Why not send the children out work instead?

I can’t understand why National normally sounds so keen on having parents (mothers) stay at home with their kids, but is constantly coming up with ways to make it hard for them to do that if they choose to.

Sue Bradford has been reminding people this morning of the risks that might come from  National’s rumoured proposal to put mothers who are on the Domestic Purposes Benefit back to work:

‘In 2001 the Ministry of Social Development carried out an evaluation of National’s DPB reforms of the late 90s, and found that:

  • The financial benefits of being pushed into part time employment were limited, with part time workers on lower average rates of pay than those in full time jobs, as well as facing the additional costs of going out to work.
  • Sole parents found it hard to access childcare that was accessible, affordable and high quality. They often had to take on night work.
  • MSD had concerns about possible negative effects on children, including children under 14 being left home alone while their parent is out at work (see ‘Evaluating the February 1999 Domestic Purposes Benefit and Widows Benefit Reforms’, MSD, November 2001).

The idea that mothers are some how cheating the system by choosing to stay home looking after their kids rather than getting out there into the workforces is risible.  It’s probably the policy initiative of some wonk who has not spent enough time at the time share luxury holiday that is full-time-at-home motherhood (or fatherhood).

106 thoughts on “Why not send the children out work instead?

  1. big bro

    As toad has pointed out, we are on the wrong thread, so I won’t attempt to answer your “either/or” question here.

    Maybe another time …

  2. Eredwen

    Ok, so you do not agree with the large number or nations (including NZ) who went into Afghanistan, does that mean you are/were not concerned about the abuses of human rights and the enslaving of woman under the Taliban regime?

  3. Toad

    ” Are you saying they cook their stats?”

    You bet I am, remember it is Labour who have politicized the public service and as such any figures that come out have to be considered suspect.
    Labour have “form” in areas like this, I need not remind you how they lied about they state of our economy in the late 80’s in a failed attempt to con the nation into believing that things were better than they actually were.

    In the old days (and here I do speak with some experience) the public service was very much staffed with Sir Humphrey clones however for all their failings they were neutral, about the worst thing one could do career wise was to discuss politics at work as they were almost paranoid about being seen as anything other than neutral.

    As for Collins….well I cannot wait until she is our PM

  4. bb

    To be accurate, I wrote:

    “Personally I do not think that Osama bin Laden will go down in history as a thoroughly “bad chap? …”

    1) Note the word “thoroughly”. (I don’t necessarily see him as a “goodie”.)

    2) Recognize that, with our media’s over-dependence on USA-based news sources we DON’T get all sides of the current picture, so I spend a lot of time reading much more widely.

    Here is a good starting point:
    http://informationclearinghouse.info/subscribe.htm

    3) Conspiracy theories about “9/11 aside, recognise that the GWBush administration had their own reasons to go into Afghanistan …
    Indeed, interfering in other people’s lands has escalated into a much bigger area since then, and evidence suggests that this was planned well in advance …

    That’s just a starter!
    eredwen

  5. BB said: Key has NEVER said his policy was a reaction to the Labour party directive to move people from the dole to the sickness and invalids benefit (still a statement of fact despite Jafa’s massaged figures) more it is a move designed to change the culture of long term beneficiaries.

    They are not Jafapete’s figures, they are MSD’s – as quoted directly in the National Party backgrounder. Are you saying they cook their stats?

    And John Key may not have personally said that, but Judith Collins has on a number of occasions.

  6. No, BB, he was just lashing out to protect what was once his and showing he will fight to protect his people from the colonisit oppresors!

    *BB, you do realise that was a tounge-in-cheek comment dont you?*

  7. “It’s all a big lie to justify forcing sickness and invalid’s beneficiaries to look to work in order to pander to beneficiary-bashing voters like BB”

    Sigh!…they do say that the first casualty of war is the truth.

    First of all (and I suspect this will fall on deaf ears) Key has NEVER said his policy was a reaction to the Labour party directive to move people from the dole to the sickness and invalids benefit (still a statement of fact despite Jafa’s massaged figures) more it is a move designed to change the culture of long term beneficiaries.

    Whats more you both (Jafa and Toad) know that, however you are also smart enough to realise that that argument is logical and not going to tear at the heart stings of the wet liberals hence the dramatic use of terms such as “benefit bashing”.

    As for me, hell you know that I do not need any excuse to bash bludgers, as apposed to the few genuine benefit recipients who IMHO do not get enough.

  8. Big Bro, Bin Laden aint such a bad fellow, he is mearly trying to assert his ancestrial right over the land and resources of the area! He is standing up to the colonist oppresors!

  9. Eredwen

    Yes, perhaps I should look a little more closely at what you write but to be honest I struggle given your assertion that Bin Laden is not such a bad chap.

  10. big bro

    In this case, what you “suspect” couldn’t be further from the truth!

    If you had read my post more carefully, you might have noticed (among other “clues”) statements such as:

    “If one looks carefully, everything has various “shades of GREY? in it, and it is these shades that need to be examined and discussed.”

    (Please pay more attention before leaping into print next time!!)

    e

  11. Getting this thread back on track, BB said Labour HAVE moved people onto the sickness and invalids benefit, it is a statement of fact. WINZ are under immense pressure to bring down the unemployment figures, increasingly so as we lead into the election.

    Check out my post over on g.blog on this BB (and others). With some help from jafapete, I think we have managed to show that the assertion above is all National Party spin.

    There has been no mass migration from unemployment benefit to sickness and invalid’s benefits, and the statistics for uptake of those benefits don’t show anything other than what demographics would predict.

    It’s all a big lie to justify forcing sickness and invalid’s beneficiaries to look to work in order to pander to beneficiary-bashing voters like BB.

  12. c’mon bb..

    ..do you really want to re-litigate that disaster/fiasco..

    ..and don’t insult our intelligence by trotting out that hoary old ‘negotiate with terrorists’ chimera..

    you well know the reasons for invasion were manufactured on a foundation of total lies/falsed letters/’evidence’..etc..

    ‘islamofascists’..’here’..

    go and sit in the corner with d4j..

    ..you are singing looney-tunes..again..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  13. SORRY for the ERROR!

    In my distracted haste I addressed the above to “bj” instead of to “big bro” !

    (… two different people with very different points of view!)

    eredwen

  14. Eredwen

    “For example, how many lives have been taken, or have been destroyed, (directly or indirectly) by the actions of the USA over the last few years?”

    If you have any sense of balance you would ask yourself the same questions about Bin Laden and our Islamist chums.

    However I suspect that you have a closed mind on these issues, you seem to be firmly in the USA=Bad camp and that is a shame.
    When the Islamofacists start their campaign of terror here (and they will eventually) I will be interested to see how quickly you change your tune, and please…do you really think you can reason or negotiate with terrorists?.

  15. bj

    My only sibling and his family are all American Citizens. I have met many Americans who think as I do! (Some of them are Greens.)

  16. bj

    I don’t live in your “Black and White” world !

    If one looks carefully, everything has various “shades of grey” in it, and it is these shades that need to be examined and discussed.

    For example, how many lives have been taken, or have been destroyed, (directly or indirectly) by the actions of the USA over the last few years?
    and WHY?

    (for what declared reasons? and for what undeclared reasons?)
    … and why and how has the World watched in silence?
    … and where is the United Nations?

    I am not a gullible person.

    In my own family:
    I was born in new Zealand in 1941 …
    my children’s father was born in Nazi Germany in 1941 …
    We were both “War Babies” and our two sets of parents did their best to raise their children under those circumstances …

    It certainly makes one think!
    and, importantly, it has given our now adult “children” a perspective that is different from the (often black and white) perspective encountered here. Our children’s perspectives were aided by the input of two wonderful sets of grandparents!

    Above all, our now-adult children fully understand that:
    ARMED CONFLICT IS A RIDICULOUS METHOD OF MAKING DECISIONS!

  17. Toad

    Labour HAVE moved people onto the sickness and invalids benefit, it is a statement of fact.
    WINZ are under immense pressure to bring down the unemployment figures, increasingly so as we lead into the election.

  18. You are still changing the topic Phil. You accused Lucyna of wanting to sterilize people, she has specifically spoken out against that, and it is against her beliefs as a Catholic. You have not admitted you were wrong once I pointed out her remark was “facetious”.

    You simply change the attack without addressing the original point – you got your facts wrong.

    Tell me where above it sounds like I am tipping children into the gutter? I’ve just argued against the National Party Policy of forcing solo parents to work in exchange for the DPB. That’s hardly demanding the end to all welfare.

    Indeed, I think it more logically consistent to argue that all life is precious (anti-abortion) rather than assume if they are starting off on the back foot the kid should be killed. My humanitarianism extends beyond birth too, long posts for another day. You are suffering from more misconceptions Phil – part of the problem is perhaps that you think your solutions work and all other ideas are wrong. However, the left do not have a monopoly on compassion.

  19. “..Sarcasm Phil, you use it enough, thought you might need a top up. .”

    um..!..zen..

    ..why are you not addressing that anti-abortion..then tip them into the gutter after birth question..?

    ..so favoured by those on the religious right..

    ..such as yourself and lucyna..

    cos’..y’see..to my mind..

    ..holding such a ‘walking=contradiction’ of a belief system..

    ..rules you our of any contention to being regarded as a ‘reasoned-commenter’..

    ..eh..?..

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  20. # bigblukiwi Says:
    August 12th, 2008 at 11:41 am

    Quite apart from the fact, as mentioned by others, that motherhood/fatherhood as a single parent, or dual parent for that matter, but probably more importantly as a single parent, is one of the most important full time jobs that could be done by anybody.
    …………………………..
    Yes it’s reproduction of YOU (not) ME the most basic of natures drives is to reproduce oneself.
    …………………………………………..
    It is hugely undervalued in Western Society, underpaid, and devalued by such policies as are always put forward by right wing parties.
    …………………………………………
    Whose society? I don’t know them they are complete strangers pushing a pram around… in what sense are they part of my society? They are simply reproducing themselves and asking others to pay for the privilege. Will I get an invite to the kids birthday party?
    ………………………………………..
    They seem to believe that ‘work’ means being a ‘wage slave’ of one kind or another, or perhaps ideally being an ‘entepreanor’ thus ‘providing jobs’ for others to be wage slaves.
    …………………………………..
    I’ll work provided it I have nice office, gentleman’s hours and interesting work involving say reading magazines….. I can’t be expected to hump boxes in a dreary storeroom…. it isn’t me.
    ……………………………..

    If single mothers were paid what they were ‘worth’ to the economy, they would be some of the highest paid around.
    ……………………………….
    Maybe if they were surrogates for Albert Einstien. The charge against our welfarism is that it is creating a sector who tend to be costly drags on society as the mothers and fathers aren’t motivated enough to sacrifice for their offspring. You can blame those people for policies that require disincentive.
    ……………………………

    What is most important, ensuring that your tax dollars are ‘well spent’, i.e. not on bludging benificiaries, or ensuring that the next generation has the comfort of a parent available to nurture a child through it’s formative years in a loving and secure household.
    ……………………..
    And bring on the next generation and the next and the next……

  21. Jafapete’s taken closer look than most into the backgrounder put out by the Nats to justify making sickness and invalid’s beneficiaries look for work:

    The Nats’ are pulling a sleight of hand trick with the statistics around benefit numbers to build a false meme. This would be amusing except that some people have bought the nonsense. I mentioned the current very low unemployment levels the other day in passing and the response was that Labour has “moved people onto the sickness benefit.?

    Go take a look.

    I think he’s right.

  22. got to admit though; for the cost of afew plane tickets he did manage to cost the US billions, pretty good investment really.

  23. eredwen

    You cannot be serious, NOBODY in their right mind would even suggest that Bin Laden is anything other than pure evil, he represents everything that is bad about Islam.
    Please tell me how you can justify 9/11?

    As for comparing him with Bush and Cheney, well that is simply ridiculous and only goes to show that the Greens have a genuine and irrational hatred toward the USA.

    History will treat Bush and Cheney well, unlike Clinton and the other darling of the left JFK.
    I suspect Obama will be the same, he is already turning out to be a bigger fake than either Clinton or JFK.

  24. # big bro Says:
    August 12th, 2008 at 10:34 am

    eredwen

    Really?…you mean there are people here who think that Osama Bin Laden is not a bad chap?
    …………………………………………………………………………………………
    I reply:

    A “bad chap” in comparison to whom? George W Bush? Richard Cheney?

    Deciding who is or isn’t a “good” or a “bad” chap is not a straightforward decision. It depends on one’s point of view, and ‘History’ teaches us that over time such decisions often change.

    Personally I do not think that Osama bin Laden will go down in history as a thoroughly “bad chap” …

    How will George W Bush, Richard Cheney et al be remembered I wonder?

  25. not quite sure what you are thanking me for there..zen..and why..

    Sarcasm Phil, you use it enough, thought you might need a top up.

    ..is it anything to do with your far-right/religous ideological fellow-traveller..lucyna..

    ..wanting to sterilise sole parents..?

    well, yes, now that you mention it. Given the comment was facetious, and that it is exactly the opposite of what Lucyna meant, and I have explained that to you, you can either

    1. call me a liar;
    2. acknowledge you misunderstood and spraying the accusation around on other blogs deserves an apology;
    3. pretend you are still correct and quickly change the subject by attacking some other area.

    Oh, I see you’ve chosen option three. Come on Phil, be a role model.

  26. Saying “Single mothers” is discriminatory. Mothers that are married who choose to stay at home and look after the children are fulfilling an equally valuable role, and one could argue that some fathers who do this are capable of achieving the same results.

  27. >> If single mothers were paid what they were ‘worth’ to the economy, they would be some of the highest paid around.

    Oh great and how are you going to pay for the single mothers so called Real worth.

    Oh wait I suppose the Green party has some far flung un-funded policy where by any family can choose to have one parent stay home and not work. The country will then pay that person with some money found on the magically Green money tree, you all know the tree where the greens get an infinite supply of money to pay for all their expensive un-costed policies.

  28. >>motherhood/fatherhood….is one of the most important full time jobs that could be done by anybody

    It’s not really, though is it.

    >>underpaid, and devalued

    It is paid exactly what it is worth. Supply and demand. Too many people can do it, and want to do it, for nothing. Much like acting….

    Not saying it isn’t hard, of course.

    >>‘work’ means being a ‘wage slave’ of one kind or another

    No, work means supplying a good or service that someone else wants/needs.

    >>If single mothers were paid what they were ‘worth’ to the economy, they would be some of the highest paid around.

    The only way that would happen is if a lot less of them had children.
    At present, they are way on the wrong side of the supply/demand curve.
    There’s also the little matter of global overpopulation…p[erhaps they should be fined? ;)

    >>has the comfort of a parent available to nurture a child through it’s formative years in a loving and secure household

    Women not working is a relatively recent development. The human race has existed for 250,000 years with full-time working mothers. These days, they overestimate their (self) importance.

  29. Quite apart from the fact, as mentioned by others, that motherhood/fatherhood as a single parent, or dual parent for that matter, but probably more importantly as a single parent, is one of the most important full time jobs that could be done by anybody.

    It is hugely undervalued in Western Society, underpaid, and devalued by such policies as are always put forward by right wing parties. They seem to believe that ‘work’ means being a ‘wage slave’ of one kind or another, or perhaps ideally being an ‘entepreanor’ thus ‘providing jobs’ for others to be wage slaves.

    If single mothers were paid what they were ‘worth’ to the economy, they would be some of the highest paid around.

    What is most important, ensuring that your tax dollars are ‘well spent’, i.e. not on bludging benificiaries, or ensuring that the next generation has the comfort of a parent available to nurture a child through it’s formative years in a loving and secure household.

    I can hear the cries now – but they DON’T do that, they spoil them rotten and produce myriads of future benefits bludgers – perhaps, but if that is sometimes so, please ask the real reason why !

  30. but you are right..

    i ‘could do with getting out a bit more’..

    ..(speaking of which..

    ..the hounds are ganging up on/standing-over me..again..)

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

  31. no..it’s a week..

    ..but i did take redbaiter down with me..

    heh..!

    ..it’s also good to get the demerit-decks cleared..

    ..i was expecting a ban between now and the election..

    ..better to have it now..than just before the election..

    ..and i have only been banging on about it here..

    ..as a necessary response to the ad hominems of that toad..

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

  32. oh..that’s right..

    ..caring compassionate ‘committed catholic’ lucyna also favours tearing away state support for sole parents/’fallen women’..

    ..eh..?

    ..or is that just her being ‘facetious’..again..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  33. not quite sure what you are thanking me for there..zen..and why..

    ..is it anything to do with your far-right/religous ideological fellow-traveller..lucyna..

    ..wanting to sterilise sole parents..?

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

    chrs..eredwen..

  34. toad,

    I enjoy having phil around !! (and his heart is always in the right place.)

    That is MUCH more than I can say for several visitors who frequent (and sometimes dominate) frogblog.

  35. Kelpie, I hear you. Where do these things fail though once the family is broken?

    A girl thrown out of home who couldn’t afford a school uniform so got kicked out of school then turned to prostitution.

    What’s the story there? Why couldn’t the school help with providing the school uniform? At the least, they could have called in a case worker. Why didn’t they care enough to take positive action? There must be more to this story than we are being told, surely?

  36. and your 8.35 is an example of your ‘humour’..?

    you must be a delight/hoot at dinner parties..

    ..wildean..?

    ..in your own mind..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  37. Phil, in case it has escaped you, there is a difference between abuse (what you do) and taking the piss and/or expressing annoyance with your abuse(what I do).

  38. very ‘green’/non-abusive of you there..toad..?

    eh..?

    don’t really practise what you preach..?

    ..eh..?

    ..figures..

    after all..

    ..you are one of those people who ‘pretend’ to be green..

    ..as you kill/eat animals/sentient beings….

    ..that have been raised/brutalised in the most horrific conditions..

    ..at the highest environmental costs..

    ..eh..?

    ..and how could that be a more ‘telling’ example of you..

    ..not practising what you (pretend) to preach..

    ..hypocrisy/cant..today thy name is..toad..

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

  39. Sapient said: Anyone seen “Daddy Daycare?? terrible movie, (why did I ever watch it?) simple concept. Do it, get it into action; Get phil into a job.

    My kids are grown up, but I wouldn’t have let them anywhere near a childcare centre Phil was working in: “…and then the man lit up a cigarette, and you know what Dad, it smelt real funny. I asked him if I could have a puff…”

  40. Women’s work at home and raising children needs to be recognized as work. Though I don’t see policy this as an “attack” on beneficiaries. Rather if it is done well (with good quality training and options – instead of shipping them into retail as stated) it could be very helpful to those mothers who are having trouble transitioning back into paid work. 15 hours doesn’t seem like too much (though child care issue needs to be worked out) and could offer the person skills and confidence. They should not however be under threat that their benefit is going to be cut if they do not “comply”. I believe that exchange is an important factor in work. With raising children you do it for yourself, your children and family. When working in paid work obviously it’s for money. Working even part-time sets a good example for our children.

    Perhaps looking into areas of work whereby a parent can earn a certificate while working say 15 hours wk over 1 year in things like childcare..so that when they’re kids are at school they feel confident about getting a job in that area.

  41. Sorry Zen Tiger; Went off like a rocket over this.
    [url]http://www.stuff.co.nz/4647704a19716.html[/url]

    These are our kids not those of some distant land.

  42. Sorry Zen Tiger; got on my pet hobby horse in a blind rage because of this
    [URL]http://www.stuff.co.nz/4647704a19716.html[/URL]

    I can not believe that we are not all out in the streets over this horror.
    For crying out loud they are our children we are treating this way.
    Not some distant land.

  43. Not quite no-one Kelpie. Even I said it, and I’m sure I’m not alone. Here’s my comment earlier:

    * I think it important for young children to have more time with at least one parent. Complicating a solo parents life further by requiring work isn’t helpful and I simply see a whole new level of bureaucracy required to really make things worse rather than better. I’m sure there would be a better use of tax payer money to help solo parents in a positive way.

  44. No one seems in the least bit interested in the fact that it is the kid’s who get damaged by having their parents penalised.
    Everyone seems to only be interested in their own narrow little lives & the community can go to hell.
    Look at how hard I work – no one else should have it easier than me.
    Who gives a tinkers curse for the next generation; let’s starve them because they were dumb enough to get work shy parents.
    Oh & let’s sign a petition to beat them as well!
    Why not just compost the lot of them for the good of the well off & the comfort of the few.

  45. Phil U, regarding your English Comprehension Skills and quoting Lucyna, please look up the word “facetious”.

    You idiot. Lucyna is a committed Catholic. Read her posts (in context) and you will see she is against abortion and against contraception and (as per the Catholic teaching) against sterilization of men or women for any reason.

    And she has just done a post against National’s policy.

    You need to read things twice sometimes, my friend.

  46. here is the thread i got banned on/for..

    ..don’t believe toads’ ‘spin’..

    ..if you can be bothered..

    ..you will also get a glimpse of toads’ new friends..

    ..the rabid righties..

    ..pretty they ain’t..

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/08/nationals_benefits_policy.html

    (a person earning $400,000 a year sneering at ‘parasitic’ sole-mothers..

    ..is what set me off..

    (and got me banned..)

    for fans of vitriol..

    ..i ‘bucketed’ him with/in it..)

    go and check out what a loathsome sneering crawling rich pr*ck looks/sounds..

    ..the others aren’t very nice..either..

    ..you can also check out how toad is fast becoming their ‘tame green’..

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

    ..phil(whoar.co.z)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  47. frog Says:
    I for one want to live in a society that cares for all its members, regardless of the circumstance that life has thrown them into.

    A laudable sentiment frog, but there are a lot more people suffering hardships than actually qualify for a benefit. Will you personally underwrite your concern by offering all of them your own money?

    I’d certainly be really happy to get a top up from you; life has not been easy and I struggle every week. There’s plenty more like me too.

    I think it is too easy to forget that a good welfare system is only possible when the ratio of consumers/taxpayers is low enough.

    It’s really easy to be idealistic when it is someone elses money you are giving away.

    Indeed the children should be sent out to work…(eventually)…and that requires that a work ethic be visible within the home.

    I will watch with interest how many DPB mothers accidentally fall pregnant again when their previous child turns five.

  48. “Media Release
    THIRD OF DPB PARENTS “NOT INTERESTED IN LOOKING FOR WORK”
    Thursday, January 3, 2008

    According to a recently published Ministry of Social Development report, one third of surveyed sole parents receiving the DPB expressed no interest in looking for work. The report, The 2002 Domestic Purposes and Widow’s Benefit Reform: Evaluation Report also found that since the controversial removal of work testing in 2003, the ‘exit rate’ for recipients whose youngest child is 14 or older has dropped.

    “There is no surprise that other factors associated with the fall in this group’s exit rate (the rate at which people leave the benefit) included being a teenager when the oldest child was born, having already spent a large proportion of their time in the benefit system and being Maori or Pacific. What should worry the Ministry, ” said welfare commentator, Lindsay Mitchell, “is the number of very young newcomers has not decreased. In September 1999 there were 2,687 18-19 year-olds on the DPB. By September 2007 the number had increased by 15 percent to 3,093. Additionally there are typically six or seven hundred 16 and 17 year-old teenage parents receiving the Emergency Maintenance Allowance at any given time.”

    “Most of the Work and Income’s resources have been focussed on getting more amenable cases into work or training, Meanwhile nothing has been done to discourage the inflow of those mothers who will stay the longest in the system.”

    “Some case managers reported that the Personal Employment and Development Plans, which replaced work-testing, have made little impression on women who have been on the benefit for six to twelve years who use the new system ‘to their advantage’. Others said that their clients showed no interest in keeping a copy of their plan or binned it on the way out. The report states, ‘There was a general feeling among case managers that for many people, having a copy of their PDEP was not something they valued highly.’ ”

    “While the number of sole parents on the DPB has dropped, the reasons are complex and may have little to do with the reforms. This is acknowledged by the authors of the report. The drop may be an effect of low unemployment, the Working for Families incentives and the ageing population. Certainly the removal of full-time work-testing for those with children aged fourteen or older has had a negative impact.”
    http://lindsaymitchell.blogspot.com

  49. put contraceptives in the water supply?
    considering that contraceptives are based on female sex hormones, I would be interested to see the effect of doing that, particularly on teenage boys.

  50. Phil, my earlier comment in response to you is in moderation. So why don’t you just go away. You’re banned from posting on Kiwiblog (that hardly ever happens) due to persistent abuse, so don’t take your chances here.

  51. here she is..

    # Lucyna (21) Add karma Subtract karma +0 Says:
    August 11th, 2008 at 4:30 pm

    Kimble, I suppose if we have mandatory sterilisation of DPB parents, it won’t be..”

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  52. philu said: don’t forget to namecheck all your new rightwing ratbag friends over at kiwiblog.. ..eh toad..?

    …this is zens’ fellow rightwing christian ‘friend..’mad’ lucyna.. ..she wants to sterilise sole mothers.. ..dosen’t she zen..?

    Phil’s just been given a holiday over at Kiwiblog, due to persistent abusive posts.

    So keep it polite, concise and intelligble here Phil, otherwise just go away. If not, big bro may be wrong in his post “I have a feeling you might be seeing a lot more of Phul over the next month”.

    Frogblog doesn’t operate demerit points, but you can be switched off for a period here too. I’m sure frog will be keeping a watchful eye.

  53. “Human existence isn’t a level playing field.”

    So because some things are inherently unfair (some of us born ugly, deformed, stupid, mentally ill, etc) – things we can do very little about changing, we should make things even more unfair, by not doing anything to redress poverty, something we can change.

    And I don’t buy the argument that there are not the resources available to give everyone a fair go. It is just that they are distributed a tad unevenly. This is becoming more the case in New Zealand recently with the rise of corporatism and market based economics.

    The wealthy who sit in on classes where they have no hope of passing may not be using the tax base, but they are wasting resources. They are wasting the precious time of teachers which would be more productively spent teaching the students with genuine talent who could actually benefit from an education. Talentless losers with lots of money are also wasting environmental resources, while not putting much into society. In comparison, women (and men) on the DPB, bringing up children as responsible citizens on a shoestring are using far less resources for far greater return. So if we are to punish laziness lets punish all of it.

  54. this is zens’ fellow rightwing christian ‘friend..’mad’ lucyna..

    ..she wants to sterilise sole mothers..

    ..dosen’t she zen..?

    ..phil(whoar.co.nz)

  55. toad said..

    “..And I don’t think all right wing males are bad .”

    don’t forget to namecheck all your new rightwing ratbag friends over at kiwiblog..

    ..eh toad..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

  56. The focus really needs to be on the fathers (yes, sometimes we are talking about solo fathers with children but usually it is the mother with the kids and the father has run off). We need policies that encourage fathers to stick round, and if they won’t ensure they pay child support.

    More accountability from fathers means:
    – Less money required from the government in the first place.
    – More contact with fathers means children (boys especially) are less likely to end up in crime.

    This needs to be the first priority, the DPB is the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.

  57. I agree with BP on this one, though how I would impliment it may differ substantially. lol.
    Anyone seen “Daddy Daycare”? terrible movie, (why did I ever watch it?) simple concept. Do it, get it into action; Get phil into a job.

  58. I see no problem with a solo parent whose youngest child is over 5 being work tested, so long as it’s only based on ability to find work that can be done during school hours, not full-time work or work that means they can’t be home at dinner time. Plus of course they have to be entitled to domestic leave to care for sick children.

    But I don’t know if National would agree with me on that.

  59. >>Mmmm! I’m lovin’ it!

    Or Mum could get a job helping run a community creche.

    But heaven forbid anyone be *forced* to work, as it is far better to sit at home, smoking fags, watching trash TV, and going insane through isolation, boredom and dependence.

  60. ZenTiger said: Frog and Toad, you need to re-read my comment again. I’m saying the opposite than you imagine.

    Okay, I have, and accept you are – just it was easy to misinterpret your post. And I don’t think all right wing males are bad – Gerrit, for example, is hardly a raving leftie but has posted some very enlightened and thoughtful comments on welfare issues recently.

  61. It’s just occurred to me who the real authors of the Nats’ welfare policy are – McDonalds! Wonder how much they donated to National for this policy?

    Just think about it – Mum’s got nowhere in the school hols to park Junior during her compulsory 15 hours a week employment at the local McDonalds. So Junior comes along too. Mum serves the food, while Junior wanders around binning all the wasted packaging that’s left on the tables.

    Two workers for the price of one! And there’s a play area for Junior during the times business is slow.

    Mmmm! I’m lovin’ it!

  62. PS: To take you through my first comment again:

    1. If banning smacking sends a signal to abusers not to abuse children,

    and I don’t think it does, but you apparently believe it.

    2. then surely insisting single parents work sends a signal for mothers to only become mothers when they are certain the father will be around to support them?

    therefore I don’t think this will work, but you may well believe it, given you believe point 1.

  63. Frog and Toad, you need to re-read my comment again. I’m saying the opposite than you imagine. So your generic “all right wing males are bad” doesn’t hold. However, my question was two-fold. I was interested in your own logic with one situation over the other.

    I’m against this latest National policy for two reasons:

    1. If women don’t want to work, then to avoid it they will simply continue having children. I’m not saying all women would do this, but the ones that are making bad choices now will continue to make bad choices with this type of policy.

    2. I think it important for young children to have more time with at least one parent. Complicating a solo parents life further by requiring work isn’t helpful and I simply see a whole new level of bureaucracy required to really make things worse rather than better. I’m sure there would be a better use of tax payer money to help solo parents in a positive way.

    That being said, as a society we really ought to be looking at welfare abuse and ensuring that we do not encourage negative lifestyles. The old hand-up, not hand-out mantra. I welcome the National Party announcements, if only to generate discussion in this area.

    As for my supposed sexist “blame” the women accusation. That’s too simplistic. If we were talking about absent fathers, I’d have a lot to say. This post is largely about solo mothers, and there are enough women having kids by choosing bad fathers to know this is an area worth addressing. And I don’t see the solution as “more condoms, more abortion”.

    Putting contraceptives in water? Because two adults cannot make responsible decisions with their bodies? That’s not fixing the problem, that’s teaching children they never need to grow up. There are too many 30 year old children out there.

    Finally, and obviously, there are many solo parents that end up that way in much different circumstances, and I don’t include those in the above comments. If some-one wants to argue that I’m only speaking about 20% of solo parents, then fine. I’ happy to solve 20% of the total number, because this 20% (or whatever it is) creates 80% of the problem – socially estranged kids that start life off on the back foot.

  64. BluePeter: “Those who have got their act together enough to do so, of course.”

    Brilliant idea. When my son was a pre-schooler we would often arrange a bit of a roster via Playcentre with other parents to take of child minding. There is always a solution when you have no choice, which as a working self-employed couple you generally don’t: clients won’t listen to excuses.

  65. If someone wants to talk about putting contraceptives in drinking water then you can start to talk about the choices that women have. A lot of women are left bringing up children with NO other support than the DPB. And they aren’t generally women who are well educated, and they aren’t generally women who have spent a lot of time in the workforce. The DPB has to be available to all women with small children, and the father should be paying his bit towards it – except that the typical response of a well-educated father earning decent money with access to a decent lawyer is to quit his well paying job, become a self-employed consultant, and channel all his earnings through family trusts (ironically, of which the children are often not beneficiaries) in order to prove to IRD that he can’t afford to pay child support. They are the people who are ripping you off, BP, BB – not the woman who is actually working a 60 hour week herself as it is. And no, she can’t afford $80 to get someone else to clean her oven.
    If you want to get women off the DPB and into work, try making a donation to http://www.newhorizonsforwomen.org.nz/. $80 every time you get your oven cleaned would be a start.

  66. There are many NZ families with both parents working full time and raising their children. Why does a parent have the right to sit on their arse stealing money from the rest of New Zealand. Once the child is in school at the age of 5 then every one of these parents should be FORCED into the work force from 9-3. The REST of us have to work so why do these people not.

    Having children is not an F-ing right Toad/Frog, if you have children then you need to be able to take care of them. Now since both Toad and Frog love giving other peoples money away why don’t Toad and Frog front up and give THEIR money away for once. Of course the day Toad and Frog front up to give their money instead of everyone elses money is the day hell freezes over.

    THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO DECLARE WAR ON BENEFICIARY’s ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!!

  67. Toad: okidoki, so what about working couples in Ekatahuna ( I couldn’t find a childcare center there) ? Surely it is just as difficult for them to sort out school holidays as the solo mum ? If the solo mum on the DPB can’t find childcare why not move to somewhere she can ?

  68. >>But there are still places there is not.

    They could provide this service to others. Those who have got their act together enough to do so, of course.

  69. Bryan Spondre said: are you saying that “Labours 20 hours free? is not a reality ?

    Yes, that’s one they haven’t delivered on.

    just checked on Yellow Pages there is childcare available in Mamaku.

    Okay, so there is now. Maybe the woman I dealt with complaining about the lack of it there a few years ago got something happening. But there are still places there is not.

  70. Here’s is what you do, Sam.

    Pick out an apartment block. It helps if the apartment block is upmarket. This demographic is usually cash rich and time poor. Find out who the body corporate secretary is, and offer to clean their oven for free, provided they write up the service in their newsletter, and promote the service to owners/tenants. This is your marketing cost (essentially $80).

    Repeat.

    You’ll have more business than you know what to do with.

  71. “Just work 15 hours, it’s not hard” is a lovely soundbite, but it’s not like the issue of getting childcare to cover those “not hard” hours were unaddressed in the post. “But there IS childcare in Mamaku!” Awesome. Will the YellowPages also tell me how much it costs, what the quality of childcare is*, whether there’s a waiting list, whether its opening hours match up with available part-time work … oh, National supporters, I do love your amazing oversimplification of complicated issues.

    *Oh wait, who cares if it’s awful, it’s only beneficiaries’ kids, amirite?

  72. “I could find you a few hundred within days. This is not rocket science.”

    Wow! I know people that would be keen to clean ovens at $80 an hour. Can you send me contact details to pass on?

  73. All very well for you Bryan – in Ponsonby there are lots of childcare options. Try being a single parent in Mamaku or Eketahuna – where do the kids go when you have to work during school hols?

  74. I struggle to see how working 15 hours a week is much of an imposition. I work around 60 hours a week and my wife works around 40. School holidays are always a challenge as work commitments don’t bend to fit our family schedule. Like most of our cohorts who are in a similar position we use a combination of school holiday programmes and sharing the load with friends of similar aged kids.

    I don’t see why solo mums couldn’t do the same ? Especially as I am sure they are entitled to child care support.

  75. heh, more people in the labour force would bring oven cleaning costs down – secret agenda anyone?

  76. >>Not hard at all, but finding more than a tiny number of people willing to pay $80 to have their oven cleaned might be a tad tricky.

    I could find you a few hundred within days. This is not rocket science.

  77. >>is that it is not a level playing field.

    Human existence isn’t a level playing field. I find it bizarre when anybody argues from that direction, because it assumes it is possible. Should Bratt Pitt be penalised in order to level the playing field for ugly people?

    >>because of family money or important contacts

    The important distinction is they aren’t demanding an inordinate amount of money from the taxbase.

    It would be lovely to fully fund all people to do everything in life they want. But unless you find a few oil fields off the coast of New Zealand, then we do not have the ability to pay for it.

    Welfare in NZ is making matters worse, not better. Unwanted kids drive up our crime rates, abuse and poverty levels. Welfare needs to be restructured to avoid these issues, whilst still providing a safety net.

  78. “How hard is it to clean a flippin’ oven?”

    Not hard at all, but finding more than a tiny number of people willing to pay $80 to have their oven cleaned might be a tad tricky.

  79. blue peter’s argument is one I have heard again and again when relating to cutting benefits or allowances for education. Basically it is that those who are enterprising will survive any hardship. Fair enough as far as it goes, and quite true. But if as a society we are to punish those who are unenterprising (and maybe there is something in that), then lets be consistent and punish the unenterprising rich as severely as the unenterprising poor. The problem with cutting off or curtailing the DPB, or education allowances is that it is not a level playing field. There are a number of people sitting on their chuff, or wasting time doing education courses they don’t have the motivation or talent to finish, who can afford to do so because of family money or important contacts. Let us deal with all lazy bums equally.

  80. Frog, your whole approach to this thread is discriminatory. Had you considered the solo fathers out there?

    Perhaps had you not defined this as a women’s issue, then you might have received some more intelligent comment and meaning discussion.

  81. >>hose who bash the most live in the delusion that every individual has equal opportunity, equal information and equal power in this world.

    Of course not. But some appear to be under the delusion many people on the DPB are saints who need 24 hour nannying (whilst the child is at school!) if they are ever to survive.

    I’ve got a guy here right now, cleaning our oven. Charges $80, takes an hour. Money well spent, as far as I’m concerned – we hate doing it. He does a fantastic job, and he is happy with the money. Everyone wins. How hard is it to clean a flippin’ oven? Is such work beyond the capabilities of average beneficiary? A couple of hours a day doing that, or something similar to supplement income. Oh, the humanity! The hardship!

    You’d think we’d asked they chop a leg off….

  82. frog said: None of the men seem to be asking where the other half of the equation is and to what extent he might bear some responsibility?

    I did, frog. Just a bit slow off the mark because I was reading and commenting on National’s media release.

  83. >>More seriously, the National Party’s policy details have now been released, and they are far worse than rumoured.

    I would use the word “btter” instead of “worse”.

    We will no longer carry and encourage bludgers. Great stuff.

    >>he might bear some responsibility

    Yes. Send him the bill….

  84. ZenTiger: How can a mother ever be certain the father will be around to support his kids? Lots of them just bugger off, and there’s nothing the mother can do about it. Or beat the mother and/or the kids – a motehrs supposed to just take the beatings in order to “be certain” the father will be around?

  85. Interesting that it is only the blokes who are commenting and casting aspersions on the self-control and morality of women who bear children. None of the men seem to be asking where the other half of the equation is and to what extent he might bear some responsibility? These same blokes also like to punish the mother, without considering how this might affect the child, who will no doubt cop the blame for all the rest of society’s ills.

    I think it is somewhat lazy to sit here and bash the beneficiary and get self righteous without considering the whole picture. Those who bash the most live in the delusion that every individual has equal opportunity, equal information and equal power in this world.

    I for one want to live in a society that cares for all its members, regardless of the circumstance that life has thrown them into.

  86. Frog said: Why not send the children out work instead?

    A National Party, Family Party, Kiwi Party coalition (scary thought) policy: Send the children out to work and hold public spankings of those who won’t go!

    More seriously, the National Party’s policy details have now been released, and they are far worse than rumoured. They are not just going to work-test people on DPB, but also those on Invalid’s Benefit (qualification: “permanently and severely restricted in his or her capacity for work because of sickness, or because of injury or disability from accident or congenital defect”) and Sickness Benefit (qualification: “not in full-time employment, is willing to undertake it, but because of sickness, injury, or disability is limited in his or her capacity to seek, undertake, or be available for full-time employment”).

  87. If banning smacking sends a signal to abusers not to abuse children, then surely insisting single parents work sends a signal for mothers to only become mothers when they are certain the father will be around to support them?

  88. What planet is Bradford on?

    From the press release:

    “….*forced* work….”

    You mean like the rest of us? Forced by necessity. And if we didn’t work, or worked a measly 15 hours, no one would be funding your enormous DPB bill, eh.

  89. “The idea that mothers are some how cheating the system by choosing to stay home looking after their kids rather than getting out there into the workforces is risible. ”

    You pay for them, then. Can I opt out?

    I see no reason why I should support lifestylers. In this respect, Nationals policies do not go far enough. Once the kids are at school, the mother should be in part time work or study, and start paying back the generosity of the New Zealand taxpayer. They should not be encouraged to go off and get pregnant again, as is the case now.

  90. The idea that you are wet enough to think that there is not wholesale abuse of the social welfare system is laughable.

    Once again you are not telling the whole story, single parents will be expected to work for the money they take from me every week for only 15 hours and even then only once the child has reached the age of six years old.

    Three is NOTHING wrong with that at all.

Comments are closed.