CYF taking babies at birth
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm by David FarrarThe Dom Post reports:
Child, Youth and Family took 66 at-risk babies less than a month old into its care last year and 15 of them were taken the day they were born.
In more than half of the cases, older brothers and sisters were already in care, figures provided to The Dominion Post under the Official Information Act show.
The number of custody orders involving newborns has more than doubled in the past five years. In the 2003-04 year, 32 were taken into state care.
And I say good on them – the kids may grow up safe. Parents with a history of child abuse, do not have a right to keep inflicting misery.
I am reminded of the pregnant 14 year old who has twice been arrested for drink driving. I find it impossible to believe she could safely raise her children – even if they survive the pregnancy.
I am reminded of the words of a friend of mine who is a journalist. She described how she cried when she heard Antonie Dixon had killed himself. She attended his trials, and explained she didn’t cry for the sociopathic killer he had become, but for the tortured abused childhood he had to endure.
It was a salient reminder that so much of our crime (and “underclass”) is due to abusive childhoods, and that we need to be more aggressive in protecting at risk kids. And no, that does not mean passing an anti-smacking law – which was a gaint distraction from the real problem.
Related posts:
- Antonie Dixon is dead
- Levin, babies and licorice
- Goff taking my advice
- The White Paper for Vulnerable Children
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:12 pm
It does make you wonder why the hell we let parents, who have already had kids taken into care, continue to breed…yes I know, we don’t let them, we *encourage* them.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Many state care children are before the youth court by the age of 12. Well done New Zealand! Our children deserve better than the out of control kiwi society. Time for action pollies!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Finally CYFS are doing something right, it should happen far more often.
Vote:We would also save a fortune on the DPB.
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:28 pm
BRUV………..YES!.But they are doing less than half the job if they don’t carry out sterilisation to either or both parents at the same time.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 2:37 pm
A conviction for animal abuse can result in an order banning the abuser from owning animals yet Macsyna King can carry on popping out kids despite CYFS having taken custody of her older children.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Bad parents abusing children are not part of some market that will change its direction if Govt resets a few of the background parameters. But that wasn’t the intention of Anti-Smacking, all it does give the Old Bill some more legal options when dealing with individual cases. But don’t bother trying to say that to the “Sue Bradford’s trying to tell me how to raise my children” types.
In all of this, remember that abusive parents are *individual* ignorant bastards who don’t know better, or *individual* bad bastards who really are evil.
As soon as you start talking about using the DPB as a tool to curb child abuse, you are no longer talking about crime/punishment/prevention, you are talking about eugenics because you are affecting a huge number of people, most of whom don’t abuse their kids.
(And as soon as you start talking about sterilizing people, you are going to a very dark place indeed and I won’t say anything more about that!)
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 2:49 pm
It’s a NZ Stolen Generation! The government will be apologising to these babies in 50 years time. And paying compensation for stealing them.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 2:57 pm
First a little background, my parents worked with youth at risk in a residential situation (6-8 youths at a time, care and protection NOT Youth Justice for the most part) for 30+ years specalising in the 12-17 age bracket. In that time the range of youths that came through ranged from young people who were in care for 28 days while some minor issues with the family unit were resolved by councilors / social workers to the vitims of repeat abuse (Physicial, Sexual and Emotional). In the worst cases it was a matter of ticking off the kids as they hit 12-13 and came into care, 4-5 from the same parents in order.
Now I am not in favour of permanent sterilisation, but a 5 year stand down for repeat offenders with a surgical implant is a GREAT idea. If you get 2-3 complaints of abuse in a single family remove all of the siblings and enforced 5 year break from having kids would go a long way to breaking the cycle IMHO.
Now for all of the “Human Rights” bleeding hearts out there, who looks after the rights of the kids?
The only sterilisation I am in favour of is for child sex abusers who, if male should be castrated with pinking shears and if female should have the reproductive organ sewn up. Then have them tattoed on the cheek bones with “Child Sex Offender” and make it illegal to have it removed via laser surgery. Make them understand how their victims feel.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 3:19 pm
you are talking about eugenics because you are affecting a huge number of people, most of whom don’t abuse their kids.
Using eugenics as a pejorative is close to a Godwin violation but I’ll let it slide.
The facts is that the shallow-end of the gene pool is breeding a huge mass of burdens-upon-society, encouraged by government social policy. The cost to New Zealand in crime and welfare is significantly beyond what we can afford.
The lifestyle choice of your average Maori (and many Polynesians but not exclusively these two groups) is to breed early and often (to gain DPB and other welfare) stay unmarried (so that the male receives the dole welfare as well) and to supplement the taxpayer-provided income with crime.
The net result is that we have a massive underclass that simply will not ever produce more than it consumes, that drains our scarce resources, that preys upon the law abiding. Our current social policy encourages this trend to continue.
Reversing this trend should be a national priority. We need to introduce the underclass (and by extension, the Labour-voting electorate) to the concept that society does not owe them a living and to the concept of “an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work.”
How do we achieve this?
-Discourage the underclass from breeding. End the DPB and other breeding programmes, introduce mandatory sterilisation for unfit parents, introduce licensing for potential parents.
-Discourager the underclass from crime. Introduce capital and corporal punishment. Increase sentences. Introduce collective punishment (e.g.; no member of the criminal’s immediate family may have recourse to public funds until restitution to the victim is made.)
-End all public funding for Maori cultural promotion (Maori TV, Waitangi settlements, etc. etc.) What we were supposed to be paying for was Maori culture, what we got was South-Central L.A. Negro gang culture.
-Outlaw the Labour party and imprison the senior leaders of its politburo. The Labour party aims to foster a socialist revolution by increasing the ratio of underclass to productive citizens and by extension increasing the underclass’s burden upon the state – following the 1-2-3 of Trotsky 101.
-Membership of the Labour party should preclude appointment to any public sector position and should be recognised as legitimate grounds for dismissal from private enterprise. Membership lists should be published, so that decent Kiwis can know if their neighbours are Party members.
Make no mistake – the underclass is the symptom, the Labour party is the problem. One needs to be re-educated, the other needs to be smashed.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 3:42 pm
“As soon as you start talking about using the DPB as a tool to curb child abuse, you are no longer talking about crime/punishment/prevention, you are talking about eugenics because you are affecting a huge number of people, most of whom don’t abuse their kids”
Bullshit….you are talking about NOT forcing decent people to fund the breeding habits of scumbags via taxation. You are talking about removing the incentive to have unwanted,unvalued and therefore much more likely to be abused children as a means to a income from those same taxpayers.
The DBP is a State “privilage” funded by redistributing the wealth of other people…people who are sick and tired of supporting those they dispise and disagree with. Return welfare to a voluntary charitible situation and watch the changes over night…those in real need will be drowned in assistance…those who aren’t and are gaming it will feel a cold wind up their arses….and their meal tickets adopted out to caring familys who really want them…
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 3:44 pm
NO NO NO As Ive told you and others before These people have RIGHTS and you and every other taxpayer have RESPONSIBILITIES
They have the RIGHT to have as many children as they can produce and the RIGHT to receive unlimited taxpayer funds for their entire life.
You on the other hand have the RESPONSIBILITY to pay for their life style
Havent you been listening for the past several decades We have been told this time and again by our betters the Pollies the civil servants the Unions the Sue Bradfords et al
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Well said, DPF. Although it seemed to be lost in the furore, this was my point about the passing of “three strikes” laws and harsher penalties generally.
Until we’re prepared to suck it up and intervene much, much earlier than when someone is standing before a judge being sentenced for their third strike we’re just beating our chests to look tough without doing anything to make society safer.
No one gets a string of violent offence convictions behind them without a steady escalation beginning in childhood and continuing through youth – every single one of which provides an opportunity to intervene.
But we don’t… because the left/liberal side of the argument says people have the “right” to screw up not only their own lives but also that of their children. And the right/conservative view holds that such people are somehow “bad” and that the cost of their rehabilitation (which, if done properly, is expensive) shouldn’t be a burden on their taxes (I admit this is an over-simplification, but that seems to me to be the root of the respective perceptions).
So this impasse creates not only a budding Antoine Dixon but also scores of nascent victims, waiting for the moment when they’re unlucky enough to cross his path.
All “three strikes” does is build an impregnable door to slam shut well after the horse has bolted. It’s the coward’s way out unless it’s the end point of a comprehensive intervention which can, if necessary, begin at birth. Yes, CYF are snatching a handful of children from the jaws of disaster… but ask any foster parent about the support they receive. Or the children themselves. We need to do so much more, yet all we’re doing is building more prisons and waiting for them to fill them.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Rex Widerstorm wrote “but ask any foster parent about the support they receive.”
This “SUPPORT” you talk of, you must be joking. Caregivers with 20+ years of experiance and track record of looking after HUNDREDS of kids have been driven out of the field by “UNFOUNDED” allegations by 14-15 year olds with an axe to grind. What was the response to this by the Agency involved you ask? A fair minded investigation of the allegation by unbiased professionals? Not so much! Pull the kids and an investigation that was held behind closed office doors for 5 days without contact with the caregivers. Three weeks of bullshit meetings and eventually the kid admitted that the allegation was made up because the caregiver had asked them to do some dishes. No apology, no recompense for the financial impact of 3 weeks with no income, and to top if off the same round about 4 months later with the same result.
The caregivers chucked it in surprise surprise and we wonder why there is a shortage of residential beds for youth at risk in NZ?
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 4:18 pm
MikeMan: I was.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 4:33 pm
Cool dude. Sorry this subject is a little close to home. Watching my parents and a lot of their peers be treated as no-bodys by snot-nosed recent graduates from university who know it all with their great life experiance from living at homes for all but 1 year. Watching lots of good people thrown on the rubbish pile because they dared to call social workers performance into question when there are clear issues with the way a case has been handled.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 4:35 pm
There’s an implicit assumption here, which is that CYFs care is better.
My understanding from a worker there is that CYFs is utterly dysfunctional – badly understaffed, low morale among workers, and badly underpays its child carers, who in many cases deliver only marginally better care than the abusive parents.
Simply because there is an agency that is set up to deal with delinquent parents is no guarantee that the care it does arrange is any good. Providing care that is only a bit better than abusive parents isn’t nearly good enough.
I’d like to see CYFS remade from the ground up. Work out the budget required to deal with the incredibly difficult problems it deals with, and execute properly. Pay good wages, get enough staff with the skills required, and then actually make a difference.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 4:47 pm
ben, CYFS will NEVER be effective when they work to the feminist ideology. Fact. How many examples would you like Minister!! Oh yes, before billy borker starts I am a CYFS approved care giver.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 4:58 pm
To be honest the scale of the issue is insane. You can see the shrinking budgets by the kids that came in, the problems got worse and worse as the threshold for taking someone into care got higher and higher with shrinking budgets. Another major issue WAS (and I am not sure if this is still the case) the old DSW handled child care and benefits from a single budget. The child care portion of that budget was in most years less than 4% of the total. You had site managers who have financial bonuses based on meeting financial targets rather than care targets. You have social workers with 40+ cases to handle, the guidelines used to say at least one meeting with the child and family every two weeks, that is now every two months if you are lucky. Because of this environment CYF social workers are mostly grads with less than 5 years experiance and a few old hands at senior and practice leader levels. After 5 years if they are not yet seniors most go into other organisations where the workload is lower and the pay better. That being said the social workers get a MUCH better deal than the caregivers. The financial side of the business is a mess, $140 a week to house, feed and care for a teenager is just stupid, even worse in residential units where it is a full time job for two people to care for 4-6 clients. 28 days on and 2 days a month off. Minimal support and oversight. Yeah it is a mess.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Mikeman; why does CYFS completely shut out the paternal family 90% of the time when a child is placed in their care? Thanks sisterhood. Have another one Ruth !! A paternal bond refers to the relationship between a father and his child. Say no more. The damage to society caused by fatherlessness is so obvious even a stoned up phool can see it !~!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:13 pm
D4J, yes I can believe that’s true. Putting a government agency with power of coercion in a position of making value judgments will, I suspect, unavoidably lead to ideology one way or another. An alternative is to get government out entirely and let charitable organisations take over. That may lead to better care but without the right to forcibly take children away from abusive parents these organiusations may not be effective.
Truly, a difficult problem.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:17 pm
ben, just imagine people working to put families back together, devoid of any sinister agendas who were working with compassion trying to avoid most conflicts that might seriously impact on any innocent children. Lawyers, counsellors and psychologists would scream blue murder!
Section that kid judge! When will we learn? No wonder we are gold medalists at CHILD ABUSE!!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Oh great, here we have yet another expansion in the role of government specifically to cope with the legacy of social problems brought about by too much government and bad government in the first place.
Why o why can’t people just admit that introducing the DPB in the first place, was wrong, wrong, wrong, and the total costs, both direct and consequential, of that alone, (let alone all the other reprehensible “entitlements”) are paramount among the burdens that are in the process of breaking our economy and those of similarly benighted post-Christian western nations.
Charles Murray is right. There are good sound societal survival reasons for the stigmatisation of childbearing outside of the father-and-mother family structure. There should be a cultural Darwin award, and it should be awarded to all nations with a DPB.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:21 pm
“Charles Murray is right. There are good sound societal survival reasons for the stigmatisation of childbearing outside of the father-and-mother family structure. There should be a cultural Darwin award, and it should be awarded to all nations with a DPB.”
Nice, Phil! Spoken like someone who has clearly never met a hard-working and honest solo mum.
They’re all just dirty little slappers and whores, aren’t they?
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Even ones who (to take a real example) run the huge personal risk of driving around with an uninsured car because they spend every dollar they earn on renting a place near a good school for the child, and on daycare for the child so that they can work 45-50 hour weeks trying desperately to pay for it all.
But in your estimation they’re just unworthy low life and deserve our stigma, not our help.
Truly you are an offensive and ignorant c*nt head sometimes. Your God smiles on your presumed right to judge everyone else, no doubt?
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:31 pm
D4J my parents shook up the child care environment in NZ back in the early 1980′s when working for the Methodist Mission. They demanded and got the ability to work with the kids, the familys, the social workers and whatever professionals (psychologists, counsellors and lawyers) to work towards reintegrating the family unit and two years later the sucsess rate was over 80%!
They setup and ran the first, residential, teenage only family home in NZ with 6-8 clients, my self and my brother and them in residence and it WORKED!.
But the level of clients and the steady decline in the level of social work (Less experianced social workers with HUGE case loads) has made that almost non-existent now.
Phil
I believe in a benefit system that allows you (within certain limits) to pull 50% of your total tax contribution over the last 10 years as assistence if needed to cover unemployment and sickness. After that carry health and income protection insurance. DPB should be severly curtailed, no additional funds for additional kids after starting DPB, if you have no income but DPB do not breed further it is that simple. I understand that shit happens and the state should help but it should be help not a lifestyle, DPB should cover the outcome of a broken relationship with kids. It should not be a professional choice for under-educated females with 7-8 kids from multiple partners and large dollops of our tax dollars are currently going there.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:42 pm
NZ Govt aiding and abetting the destruction of our **Whole Natural Biological FAMILIES** continues wholesale under National
MP – NZ – the Hon. Paula Bennett – National – Waitakere – Minister for MSD
Minister Bennett,
Time to listen to your VOTERS
NZ Govt aiding and abetting the destruction of our **Whole Natural Biological FAMILIES** continues wholesale under National.
According to;
• http://www.cyfstalk.org
• http://ration-shed.blogspot.com
• http://www.panic.org.nz
• http://rationshed2.blogspot.com
• http://watchingcyfs.wordpress.com
• http://dad4justice.blogspot.com/2009/01/357-children-die-after-cyfs-notified.html
• http://www.petitiononline.com/cyfsnz/petition.html
• http://tvnz.co.nz/content/31107
• http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2007/01/a_cyfs_story.html
• http://groups.yahoo.com/group/watchingcyfs
• Many, many more have spoken against MSD – CYFS – WINZ etc
Has the new Minister for MSD got what it will take to fire Peter Hughs and get rid of the other HELENGrad appointees?
Onward – Ration Shed – Jim
At this time our main focus is to Build the **Equal Parenting **Petition to Strengthen **Equal Parenting** Orgs World-Wide and to Build new ones where there are none. Please consider hosting the petition on your websites and of course signing it.
Go – http://petitionthem .com/default. asp?sect= detail&pet=4275
As we move toward Easter – Do something extra for lent – Be of mind that 2000+ years ago Jesus was in the desert at this time being tempted by the Devil himself which lasted 40 days – Yet he chose to walk in obedience all the way to the cross for you and me – WOW what a saviour!!!
““““““““““““““`
GO – http://www.stuff.co.nz/4864585a11.html
More new babies taken from mothers
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 5:50 pm
oob, maths not your strong point dear boy ?
I notice less than 10% of maori are unemployed.
Philbest, you would not want the DPB for a friend of mine who lost her husband from cancer ?
Vote:What do you suggest, putting the four kids up for auction since they are all under five ?
One thing I notice, those who judge women so harshly after they lose their husbands from illness are never around to offer help to the same said women.
Of course the blokes who insulated all her house were all socialistic types, must be a lesson in that.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:58 pm
RatBiter: PhilBest said nothing to warrant such an unfair and poisonous attack. Calm down and reread what he actually said.
Nowhere did he say anything to suggest that he is ‘like someone who has clearly never met a hard-working and honest solo mum’ or that ‘they’re all just dirty little slappers and whores,’ never mind your less printable accusations.
If you had an ounce of logic in amongst all that bile, you’d understand that it’s quite possible to admire some solo mums and still know that the system is deeply flawed.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 6:50 pm
dad4justice (4896) Vote: 4 2 Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Oh yes, before billy borker starts I am a CYFS approved care giver.
Don’t know about you, but I didn’t need approval from CYFS to be a good dad to my kids.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 6:57 pm
fugley or should I say billy porker – stan pig.Anyway, I care for other peoples children, as well as my own biological kids. Can you please stop with the malicious phone calls because you are making the children frightened! You ####!!!!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Ansell, are you aware of who James Murray is? if you were, you may understand why ratbiter finds read such a dumb fuck at times.
Read expects us to take lessons on the family from a bloke who couldn’t keep his OWN marriage together.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 6:59 pm
oob, maths not your strong point dear boy ? I notice less than 10% of maori are unemployed.
Dear Grumpy,
That’s weak baby. Come back to me when you can say that 90% of Maori are productive, law-abiding citizens.
You know, as I know, as well all know; there are serious social issues that disproportionately involve Maori and that it is well past time for Maori as a community to take some responsibility and start to measure up.
No more handouts, no more ghetto-fabulous; law-abiding and productive.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:01 pm
dad4justice -
1. I am angry that you constantly abuse me for my physical appearance. I am quite handsome, truth be known.
2. In case you didn’t know, Stan is a character in South Park, I am a character in several books of short stories.
3. What malicious phone calls? Give me your phone number and I’ll take you off my list of People I Must Phone And Abuse Today. Its a big list, so it may take time.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:02 pm
billyborker (284) 0 0 Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Ansell, are you aware of who James Murray is? if you were, you may understand why ratbiter finds read such a dumb fuck at times.
Read expects us to take lessons on the family from a bloke who couldn’t keep his OWN marriage together.
In above, delete read insert PhilBest; don’t know waht came over me, I think the pain of being labelled fugley by d4j.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:03 pm
…there are serious social issues that disproportionately involve Maori and that it is well past time for Maori as a community to take some responsibility and start to measure up.
How odd, I thought maori shared the same community as the rest of us.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Hey good folk Team from tbr blog doesn’t billy porker write just like fugley. The xtian tag gave it away. You owe me a jug Mac. I told you this twisted old fart is the one and same. Quite scary that such hateful people exist in New Zealand. Lefty’s like this should be, well??
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:15 pm
Sorry d4j, I don’t have time to answer you now, I have a stack of malicious phone calls to get through – better takes yours off the hook or have your whistle ready!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:17 pm
I have made my point fugley.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:22 pm
Didn’t realise you ever HAD a point. In fact, I always thought your posts were pointless. Anyway, back to my malicious phone calling. You can just go back to wondering why I have a happy family life with wife, children, dog, home and you …
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:25 pm
You can just go back to wondering why I have a happy family life with wife, children, dog, home and you …
We don’t have to wonder billyborker, we know already; it’s us taxpayers after all that are writing the cheques to support your lifestyle choices.
Get off welfare! Get a job! Stop committing crime! Produce more than you consume!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 7:52 pm
not quite, oob, my lifestyle choices require a lot more $ than I could get on a benefit.
I guess you, like d4j, are just jealous of people like me who can succeed in this life, can have everything I need, and most of what I want, while wasting your own time as sad little fucks with nothing in this life, hoping for something better in the next, terrified of going to your grave
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:00 pm
“I guess you, like d4j, are just jealous of people like me”
That line is written by somebody with a mental disorder.
Your obsession with me toxic fugley is pathetic and rather frustrating to most blog readers. You are so full of hate, can you EVER get a good nights sleep? Don’t answer that sewer rat. What a crackpot keyboard nutbar. Unbelievable.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:06 pm
Its all right dad, you’re still on my list, I didn’t forget you, your phone call is on its way…
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:10 pm
James
Your post at 3.32 is outstanding, whats more there is proof to support what you say, that proof comes from the good old USA.
Back when Billy Bob Clinton was the President he introduced tough new measures around welfare, he made it near impossible to be on welfare for life and he also drastically cut funding for single unmarried mothers (as apposed to those who found themselves widowed or divorced)
Billy Bob argued quite rightly that there was a growing number of woman who chose to get pregnant time after time safe in the knowledge that the state would pick up the tab, the figures proved that the rate of unmarried mothers was continuing to grow year on year and that the kids of these mothers made up 80% of the prison population in the USA.
So Billy Bob cut the funding…….almost overnight the number of unmarried women getting pregnant started to drop away and has remained constant now for many years.
Billy Bob Clinton proved cutting funding (the USA version of the DPB) works, there is no reason why we cannot do the same here in NZ.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:16 pm
billy
I am glad you have done well and no doubt you pay a lot of tax, I suspect (unless you are a hypocrite) that you also pay extra tax because your political beliefs deem that is a vital part of a “just society”
But can you tell me this, why is it that the left feel they have the right to determine how much of my money I get to keep? and why on earth do they think they can spend my money better than me where the track record proves this to be untrue?
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:18 pm
“Quite scary that such hateful people exist in New Zealand”
That is one of the funniest lines I have ever read on this blog when you consider who wrote it.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:33 pm
I guess you, like d4j, are just jealous of people like me who can succeed in this life, can have everything I need, and most of what I want, while wasting your own time as sad little fucks with nothing in this life, hoping for something better in the next, terrified of going to your grave
Jesus H Christ Borker, you need professional help.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Seriously.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:41 pm
“That is one of the funniest lines I have ever read on this blog when you consider who wrote it.”
Get some similar help big blouse.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:45 pm
dad4justice,
Have a look at these web sites and set up a phone record to disk system.
If you are being targeted you may as well start a log history and nail this
bastard.
Who knows you my well be protecting others simply by bringing documentary
evidence to the the notice of the Police.
J Key may well be the catalyst that brings good policing back into favour.
If cost is a problem let me know.
.VoiceRecorders.com.au
Vote:.orb.co.nz/
.Cackle.co.nz
.2Talk.co.nz
(put the www in front of the .)
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Thank you David Baigent. Police are well aware of my problems due to blogging. All will be sorted in due time.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 8:58 pm
big bruv (2784) Vote: 1 1 Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:16 pm
billy
I am glad you have done well and no doubt you pay a lot of tax, I suspect (unless you are a hypocrite) that you also pay extra tax because your political beliefs deem that is a vital part of a “just society”
I pay the tax that is due to be paid, under the law of the land. At the election before last, I considered how much better off i would have been with Brash’s proposed tax cuts. Then decided I didn’t like the sort of society Brash wanted to create.
But can you tell me this, why is it that the left feel they have the right to determine how much of my money I get to keep? and why on earth do they think they can spend my money better than me where the track record proves this to be untrue?
Can you tell me why people on the right are so stupid that they don’t see right wing governments have a much worse tax record than left ones?
For example, John Howard was Australia’s biggets taxing PM. Ronald Reagan was the biggest wastrel of all US presidents to date, although Obama does look set to out do him.
And don’t forget all those shiny new trains Bill English has just added to his train set,
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:09 pm
Re: oob, @ 3:19
Licensing for parents would never work – it is completely unworkable.
Let’s say a couple get pregnant without a license. Do we make them undergo a forced abortion? I would hope not.
Okay, do we fine them or throw them in jail as punishment? Wouldn’t this defeat the whole purpose of a license, to protect the children, if you reduced the financial freedom of the parents, or locked them up and consequently have them lose their jobs? You’d have a law that actually made the situation it was trying to prevent worse.
So, then, what? Do we outlaw having sex without a license, to stop the problem at the source?
Good luck with that.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Oh, and that was the most reasonable part of your post. Funny though.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Billy
Happy to answer your questions when you answer mine, go on, break the habit of a lifetime and stand up for the failed ideology you so desperately believe in….
Oh hang on, perhaps you don’t as you admit to not paying any more tax than you must.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Licensing for parents would never work – it is completely unworkable.
Use your imagination. Here’s one incentive method;
Licensed parents get a [tax break/free childcare/free immunisation/whatever] unlicensed parents don’t.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:24 pm
D4J – I care for other peoples children
ohmigod that’s such a worry, the violence you demonstrate on here!
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
So we exacerbate the problem and increase the divide? Check.
PS Every thing you mention is exactly the same as fining the unlicensed parents = children further disadvantaged = problem made worse.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:30 pm
I have no qualms with closer supervision of “troubled” families, those aims are laudable, my beef is against using a marxist infiltrated government department to do that. The only goal of Kiro and co. is to infiltrate the lives of all New Zealand families and put us under their thumbs to repeat the proven follies of socialism. If any remedies are truly needed, it would be wise to root out any government appointees with socialist tendencies and replace them with people with a sound, conservative grip on reality. Then for those government departments to turn welfare roles over to the church, charities & families.
This solution was touted by James above, who advocated a “Return welfare to a voluntary charitible situation”. This is where the church, charities and families were involved earlier in the twentieth century and, despite MJ Savages (wonderful Christian man) welfare changes, this is where those institutions need to step up to the plate and take back this area of society. Leftist welfarism is a failure, always has been, always will be.
That said, using some emotional female’s blubbering over a sadistic arseholes dysfunctional childhood, is just silly Farrar.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 pm
So we exacerbate the problem and increase the divide? Check.
We reward those that are fit to parent and discourage the shallow-end of the gene pool from chosing procreation as a career.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 pm
atheist are you billy borker or big blouse? Who cares, either way get a life. Trevor Mallard had a good point the other day, cowards do excel on the internet.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:36 pm
I think Billyborkers confession @7.01 is at least something
“I am a character in several books of short stories.”
They must be incredibly short
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:36 pm
D4J “cowards do excel on the internet.”
hahahaha brilliant. Go and look up the word “irony” LOL. Are you going to threaten to come round and thump me now LOL
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Has he not done that yet Atheist?
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:40 pm
BB – nah still waiting.
I mean, you can’t expect a narcissist like D4J to realise that when he’s hearing the same things from a variety of quarters they just might be true….
Vote:Hey, according to him, we are meant to be the same person even though we’ve disagreed on things before??! Maybe we’ve got a split personality
March 2nd, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Grow up atheist big blouse.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:47 pm
D4J
When the night comes……do you hear voices?
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 9:49 pm
You are one weird coward big blouse. What a nutbar you are.
Vote:Get a life you keyboard wimps. Press the karma button you freak.
Kind regards
Peter Burns
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:13 pm
When the night comes……do you hear voices?
Only mine, on the end of the phone ….
And Christy, in his dreams….
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Whatever fugley.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 10:26 pm
DPF says: “It was a salient reminder that so much of our crime (and “underclass”) is due to abusive childhoods”
Can you provide a link to back that comment up please?
Vote:Linda Axford
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:31 pm
.
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 10:32 pm
there you go alladin, d4j and the missing link,
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 10:38 pm
or maybe he’s just run out of ink, very unusual for d4j
Vote:March 2nd, 2009 at 11:59 pm
oob
Please define “shallow end of the gene pool” in a way that doesn’t seem to automatically equate people without much money as being undeserving of the basic human right to reproduce.
I’m sympathetic for the desperate need to control youth crime and to break generational dependence on welfare, but I don’t see how anyone to could accept a world where other people get to decide who is “worthy” enough to have kids in the first place. I find it funny how the right wing bemoan (justly) the idea of a nanny state but then happily dive in with suggestions such as sterilization and the government preventing people from reproducing. Makes no earthly sense to me. At all.
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 5:59 am
Please define “shallow end of the gene pool” in a way that doesn’t seem to automatically equate people without much money as being undeserving of the basic human right to reproduce.
Consider natural selection.
Right now, our species is being polluted because artificial mechanisms, like the DPB, replace “survival of the fittest” with “survival for the weakest.”
Take away the incentives for the underclass to breed and simply let nature run its course.
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 7:16 am
So, what’s the underclass then in your rosy little world? Those with brown skin? Those earning less than $40,000? Those who didn’t vote National in the last election?
Reducing the DPB is one thing, because no-one has the natural right to be supported by others for doing nothing (though a society is certianly able to agree that there are some people who do need help from time to time), but this is a million miles removed from the idea of expressly penalizing of preventing a certain type of people from HAVING KIDS simply because you assume they can’t raise them. This is why licensing is a morally corrupt idea, plus completely unworkable. But I guess you know this, as you’ve subtlely changed the focus of your argument. So all is not lost for you.
Have a good day. Look out for that underclass!
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 7:36 am
Hmm, *transmogrifier scratches barely formed beard in a way he considers would appear scholarly in a B&W movie*, perhaps if I opine that opposition A has “changed the focus” of their “argument” then it will appear as if I have the intellectual high ground on opposition A.
You scrote transmogrifier; you are a genetic cul-de-sac.
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 7:52 am
this is a million miles removed from the idea of expressly penalizing of preventing a certain type of people from HAVING KIDS simply because you assume they can’t raise them.
You struggle with comprehension. Where I speak of “discouraging” you interpret “prevention.” I suspect that this shortcoming is the defining characteristic of the Labour electorate.
Reducing the DPB is one thing, because no-one has the natural right to be supported by others for doing nothing
Convincing the Labour-voting and Green-voting imbeciles of this country of that fact is the point of my initial post.
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 11:56 am
Yep, get the knee-jerk Marxists going. When we introduced the DPB, how many people qualified for it? How many people were on it 3 years later?
This is not charitability, this is cultural Darwin award stuff.
What we had before that was charitability. Cases of genuine need were few and were provided for by family or charitable institutions, or even by government provided benefits with a “good character” requirement.
The DPB as introduced by the Labour government in the 1970′s, was not about charitability. It was about radical feminist ideology entitling women to a lifestyle that was and is destructive to the children they would bear, and to society, and to generations of young men no longer expected to exercise the responsibilities of fatherhood.
GrumpyOldHori, it is your type who should be the most regretful of all about the destruction of the old Maori Iwi tradition by the DPB.
I would have nothing against retaining the “domestic purposes benefit” WITH a reinstatement of the one-time requirement for recipients to be “of good character”; in fact the same once applied to ALL welfare and should be reapplied.
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 12:21 pm
expat
Thanks for your input. Most appreciated. Maybe if you actually read the debate and had something worthwhile to add then it would be even better. I love a good insult every now and then, but they have to be amusing and intelligent. Still, practice makes perfect.
oob
Suspect all you want, though if you can’t even guess what party I voted for correctly, then you’re pretty much wasting your time. Still, stereotyping sure beats thinking every now and then, doesn’t it?
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 pm
“The impact of the abortion revolution may be too vast to assess immediately. It should usher in an era when every child will be wanted, loved, and properly cared for; when the incidence of infanticides and battered children should be sharply reduced.” Larry Lader. “The Abortion Revolution.” The Humanist, May/June 1973, page 4
Another of the left’s bad ideas – like welfare. Fortunately, success to them is measured by their political ascendency, not success in an objective sense. So long as there is still a society left to destroy, they will find truck for their misguided policies.
Let’s face it: They’ve been riding the wave of social disintegration for decades, justified by the rationalisations of failed human beings like Helen Clark and the other radical leftists who have invented such gems as “children don’t need fathers any more”, “marriage is an out-moded tradition” and “there is no such thing as right or wrong”. How convenient!
Vote:March 3rd, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Financial incentives for long term beneficiaries to undergo tubal ligation would help stop this cycle of disaster.
Vote: