

It's a great policy.

I know a fair few single mums who hold down jobs and are far better for it, both financially and mentally.

The fact that the policy's only applied to those on the DPB without any kids under 6 is what makes it fair and intelligent.

Makes great sense. Frankly, anyone with kids to provide for who can happily stay home alone all day from 9 to 3 without working or studying needs a good hard kick up the arse.

[ajturbo]

It's a great policy.

Frankly, anyone with kids to provide for who can happily stay home alone all day from 9 to 3 without working or studying needs a good hard kick up the arse.

and that is what i needed....

i was looked after.. mothered..

i didn't need that.. i needed a good kicking to get back to the real world...
a world where I supported myself and luke.. on my own..

sure i still get $64/month from his mother what does that cover?????

err .. the milk he drinks.... thats all...

[ajturbo]

And as for deadbeat dads, make them pay for their kids. Don't pay for your kid to the best of your abilities, you don't get visitation and you get chemically castrated.

hey big guy.. don't forget the
"deadbeat MUM"S!!!!".. they TOO should be made to pay!!!!!

yer a nerve,,

[jrandom]

and that is what i needed....

i was looked after.. mothered..

i didn't need that.. i needed a good kicking to get back to the real world...
a world where I supported myself and luke.. on my own..

I was speaking from personal experience, too, of watching the personal progression of my ex-wife over the last couple of years.

She has full-time custody of our kids (I get them every second weekend), and over the last year has finally motivated herself into getting off her arse (after all this time - woulda been nice if she'd done it while she was with me instead of just bleeding me dry, but, oh well, ho hum) and has actually made something of her life.

She still gets a fair amount of financial support from me, but it's not so much about money as it is about self-respect.

Being self-sufficient, instead of just having me or the Gubmint giving her handouts every week, has made her a better person. More independent, happier, more fulfilled.

It's easy to get stuck in a rut and fail to realise the benefits of getting out of it. This new policy from National will undoubtedly do thousands of single parents a world of good.

[James Deuce]

My word. The sheer range of assumptions raised is breathtaking. Lots of them from blokes who have no concept of what bloody hard work looking after kids is. "I've been at work 8 hours, and the house is STILL a tip." Arrogant wanker.

The basic assumption is that there are employers out there able to employ ALL the "unemployed" DPB "bludgers" in a job that has hours that won't conflict with school hours. I can guarantee that most 15 hour jobs out there, WON'T be child friendly. It'll be stacking supermarket shelves at midnight or cleaning toilets at Sky City. In 25 years of working I've seen one employer make allowances for one employee who had kids whilst working for that same employer and employer wanted them back. The worker managed to negotiate 9am to 2:30pm. National are the sort of people who legislate this sort of thing and then stand back and roundly criticise the people who fail to take advantage of their munificence.

What about the DPB "bludger" with a disabled kid. Childcare won't take them, unless you pay for the "specially" trained worker who gets $2/hour more than the rest of the daycare workers. State schools are increasingly refusing to take disabled children, citing safety and funding. Increasingly, the schools that do take them on are wanting $250 per week to help fund the Education Support Worker supposedly funded by a Govt. organisation called Special Education Services.

Helen Clark, John Key, it doesn't matter. One is childless and has no idea. The other is so mind numbingly rich that the fact that someone ran out of money three days before pay day or "bludger" day is dismissed as being typical lower socio-economic stupidity. It couldn't possibly be the fact that an After-hours clinic costs $50 for a kid at 11pm, and that $50 would have comfortably done the job of feeding everyone. No. They're all smoking, drinking, gambling losers, and none of them have a genuine reason for being on the DPB.

Ivory tower, brioche munching upper middle class attitudes. If you can afford a bike you're upper middle class. Stop looking down your bloody sniffy noses and pontificating about stuff you know nothing about. If my wife went back to work full time we'd be worse off. I'd have to get a job with regular hours and lesser pay, and all of her wages would be gone in after school care and specialist day care, plus some of mine. She'd also be on rostered rotating shift work, so my workload would be phenomenal.

Why should you pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses"? Because one day it might be you.

[Dave Lobster]

Why should your pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses"? Because one day it might be you.

No, it wont. Because if we ever have children, we'll make damn sure we can afford them first.

[BIHB@0610]

My word. The sheer range of assumptions raised is breathtaking. Lots of them from blokes who have no concept of what bloody hard work looking after kids is. "I've been at work 8 hours, and the house is STILL a tip." Arrogant wanker.

The basic assumption is that there are employers out there able to employ ALL the "unemployed" DPB "bludgers" in a job that has hours that won't conflict with school hours.
.........
What about the DPB "bludger" with a disabled kid. Childcare won't take them, unless you pay for the "specially" trained worker who gets $2/hour more than the rest of the daycare workers.
.....
Ivory tower, brioche munching upper middle class attitudes....... If you can afford a bike you're upper middle class. Stop looking down your bloody sniffy noses and pontificating about stuff you know nothing about.

Why should your pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses"? Because one day it might be you.

For a start, they're not telling people they have to work. They are saying work OR study. Study is a good thing - far from the idyllic existence, being a stay-at-home mum can be incredibly isolating and a lot of women lose confidence after a few years. Study can help ease you back into the work-force - is good for you.

I agree with you about disabled kids (but I'm not sure they wouldn't treat caregivers of disabled kids differently??. But instead of looking at this like a punishment, look at it as an opportunity for the parent of the disabled child to get back on their feet, get a break, and get a life of their own through study or part time work. Of course, Govt needs to ensure proper care for the child .... whole other story.

I don't think it's an ivory tower attitude - and I know a lot about it, having been a stay-at-home mum for five years, and now working full time while raising my three boys on my own. Look for the positives, instead of criticising. It's a good opportunity for a lot of parents to better themselves - one day their kids will leave home and they'll need a life of their own

Oh and I will never be lazy - so it will never be me. I will happily pay my tax to help someone get back on their feet, but some NZers seem to forget these benefits are supposed to be a temporary measure, a stop-gap - not a way of life!

[emaN]

Why should your pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses"? Because one day it might be you.

ya got some good points in there JD...only thing/change I would point out is:

"Why should you pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses" indefinitely?"

There's a time for everything; there's a time to work hard-out, raise a family with all the hectic-ness that goes hand in hand with it, and there's quite possibly a time to be unemployed.

As long as,
this unemployed time period doesn't drag on indefinitely.
As long as, it doesn't become a lifestyle.

I resent paying tax (and having vehicle & fuel taxes siphoned off towards) a pool of money which is weekly dished out to those for whom it has become (out of choice) a lifestyle.

[alanzs]

If you can afford a bike you're upper middle class.

Not necessarily true. I rode a bike for many years because it was cheaper than a car and I was not middle class, by any means or measure.

[emaN]

I recently found out my cousin & his partner (&five kids) are getting close to $1,000 per week!!
They are 'registered as' living at different addresses...
I am ashamed of them and their 'thieving' attitude.
I'm this close to saying something to the family; if that don't help, I'll be taking it further.

[Brett]

That policy is one of the reasons I WILL be voting Nats. Once a kid is at school, 15 hrs per week is EASILY achievable, and every person able should contribute.Too many young teen mums have gotten knocked up because of the benefits they recieve. I know a family where both daughters have got preggy just for the easy cash. Got to remove this mindset. yesterday would not have been soon enough in my opinion.

[devnull]

Why should your pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses"? Because one day it might be you.

Not bloody likely pal... We made sure we could afford kids before we had them.
And if I should ever end up out of work, NO job would be beneath me if it means being able to put food on the table

Too many kiwis have no pride any more...

And you can thank the DPB for aiding in getting those child abuse stats up
Some key risk indicators:
low maternal age at birth
low maternal education level

Well done socialists....

[Brett]

Not bloody likely pal... We made sure we could afford kids before we had them.
And if I should ever end up out of work, NO job would be beneath me if it means being able to put food on the table

Too many kiwis have no pride any more...

And you can thank the DPB for aiding in getting those child abuse stats up
Some key risk indicators:
low maternal age at birth
low maternal education level

Well done socialists....

Here here mon frer.

[jrandom]

I can guarantee that most 15 hour jobs out there, WON'T be child friendly. It'll be stacking supermarket shelves at midnight or cleaning toilets at Sky City.

Like Planna said, you forget the 'study' option.

To expand on my earlier post, my ex-wife is halfway through a two-year full-time diploma in sports massage therapy, and is already taking clients on for relaxation massage work.

On the days when she needs to be in town for lectures and whatnot, the kids stay at after-school care at their primary school until 6pm. It's cheap and well-run.

When we were together, she always threw the "we'd be worse off if I worked" line at me (it was motivated by her fear of getting out there rather than by any real financial analysis). But being on her own has forced her to think laterally, hence the full-time study (funded via an interest-free student loan, naturally) for a profession that doesn't force her into a 9-5 office job.

There are many ways of earning a living that do not involve sitting at a desk for set business hours or performing menial labour in the middle of the night.

Why should your pay tax so people can "sit on their fat lazy arses"? Because one day it might be you.

Indeed.

Right this minute it's my kids living off it. I'm not in a position to fully support them and their mum from where I stand now, so I'd be fucked without it.

Nobody's saying that the DPB is a bad idea, but effective management of it to ensure that it remains a safety net rather than a lifestyle choice is an excellent goal, and this policy furthers that goal very nicely, IMHO.

[R1madness]

Go national. The more they put the pressure on bludgers the more hard working kiwis will vote for them. I am sick to death of hearing about the poor single parents, dole bludgers, criminals, and all the others that rip off my taxes and do nothing for the country. We need a system that rewards hard work, not bludgers.