Comments on: Comparing the tax relief

By: wizban

wizban — Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:47:43 +0000

It seems that all those lazy single parents are the problem again!
- Instead of blaming the parent that is looking after the kids, - why don’t we punish- sorry “dissinsentive” the ones that leave (or are left by) the one that takes custody of the kids.
When you see a separated parent without kids, they are the bludger not the one that has the kids!
If you have sex, you run the risk of being a parent, if your a man, that desision may be out of your control, so I want to urge all the men out there. Be responsible, If you have sex, you could be a dad. Be prepared to PAY!!!

By: Bernard Woolley

Bernard Woolley — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 04:13:08 +0000

Joy and Millsy - there are still a lot of irresponsible people out there too, the ones that don’t make educated choices about their lives. Pick an issue - speeding, crime drugs, health - people know the consequences but still make poor decisions. Just because people may be educated against having large families, doesn’t mean that they will actually have smaller families. Education nearly always needs to be combined with very real incentives (be they postive/negative). Which is why a program like WFF needs to taper off financial support rapidly after the third child.

I agree that in an ideal world education would be all we need, but currently it isn’t enough - not judging by many other issues in society right now.

By: joy

joy — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 02:35:57 +0000

Millsy,

Indeed you are correct. Responsible people making educated choices in their lives. Joy.

By: Millsy

Millsy — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:37:17 +0000

RE: DPB.

I would rather that we educate people to refrain from having kids at an early age than trying to meddle with the DPB.

By: joy

joy — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:22:14 +0000

Just for the record. I had 3 children way back in the 60’s. All 3 have married. One couple cannot have children. The other two couples have, 3 and 2 children each, and can support their children OK.

Sadly Paul & I do not have children.

Someone mentioned DPB. That is an area we feel strongly about. Continuing to breed, as a sole parent, whilst on govt support IS irresponsible. Joy.

By: joy

joy — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:18:19 +0000

Bernard,

Your comment about small/moderate sized families is worthy and one that my partner Paul & I support. Unless parents are seriously wealthy and can independently support their extra children then yes, responsible moderation should be the order of the day if parents expect govt help.

Millsy,

How about no gst on locally produced food? Joy.

By: Millsy

Millsy — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:16:44 +0000

Bernard, I am fully aware of the implication of population growth, and it is an issue that needs to be discussed.

I belive that educating people from an early age - in the schools, about the cost and responsibilites of having children is much better than putting financial penalties of those who have (too many) children. It is a measure that I support to solve the DP/single mother problem as well.

And - in case you were wondering - I do not have children, and I do not intend to have any, that is due to the fact that I am not a “kid” person more than anything else.

By: Millsy

Millsy — Fri, 19 Aug 2005 00:05:12 +0000

The irony is, Joy, is that by international standards, we are lightly taxed. Even the free market paradise, the good ol’ USA has higher tax rates than us (and more taxes).

I would prefer more spending on the things I mentioned above to tax cuts anyday.

However, I belive a cut in GST would do a lot for low and middle income earners. Reducing GST to 10% would be a good move in my reckoning..

By: Bernard Woolley

Bernard Woolley — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 23:56:03 +0000

Millsy - encouraging population growth with a policy like this will only put even more pressure on public services, not ease them. The way society is going, there will be less workers out there to generate the taxable base required to support more children in society. Education and health costs at a minimum will go up as well.

Everyone - I find it interesting that the Greens are supporting a policy that encourages population growth. From a party that suports Populations Action International and Zero Poluation Growth, I don’t think that WFF should provide any additional benefits to more than 3 children. Up to three, I don’t have a problem with, but any families bigger should not be supported by government. That is inefficient and a waste of what are becoming scarcer international resources. I would have expected more from the Greens on this point. People should not be encouraged to have large families in this day and age.

By: joy

joy — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 23:41:14 +0000

Millsy,
Thank you. I have just been reading the comments on DF’s blog on this subject. Your comment here is what was running through my mind as I read whinges from people who wanted THEIR MONEY to do with as they please. Just how far do such people want to go in cutting out government services? Their points do not seem logical to me, not when I consider the whole picture of NZ as a community. Joy.