Laws on Welfare

September 20th, 2009 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Michael has avoided the “h” issue in his SST column and insteads talks welfare:

LAST week 70 NGOs – mostly voluntary and agencies – met in Auckland to declare war on child . But not in the Cameroon nor Colombia, Niue nor Nicaragua.

In good old New Zealand.

According to their later communique, chaired by Barnardo’s chief executive Murray Edridge, more than 220,000 Kiwi kids live in direct poverty as a result of their parents being dependent upon a welfare benefit. And because the value of a benefit “is way below the poverty level”, the NGO summit demanded an immediate increase, plus tertiary training incentives, and the provision of breakfast in all decile 1 and 2 schools.

The best thing is for a parent to move off the welfare benefit and into the workforce. New Zealand has a huge fiscal deficit and the notion that we can afford to pay people more money to not work is madness. We need more people in work.

“We want our kids to be barristers, not baristas!” declared chairwoman Ani Pitman. They didn’t want them doing “menial jobs”.

All that is wrong with New Zealand, the welfare system and NGOs was probably summarised in that last point. Better to be on the dole than in a menial job. Better being a criminal defender than a skilled worker. And if none of these options are immediately at hand then just give us more money.

Almost any job will make you better off than being on welfare. And not just about the money. I’ve worked as a cleaner to earn $1.99 an hour.

This calculated and continuing attack on the taxpaying workers of this country demands reply, not simply to respond to the silly sophistry of this latest gimme summit, but because it refuses to address the real cause of all child deprivation in this country: their parents.

There is not one child in this country who should be going to school without breakfast. If there is, then that is a mandatory call to CYF. Clearly, the parent or parents are unworthy of the name.

Similarly, if the welfare benefit is not enough to house, feed and clothe your kiddies then there are two possibilities. First, the parents in the equation are smoking, drinking, gambling or huffing the taxpayer money intended for their children. Or, second, that their boyfriends are. Either way, it is testimony of child abuse and neglect, not child poverty.

Laws over-generalises here, but his point is basically sound. There are times when a family does get hit with an exceptionally large one expense such as a medical or dental bill. However there are grants and loans from WINZ to cover such situations. The welfare system does not give a life of luxury, but it is certainly enough for the vast majority of families on it to give their kids breakfast. Breakfast does not cost a lot. it is about priorities.

Except for those permanently incapacitated by injury or mental illness, the welfare benefit is a bridge. From independence to independence, not from sob story to lifestyle. That the summit NGOs don’t get this is the reason why NGOs exist: to create a need and then to amplify it.

And for those permanently incapacitated, I don’t think we do enough.

Yes, it’s true that New Zealand has more unskilled labour than we have jobs. But even those unskilled and I use my council’s litter and graffiti teams as an example perform valuable community service. They are probably of greater value to my city than the entire legal fraternity. But, according to the summit, these are unworthy and menial occupations.

Heh. Poor lawyers. Always picked on.

This country’s welfare system does not deliver poverty. Rather it rescues people from it. It is generous on any international scale and probably to a fault. And it is neither the cause nor the solution of our country’s underprivileged, undernourished and underloved children.

That exclusive responsibility rests with the people who brought them into the world, and the people responsible for their ongoing “care”. This country has too many crap parents. End of story. Until we start facing that reality, we will continue to blight the lives of those we most profess to care for.

Hard to disagree with that conclusion, even though I am sure many will try.

Tags: , ,

121 Responses to “Laws on Welfare”

  1. tvb (4,262 comments) says:

    This country has a welfare system that is too easy to enter by having a baby and then raising it in welfare induced poverty. In other words our welfare system may be increasing the number of children being raised in poverty. And because children are being produced for “economic” reasons that may be causing the abuse of children. That is they are not really wanted but are being used to get money. By thinking the unthinkable on welfare we may in fact reduce abuse and children being raised in poverty. As for Laws the “h” debate is all about race and this column hard on the heals of that to me is saying one thing. The subtle connection of the two issues is Laws subliminally raising the issue of maori and welfare.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. bchapman (649 comments) says:

    Excellent post tvb

    Don’t know if there is any easy answer to welfare dependence but it is definitely worth tackling. The education system has to play some part but they are really up against it. When you get families with 3-4 generations of welfare dependents living in them it must be very difficult for schools to motivate kids to think about a future career.

    Not paying parents to have kids would be agod start though. Getting ALL kids into pre-school would also be high on my list. Then we can look at changing cultural expecatations.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. side show bob (3,660 comments) says:

    Yeah go Michael!!. The fucking madness has to stop. The bloody left with their bloody handouts have destroyed this country and yet these pricks call out for more. It must be clear to all but the totally stupid the system does not work. Sadly it’s not the very stupid still pushing further welfare polices. It’s the pricks that rely on providing these welfare services that have the most to lose, they should be the first sent out to look for a real job. But no I bet the National Socialists will fold under pressure and get the cheque book out. Of course it won’t work, things will only get worst and once again another conference will be called and those silly enough left to pay the bills will be screwed over once again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Who the fuck listens to that lying prick anymore ?

    Laws, take your mascara and just fuck off….., go join Winston….

    BTW, who really gives a shit about Wanganui…Whanganui ????, about as relevent to the country as Auckland Grammar and that other team.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. dimmocrazy (286 comments) says:

    Head over to Lindsay Mitchell’s blog, who has just posted a number of entries on this conference and some statistics showing where some of this problem originates. It’s the welfare system itself that is trapping people into it.
    Don’t be mistaken about this though, this is a well documented way of advancing a socialist/marxist agenda.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Seán (397 comments) says:

    When _is_ Laws going to focus on local body issues in Wanganui? Rodney Hide made it clear he didn’t want local bodies interfering in social issues so “Laws the Ego” should just STFU. He needs to be reminded is got kicked out of National.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    So Ani Pitman (from the Northland-based Amokura Family Violence Prevention Strategy) who has failed to make any impact on family violence now says the root of all evil is the size of the state handouts – rather than why anyone chooses to be on benefits in the first place

    riveting stuff – who funded this NGO summit? – was it MSD? (I mean us)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. bill hicks (100 comments) says:

    Laws is right.Until we work the welfare system out,and stop people wasting there FREE money on booze,drugs and tribal tattoos….be it maori of white new zealanders this money train is never going to stop at the station.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    so that’s ‘it’..then..dpf..?

    no need to do anything about the facts of those oecd child povert stats..?

    that have us at the bottom….

    eh..?

    just rely on/hang off..the wisdoms of michael laws..

    and your own status as ‘expert’ on the realities of that child-poverty life..eh..?

    ‘nothing to see here..!’..

    eh..?

    just bash on some ‘bad-parents.’.

    and equate/smear the many ‘good’ parents..who through luck/circumstance/w.h.y..

    find themselves forced into that child-poverty-life..

    and how about those oecd stats..?..eh..?

    something to hold our heads high about in the international arena..eh..?

    (no..!..no..!..don’t look there..!..over there..!..look..!..pretty scenery!’..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    [DPF: If those who were capable of work, decided to enter the workforce and go off welfare, there would be more money for those genuinely in need]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    Phool – did you like this bit;

    “The best thing is for a parent to move off the welfare benefit and into the workforce. New Zealand has a huge fiscal deficit and the notion that we can afford to pay people more money to not work is madness.”

    ‘work’ – Phools four letter word …eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. kiwirights (48 comments) says:

    Baying wolves again, attacking beneficiaries. The increased numbers on the dole will almost certainly not be people unwilling to work – by the very fact that they must have been recently employed. If you want to see what happens without the dole, go to India or other third world countries – its horrifying. Manage the dole better, but don’t screech about evil beneficiaries or those trying to make suggestions (good or otherwise) to improve how money is paid out to maximum benefit.

    Laws is a sad git really. Such a manipulative populist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    and side show bob a.k.a..’bloody-hands-bob’..

    is a laws-fan..

    (heh..!..

    ..figures..!..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Laws is stating what every redneck already thinks

    “First, the parents in the equation are smoking, drinking, gambling or huffing the taxpayer money intended for their children. Or, second, that their boyfriends are. Either way, it is testimony of child abuse and neglect, not child poverty”

    You start to over-generalise, you become Winston.

    Stick to your mutual masterbation of the long time listener, first-time caller

    Has he blamed Asians yet ?

    Make you all happy now ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    That is some serious Irony “deceleration of war” one would hope they have the ability to carry out such a metaphor rather than demanding someone do something about the perceived situation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Who would have expected philu to be having his moment supporting Whelfare ?

    Come on philu, many of us here pay for you to enjoy your lifestyle, we know you are not going to like hearing that there are people like you who rort the system. Learn when to STFU.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. radvad (706 comments) says:

    Why not be a crap parent when other people are forced to pay for your lifestyle and stupid decisions and there are wowsers like these people demanding that they be given more?
    Change incentives and you change behaviour. It’s simple.
    Social justice must work for everybody, both benefactors and beneficiaries, otherwise it is not justice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. MT_Tinman (3,055 comments) says:

    It’s not a problem because the commynists don’t like the fellow who highlights it?

    Or is it not a problem because without the beneficiary receiving, welfare dependent losers the commynists wouldn’t have any support at all?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. reid (16,111 comments) says:

    Hey phil, just because there IS a correlation between poverty and crap parenting doesn’t mean there HAS to be.

    That’s the point, and FFS, it’s not rocket science. Stop being angry, and educate yourself and your children. That’s all you have to do to get out of that trap. Poor people have every bit as much opportunity to adopt those attitudes as you or I. The fact they don’t, is a failing on our part to explain to them how simple it is to change their life.

    IF this country was like say, any SE Asian country where children beg and families live in rubbish tips and there is no ubiquitous free quality education available, then I’d agree with you. But it’s not like that and therefore, the only reason poor people remain in poverty is because they’re ignorant, not because they’re consigned to by some fantastic set of circumstance and fate.

    The fact that no lefty I’ve ever met apart from the cynical ones, can get that simple reality through their thick skulls, is the main reason why I hold their politics in complete and utter contempt. I do like [some of] them as people though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    So why are other people ‘forced’ to pay for their lifestyle ?

    They are not, they pay tax. It is the politicians who make the decisions, not the taxpayers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Fuck…
    I am “forced” to pay for someone doing a BA. The worlds most useless degree ever.

    Its so unjust

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    philu

    Is being a perpetual work dodger yourself making a difference to NZ’s child poverty OECD statistics? Some people contribute money to the consolidated fund that allows the govt to spend money on reducing child poverty. It’s all very well you are highly concerned about the subject, as many of us are, but you will have more grounds to dictate how we manage the problem if you start contributing to the cost of the solution.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    What I do not understand is why the dole bludgers like the National Party so much.

    Under Muldoon the growth in their numbers was huge. Under John Key the number of bludgers has increased by up to 2,000 each week. And under Helen so many of them seemed to disappear. At one stage only 4% of the workforce were unemployed and many of these people were workers in between jobs.

    So why did all the bludgers disappear and where did they disappear to? And why are they coming back in such numbers now?

    ; )

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Fuck

    I am “forced” to pay for Bill English’s house cleaner too

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    mickysavage

    Unsurprisingly you missed the lesson on cause and effect. See 1990 and 2008 both share a common factor. Both years were where National took the govt from a Labour party that had managed the economy into a recession after vastly increasing govt spending in an attempt to buy successive terms of govt. Both times undeclared debts and economic shit-holes were dumped on the incoming govt because the Labour govt decided it was better to shut up about the looming disaster because they would rather win the election than be honest with the voters.

    Keep up micky, what we are seeing now is the failed policies of the 90′s 2K’s coming home to roost.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Dirty Rat

    Yes you are – and judging by the commotion that supporters of big govt and corruption are making about it – clearly it’s not a popular thing to pay for.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Burt

    If I had known the Labor party had forced the world into the recession in 2008 and 1987, then I would jolly well give Cullen a kick in the bottom.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    Society has done away with disapproval and shame. We’re not supposed to judge. It’s wrong. But that’s too simplistic. Disapproval and expectations go hand-in-hand and by removing shame we’ve lost a powerful motivating force. Not helped by the government offering a cornucopia of handouts (sorry, entitlements) to encourage people to live off the labours of others.

    I’m trying in my own little way to rectify the problem. Last week a friend mentioned he went straight onto the workseekers allowance (or whatever the hell it’s called) when we returned from his OE. I said “You’re a bludger and you should be ashamed of yourself”.

    Save NZ. Call someone a bludger today*.

    *Needless to say there are plenty of people in genuine need who can’t help themselves. I’m sure we can all tell the difference.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Dirty Rat

    You must be one of the most promising stars for the Labour party. You didn’t notice that NZ was in a domestic recession well before our trading partners and before the global economic crisis was even a sub prime mortgage crisis.

    Keep it up Dirty Rat, your ability to re-write history will make you a star contender for Labour leadership.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Burt
    I am also “forced” to pay for the Working Families Benefit as well.

    Can I force the taxpayer to pay for therapy for this.
    Its just so unjust

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    Burt

    “Unsurprisingly you missed the lesson on cause and effect. See 1990 and 2008 both share a common factor. Both years were where National took the govt from a Labour party that had managed the economy into a recession after vastly increasing govt spending in an attempt to buy successive terms of govt.”

    Straight out of the Crosby Textor manual. The process is like this:

    1. Is the change good? – Take credit
    2. Is the change bad? No matter what it is or who long ago it has been since National took over blame Labour.

    So Labour was responsible for drought AND Wall Street? Wow Helen was more powerful than even I thought she was.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Burt

    Are you rewriting history that the global recession was because of Roger Douglas and Michael Cullen ?

    The Asian crisis ten years ago, Shipleys’s fault ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Hells tits.

    The great depression.

    I blame MJS.

    Oil Shock, clearly Muldoons fault

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    no burt..you shouldn’t have crossed out that 90′s..eh..?

    and it is to labours eternal shame that they did not undo that gutting of welfare benefits by the freemarket-ideologues..richardson and shipley..

    that which drove all those people/children into poverty..

    (and at the same time..induced a recession..from all that money being taken from the poorest..

    (who of course..churn their payments straight back into the economy..in living expenses..)

    so..yep..!..the ‘failed policies of the 90′s’.. it was..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    mickysavage

    You come on here talking about how under National the unemployment rate go up then you claim that it’s Crosby Textor behaviour to claim the good stuff and blame the bad stuff on the other guys.

    It’s hard to call you human when you demonstrate a basic lack of being able to recognise your own reflection.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    Where were you when Kennedy was shot ?

    Who was in power in New Zealand ?

    Fuck LHO, it was that guy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. malcolm (2,000 comments) says:

    mickysavage wrote:

    ..And under Helen so many of them seemed to disappear. At one stage only 4% of the workforce were unemployed and many of these people were workers in between jobs.

    So why did all the bludgers disappear and where did they disappear to? And why are they coming back in such numbers now?

    Many disappeared into perpetual and useless training courses. Many moved onto the sickness benefit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    btw..what name d’yareckon laws posts under here..?

    which of the gibbering/drooling (anonymous) knuckle-draggers d’yareckon he is..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    philu

    How much you contributing to help the child poverty situation? Either through your time or your taxes. Clearly if you are not working you could be doing enormous amounts of voluntary work – are you ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    philu

    mickysave or Dirty Rat would be my pick – both are myopic and possibly just some form of counterbalance to a rabid fruit loop who wants to feel better about being unable to tie his own shoe laces.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    burt…!..is it you..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    kiwirights @ 11.39 am I find your reference to third world countries totally insulting. Those people may live in conditions we in the first world would describe as horrifying but they little choice. They also have a damn site more pride and self esteem than the bludgers and malingerers in this country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    burt

    what is myopic about my posts.

    Maybe you are Michael Laws.

    I take it as a compliment to being a counterbalance to you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    philu

    No, no chance. I’m nowhere near red neck enough and I have no issues with having Whanganui spelt how the locals want to spell it.

    You are still dodging my question so I’ll help you out a bit – answering the question is fun rather than work – there ya go, try it now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    you burt..could try basic literacy/legibility..

    eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    philu

    It’s OK if you suddenly feel ashamed at neither contributing taxes or time to a cause that you claim to be passionate about – other people will look after the issue for you and you can just shout from the couch how it should be done and why it is so important.

    But once you get over yourself – think about what you can do with all that time you have.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Bruv had a good point on this re: the telethon a few months ago.

    A charity set up for feeding clothing our poorest children?????
    The level of benefits in NZ (and availability of grants, accom supplement, WFF etc etc so on and so forth) are set so no child in New Zealand has to go hungry, there should be NO children without food and NO children without clothing and NO children without adequate housing.

    The fact that some children are going without simply means that dropkick parents are spending (our) dole money on tobacco, alcohol and drugs instead of necessities.
    Yes the charity sounds nice in practise, but in reality it would not exist if some useless parents just took some damn responsibility.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    And philu, I find it funny re my immediately previous post that you have proven my point for me, by arguing against it.

    You are the first to tell us that your son is adequately fed, housed and clothed with your vegan rants and the like.

    Let you have enough money left over from your taxpayer-funded stipend to purchase drugs?!?!?!?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    so..nckb..that oecd chid poverty stats-report.

    which specifically cited the low levels of state support as one of the main reasons for this poverty..

    that’s all just a crock..?

    eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Haha conveniently dodged the question…
    Ok, I’ll answer your question if you will answer a simple one from me.

    Q: Do you think you receive enough weekly support from the taxpayer to support yourself and your son? If not, why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    btw..nckb..

    ..how are your taxpayer funded/supported studies to become yet another scum-sucking leech of a lawyer coming along..?

    will you be out looking for victims soon..?

    just in time for the big crash..?

    (i told you you should have done that nurserymans course..eh..?)

    y’know..!..something useful..!

    your are going to be about as useful as tits on a bull..

    eh..?

    and all funded by low-income taxpayers..

    have you no shame..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Jack5 (4,920 comments) says:

    Welcome Dirty Rat. You have disproved the hitherto popular belief that there is no crazier fucked up leftist than Philu.

    Meanwhile Laws continues to sock it to lefty-liberal morons:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10598419

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    Burt

    “mickysavage

    You come on here talking about how under National the unemployment rate go up then you claim that it’s Crosby Textor behaviour to claim the good stuff and blame the bad stuff on the other guys.”

    I was actually trying to make two points:

    1. Labour is good for unemployment rates. Check the history.
    2. Most people do not choose to become unemployed. The proportion of these people who are “bludgers” is incredibly small. The combined kiwiblog angst looking for people to criticise is misplaced. Economic management rather than some sort of mass moral failing is the cause of unemployment and you should blame the Government, not the vast majority of ordinary kiwis who lose their job through reasons beyond their control.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. reid (16,111 comments) says:

    phil, the “failed policies of the ’90′s” is a political slogan which only truly stupid people actually believe.

    The reason Hulun didn’t change them is because they’re the best alternative, on balance to any other model.

    Having people prance gaily through the meadows in some fantasy utopia, is what lefties seem to be imagining when and if they actually believe that slogan.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    so reid..those oecd chid-poverty stats..?

    rubbish..?

    lefty-propaganda..?

    (i mean..the oecd is such a commie-front’..eh..?..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    I think the majority of working kiwis would agree that the comment made by nickb @ 12.32 pm pretty much sums up the situation we have in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    same question for you murray..

    those oecd child-poverty stats..?

    ..that have us as the worst..?

    commie-propaganda..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    They are going good phil, not too sure if I want to practise law yet, if I do I have decided it will most probably be in the area of tax law, any contribution to helping the middle class of NZ and SME’s of this country pay less to a thieving government and associated bludgers would make me feel like I was making a difference.

    And anyway, how about answering my question? Do you think you receive enough weekly support from the taxpayer to support yourself and your son? If not, why?

    On another note philu, if the OECD stats are correct, I would think they further back up what I am saying. The government can only punish child abuse, NZ is a case in point that the govt cannot do fuck all to prevent it while the welfare state is in existence, it perpetuates generations of dropkick parents who think hitting their kids is ok, throwing more money at the problem has only made it worse, after 40+ years of a universal welfare state child abuse is far worse that when it began.

    IMO anyway, the OECD is yet another trendy lefty one-world-order kind of body like the UN, any look at its website or works wil lshow reports on “social progress”, “social happiness” and reports such as “OECD chairman urges member states to protect jobs” etc etc.

    Sounds like the international branch of the Labour Party

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    ok..so it is ‘commie-front’..that oecd..eh..?

    (who knew..?..)

    and a ‘tax-lawyer’..eh..?

    oh..!..joy..!..joy..!..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    philu what the fuck are you doing about NZ’s dismal OECD stats, from what I can gather you are part of the problem, and far from being the solution.

    nickb – right again

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    Laws has succinctly identified one aspect of the problem.
    There is no doubt there are people who spend part of their money on booze, smokes, gambling, drugs etc. That isn’t an attack on beneficiaries it’s a statement of fact. I know people in this situation and they are not Maori either, they are white.

    These same people see the benefit as their way of life. They also resent it if you say to them maybe you should give up smoking/drinking and you could afford to do more things, they will say “it’s not my fault, why should I have to give up my small pleasures”? They have long ago given up any thought of looking for work and it is a mindset that is now entrenched among many.

    Now before I get attacked by the far left, I know it doesn’t apply to all beneficiaries. I don’t know what the percentages are but there are a few. (Sad when you have to put that statement in because of the myopic views of a view who can’t look at the topic objectively).

    Somehow the mindset amongst hard core beneficiaries has to be changed from defensive belief in entitlement to wanting to get out, contribute to the country and develop some self esteem. I also think a big part would be to find ways to work on building a feeling of identity and nationhood for everyone who lives here. There is way too much division and talk of Maori, Pakeha, Asians, Islanders etc etc. magnifies that.

    I speak from experience, I left a divided Northern Ireland in the mid 80′s after 5 years on a benefit and a period of feeling like that. I never enjoyed it and the job situation was particularly grim at the time so job options were limited, but something snapped in me and I moved to London to find work of some kind. I arrived without a job and door knocked for 2 days until I got one.

    Anyway, it eventually led me to this lovely neck of the woods so I personally think if you make an effort and get off your arse things usually happen for you!

    Not having enough real jobs doesn’t help matters. It’s a big problem that needs to be addressed and talking about it is a start. Bilious rantings from both extremes don’t really do anything to help.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Philu, I do enjoy arguing with you, even though it is usually painful and pointless, it is at least entertaining.

    But you do yourself no justice, and lose credibility, for every minute you do not answer my very simple question (which is central to the debate we are having, and the topic of this thread). In case you have forgotten from 5 minutes ago, I will state it again:

    Do you think you receive enough weekly support from the taxpayer to support yourself and your son? If not, why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    nickb – I think you will find the answer to your question a big fat NO. I worked in a pharmacy in a lower socioeconomic area for seven years. The majority of our customers were on one form of benefit or another. I have never met a more greedy ungrateful bunch in my entire life and I hope I never do again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    What really used to get me was when I told them how much tax I had to pay a week (enough to finance two dole bludgers) the standard response was “you earn it, you pay it”. I reduced myself to working a four day week on the strength of that statement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Rufus (648 comments) says:

    Phil – you won’t answer nickb’s question : “Do you think you receive enough weekly support from the taxpayer to support yourself and your son? If not, why?”

    A bit of shame perhaps?

    For all your fucked up posturing, deep down you know that you’re ripping the system off.

    You’re joke as a man and a father.

    Rufus

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    mickysavage

    The only two points you have thoroughly made are;

    1. You think National are bad.
    2. You think Labour are good.

    But hey, yes spending public money like a drunken sailor on job creating schemes will lower employment, sadly it also crashes the economy in the long term as productivity falls. Cue change of govt and the “nasty” party that needs to fix up the fuck up socialism created – again and again.

    But hey, keep wanting to see the economy ruined for the sake of having a red flag flying – it’s about the level of contempt for reason and logic we expect from people who support a failed ideology.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    “Bilious rantings from both extremes don’t really do anything to help.”

    Yes kaya, and I can’t see NZ ever having a government with enough balls to do what is necessary either.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. kaya (1,360 comments) says:

    mickysavage – “the proportion of these people who are “bludgers” is incredibly small.” Hard to quantify but I don’t think “incredibly small” is an accurate description.

    More to the point is whether what Laws said is accurate or not? If Philu’s reluctance to answer nickb’s question as to whether or not he has enough to feed himself and his son is anything to go by it would appear that Laws is correct, real poverty is not an issue in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Murray M

    It suits the two major parties to have a regular cycle of National-Labour-National-Labour… on and on. They get to both just fiddle with the fringe and then blame the bad hair cut on the last lot. It’s hard to imagine there are still intelligent people that haven’t notice that this cycle is serving the major parties best interests above all else…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    If the OECD report is the ‘Doing Better for Children 2009’ the I’m interested in two factors that contribute to NZ’s low ranking

    (From the author Dominic Richardson)
    “ Overall child mortality is also higher than the OECD average. Immunisation rates are poor for measles (2nd worst in the OECD) and whooping cough (5th worst in the OECD)”

    ….is this about poverty – or piss poor parenting?

    and BTW Philu – the author also states;
    “Material conditions for Kiwi kids are relatively poor. Average family incomes are low by OECD standards, and child poverty rates are high”
    which seems more to suggest that its relative to our family income, it would be hard not to have high child poverty rates

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Haha agreed completely Murray and Rufus.
    Where I work I see daily the juxtaposition between the two classes of NZer as I see it: the hard working, productive members (self-employed, company directors, wage slaves etc etc) and the rest, beneficiaries, criminals etc etc.

    It does your head in, believe me

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    Dirty rat

    “Hells tits.

    The great depression.

    I blame MJS.”

    It wasn’t my fault …

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    I know there are a lot of bad jobs out there but I really can’t think of anything worse than being a WINZ case manager, unless of course you are a liberal lefty, then you would probably love it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Haha lol I’m not a WINZ case manager murray- wouldnt wanna work there if my life depended on it

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Patrick Star

    Average family incomes are low by OECD standards,

    Now that is mickysavage’s fault – no one shall earn too much and no one shall earn to little has delivered us exactly what would be expected from such a communist view. Mediocrity and a flat society where most people don’t earn enough to get ahead (because that would be too much and they would stop voting for state support) and people don’t earn too little to feed themselves (because that would be too little).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    nickb

    Apparently neither would philu….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Banana Llama (1,105 comments) says:

    wasn’t New Zealand already in a recession before the Financial crisis hit, if so who was in government at the time?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Banana Llama

    Yes it certainly was, but the supporters of poor quality spending and the defenders of policies that reduce productivity and increase welfare dependency don’t want you to remember that. It was National’s fault for the economy being in ruins just days after taking the levers of govt because the failed policies of the 90′s made it impossible for 9 years of Labour govt to fix the economy 10-15 years after the failed policies of the 90′s were started.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. big bruv (13,571 comments) says:

    DPF

    “The welfare system does not give a life of luxury”

    Oh I dunno about that, remember Natasha Fuller, her nice house, her flash new laptop and the car that we tax payers “gave” her, plus, the little matter of $750 per week.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Don’t forget $400 hair extensions bruv

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    or how ungrateful she was

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Or the $5000 or so “business grant” she was given, if she is given this much money and cant make a serious go of getting off the benefit then it is obvious the money may as well of been flushed down the toilet

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    or the syndrome that prevented her from running a business for which she received a start up grant

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    bugger nickb you beat me to it

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..which seems more to suggest that its relative to our family income, it would be hard not to have high child poverty rates..”

    starr..how about trying to write a sentence that makes some sort of fucken sense..?..eh..?

    and..

    um..!

    “..“Material conditions for Kiwi kids are relatively poor. Average family incomes are low by OECD standards, and child poverty rates are high”

    d’yareckon the fact that shipley/richardson/national slashed benefits..

    ..and that national..in those nine years..

    ..increased the minimum wage by 87 cents..

    d’yareckon they are contributing factors..?

    to that ‘ Average family incomes are low by OECD standards, and child poverty rates are high”..?

    d’yareckon..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    haven’t heard from phil dipstick for over an hour, must have gone to the tinny house

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    philu

    Why are average incomes low ? Who has made them low and why ? What political mindset tells us “no one shall earn too much” – I’ll give you a clue, it’s not a free market mindset philu.

    How many other OECD countries have an income equalisation act that strives to flatten the natural shape of income distribution graphs because some ideology says it is a good thing to do. It’s failing philu, the very thing you are being told is your friend is actually your enemy – welfare above and beyond basic safety net is not helping you – how many more ways can we tell you this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    sorry guys and gals I spoke too soon

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Hurf Durf (2,860 comments) says:

    Phool you ratboy. Nick’s law degree has to be paid for by itself (as all tertiary education is now) and, if he wants/needs, can take a loan out from the government which has to be PAID BACK. You understand that? He has to give the money back. Which makes him a hell of a lot better than you and your work-dodging, you reprehensible leech. He’ll give something back. You? What’s your legacy? Your shitty news aggregator? I’ll stick to the Drudge Report for that, thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Duno about you guys, but philu’s starting to remind me of ole Winston Peter’s haha.

    A whole lot of bluff, bluster, obfuscation, lying, and dodging questions. Exactly the same.
    When he begins to falter in a debate, his answer is to simply leave, what a joke.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Forgot about two other similarities- a liking for the public trough, and an increasing departure from reality and relevance

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    “..increased the minimum wage by 87 cents..”

    Shut up, you parasite. You deserve nothing, not a cent of my taxes to sustain your laziness. Get lost.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Murray M

    on philu;

    must have gone to the tinny house

    Give him a break, the tinny house is on the way to the organic vegan dog food shop – so it wasn’t really a separate trip to get dac.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    “starr..how about trying to write a sentence that makes some sort of fucken sense..?..eh..?”

    was it too much for you to take in Phool?

    BTW – what did you say your Green party policy was on immunisation again? or are those bits of the OECD report you wankers ignore?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    Patrick Starr

    It’s OK to raise dogs as vegans but wrong to immunise children.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. kiwirights (48 comments) says:

    Murray M said this “kiwirights I find your reference to third world countries totally insulting. Those people may live in conditions we in the first world would describe as horrifying but they little choice. They also have a damn site more pride and self esteem than the bludgers and malingerers in this country.”

    Murray you should leave your little bubble – poor people in those countries have no pride and no dole, but they do have extra rickets and dysentery. No doubt you would like people to suffer from those here, just to teach them a lesson for “malingering”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..Your shitty news aggregator? I’ll stick to the Drudge Report for that, thanks…”

    ‘drudge report’..heh..!

    and hurf..the ‘real cost’ of tertiary education involves a very large subsidy from other taxpayers..

    for any degree..way over and above any ‘fees’..eh..?

    got that..?

    and starr..read your sentence..it does not make sense..

    (can you still not see that..?..)

    and..’your Green party’..?

    i vote for them..(‘cos there is no other choice..)

    i am not a member..

    and i sure as hell do not speak for them in any way..

    if you want to know about green party policy..

    i suggest you visit their website..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Viking2 (11,284 comments) says:

    Address by Muriel Newman.
    http://www.nzcpr.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=885

    Welfare Reform

    Welfare reform was always an ACT issue, but without ACT’s advocacy nothing will change. The dependency culture will continue to escalate – the underclass, child abuse, dysfunction and crime will all continue to grow unabated until the system is changed. And at the heart of the problem is the Domestic Purposes Benefit which is the source of the greatest damage.

    New Zealand is one of only four countries with a stand-alone sole parent benefit. The incentives inherent in the DPB that undermine the family have had a devastating effect over the years: in 1968, while 89 percent of non-Maori children were born into a married family, by 2008, that had dropped to 65 percent. But when it comes to Maori families, the change has been catastrophic: in 1968, 72 percent of Maori children were born into a family where their parents were married but by 2008 that had dropped to 22 percent. What we are witnessing is the almost total collapse of the Maori family. Is it any wonder that with the family being in such a precarious state, Maori are totally over-represented in all of the negative social statistics? And while the DPB is, of course, not the only factor, it plays a key role. Presently over half of the 107,000 sole parents on the DPB are Maori or Pacific Islanders and almost half are unmarried.

    With the cost of welfare in New Zealand now amounting to over $2,200 a year for every man, woman and child, we have the bizarre situation that because taxes are so high, the only parents who can afford to stay at home for 18 years to look after their children are sole parents on the DPB!

    But in spite of the significant problems, other countries have shown that it is possible to reform welfare to create better opportunities for women and children and better outcomes for the country as a whole.

    It remains my greatest regret that ACT could not shepherd through welfare reform because it would change the future of this country in a way that no other policy change could.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Philu, Do you think you receive enough weekly support from the taxpayer to support yourself and your son? If not, why?

    And philu, I have explained to you before that I think NZ university fees are capped far too low and restrict quality; I am also amassing a sizeable loan (but not borrowing any to live/or have a student allowance) as I work nearly full time to support myself at the same time as doing a law degree. Anyway philu, comparing tertiary education spending to welfare spending is clearly moronic; which is going to be a better investment? I am going to pay 100x more tax in my life than you will in yours, right now you are in fact a negative taxpayer.

    As for tertiary education, havn’t you done a master of political science? Firstly, the cost of a masters would be vastly more to the taxpayer than just my bachelors (we’ll forget for a second that you would have been bludging of the state for living support during your time at uni as well, unlike myself)).
    Secondly philu, my law degree wil lset me up for a life of work and thus paying tax. Your masters has not even gotten you off the benefit.

    You really are getting too easy philu, why don’t you just give up.

    P.S going to answer my question?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    nckb,,’Do you think you receive enough weekly support from the taxpayer to support your’ training to become a leeching tax-lawyer..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    I don’t receive weekly support at all philu, as I say I work hard to support myself (unlike the vast majority of students on the student allowance etc) and this is often to the detriment of my study, however I get on with it.

    I am most certainly grateful for the help I get regarding a loan to pay my fees, I would rather not have to at all, as I don’t like being indebted to anyone, but I don’t have wealthy parents as they have been wage slaves and struggling business owners most of their lives; they have had their taxes taken for the subsistence of people like you.

    Now philu, I have answered, are you going to address all my posts? Or are you just going to do a Winston and hold up your “NO” sign?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Excellent post BTW Viking; Lindsay Mitchell’s blog is also excellent in that regard

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..ickb (444) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 0 Says:
    September 20th, 2009 at 6:12 pm

    I don’t receive weekly support at all philu,..”

    um..!..are you being willfully ignorant..?

    or are you just as thick as pigshit..?

    i repeat..the ‘real’ cost of your/any university education..

    is far above any fees charged..

    you/all university students are subsidised…

    by low-income/p.a.y.e. taxpayers..

    what can’t you ‘grasp’ about that..?..

    this is a basic fact of life we are talking about here..

    did you not know/realise that..?

    or are you just totally denying facts..?

    (after all..this is a kiwiblog comments-thread..eh..?

    so..par for the course/you wouldn’t be alone..eh..?..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Patrick Starr (3,675 comments) says:

    “for any degree..way over and above any ‘fees’..eh..? got that..?”

    whilst on that subject Phool- the OECD report that you rely on to try and increase the amount of welfare you suck each week also mentions our kids have the forth best educational achievement in the OECD

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Ok Winny, settle down, if you are not going to answer my very simple question when I have had the courtesy of answering all of yours, I am not going to debate this with you any further; this started on topic with me asking you (don’t know why you weren’t flattered here, as you are clearly an expert) whether you think the levels of benefits in NZ are sufficient, clearly a question central to the issue.

    Then you just when way off topic getting abusive and defenisve, obviously I have touched a raw nerve here philu.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..I am not going to debate this with you any further..”

    promises..!..promises..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. Steve (4,524 comments) says:

    Phool,
    In this economic recession do you find you get less dak for our money?
    No GST to pay, but are the supplies good?
    Do you buy in bulk to save, or just buy as the addiction dictates?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Philu you have been comprehensively owned by the posters on this thread, why do you bother?

    I note with interest that you dodged my question the entire time; very illuminating. Perhaps there is a tinge of guilt under your bluffing, narcissism and puffery that you live off the backs of the rest of us

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    perhaps the personal life of me and my son..are none of your business..?

    btw..seeing as you broke yr ‘promise’..to fuck off..

    i’ll just put you back on my personal shit/ignore-list..shall i..

    bye..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    When have I ever asked a question about your personal life?
    Piss poor excuse Winston.
    Forget it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Rufus (648 comments) says:

    Phil, when you get off the public tit, when you start WORKING to support yourself, then and only then will you have the right to privacy.

    Until you do so, we, the hardworking taxpayers have an interest in your personal life. Although I shudder to think of your personal life.

    Get some pride man, get a job.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. pentwig (240 comments) says:

    nickb

    Good try bud, but the cowardly troll is just a low life piece of s… .

    If we ignore him he may go away.

    Then again, he is too thick to realise he is being totally disgraced and shamed, so maybe not.

    Anyway you have have kept your dignity and respect, something phool can only aspire to.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..Anyway you have have kept your dignity and respect..”

    (heh..!..heh..!

    you do know he is training to be a tax-lawyer..?..eh..?

    not a lot of ‘dignity and respect’ to be found/had there..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Ha thanks pentwig… does your head in all right, now I know how all those tv reporters who interview Winston Peters felt like.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Lol philu your comments are so hypocritical and moronic that you have actually convinced me their is life on other planets, you must seriously be from Mars or something if you are serious about some of your comments.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. burt (8,044 comments) says:

    nickb

    Ignore him. I know I have engaged as well and he hasn’t answered my questions either – let it go. He has noting of value to offer this debate other than his value as a good example of all that is wrong with welfare in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. nickb (3,675 comments) says:

    Yea good advice burt, though it is hard to stop arguing with someone so clearly blinkered and deranged, you want to keep going to see if you can make them see sense.

    After today my final hope to achieve this with philu has gone

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    (sigh..!.)…again with the ‘promises’..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. Murray M (455 comments) says:

    hey kiwirights I have left my little bubble. I now spend six months of every year in SE Asia. I am supporting one girl in Thailand and two in the Philippines. Thats three lives I am assisting voluntarily. Due to my change in lifestyle I now pay very little in tax. At least I now get to choose who I will or will not support, if I were to work fulltime it would get pissed up against the wall by the parasites you defend. Rickets is not a problem in SE Asia, they have plenty of sunshine. Dysentry is usually only suffered by westeners who are not careful with what they eat and drink.
    AND THE PEOPLE IN THESE COUNTRIES DO HAVE PRIDE, you condescending little prick.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. jabba (280 comments) says:

    goodness .. I sense hostility here.
    Michael is an elected Mayor (2 or is it 3x) and has every right to say what he thinks, be it a local or national subject.
    too many people these days attack the messanger and not the message.
    God (am I allowed to say that), I hope I don’t need to go onto a benefit but if I do, I know I will have such assistance.
    I would then do whatever it takes to get off it and support myself and family .. I would hope all of us would do the same but I suspect that is not the case.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. ross (1,454 comments) says:

    > The best thing is for a parent to move off the welfare benefit and into the workforce.

    I see you’re still grappling with Economics 101, David. If there are more people looking for work than there are jobs availabe, you will have unemployment. Maybe that’s why we’ve seen unemployment rise sharply recently, because more and more people are looking for jobs which are simply not available.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. CharlieBrown (927 comments) says:

    Every parent that cannot provide breakfast for a child in NZ without extreme circumstances should be given forced budgetary advice. If they still cannot do this then they should be prosecuted for Child neglect and have that child taken of them untill they prove that they can look after them. If they continue to have children that they neglect then they should be banned from having children (perhaps forcibly sterilized).

    The way we let parents neglect or abuse their children is this country is appalling, neglecting an animal carriers more severe penalties than neglecting children (eg, if you neglect an animal you have it taken of you, if you continually neglect animals, you get banned from having them).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.