Take the kids off them

January 18th, 2011 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Giles Brown at The Press reports:

A young mother was caught in Christchurch driving with nearly twice the drink-drive limit, sipping from a cup of rum and with two children in the car, police say.

Southern Canterbury area commander, Inspector Malcolm Johnston, said it was one of the worst cases of drink-driving he had seen in 30 years.

He said the 21-year-old woman was caught in Riccarton Rd about 8.15pm on Saturday after police spotted her driving erratically. Her 25-year-old partner was in the front passenger seat with an unrestrained two-year-old boy on his lap, Johnston said, and a baby boy was in a restraining seat in the back.

Johnston said that while the mother was being spoken to by police she was drinking rum from a cup.

I’m not sure what is worse – the with kids in the car, the holding of the boy on a lap, which is guaranteed to kill him in a crash, or carrying on drinking while the Police are talking to you.

Regardless, the combination of such moronic behaviour has me conclude that there is no way they can be safe parents.

Tags:

63 Responses to “Take the kids off them”

  1. Bed Rater (239 comments) says:

    Scotch would have been a far better choice, IMHO.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Put it away (2,888 comments) says:

    It’s a no-brainer

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Manolo (13,327 comments) says:

    Sterilise the animals, too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. KiwiGreg (3,169 comments) says:

    By stopping them the police are probably interfering with evolution. But they’d probably just kill someone else instead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Simon Lyall (100 comments) says:

    Perhaps her lawyer will argue that since she was drinking after she was stopped, she was in fact below the legal limit while she was still driving..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. ben (2,396 comments) says:

    Anyone like to take a bet these folks are not on welfare? Anyone?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,790 comments) says:

    What is it about Christchurch? Nazi skinheads, Lianne Dalzeil, and now this!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Michaels (1,317 comments) says:

    Jail them, crush the car and remove the kids…..
    However, how times have changed.
    Back in the 60′s my father would finish work on Christmas eve and get on it with his staff.
    He’d be home around 9pm and sleep for 3 hours.
    Mum would then pack us 5 kids into the car at midnight, dad would come down and we would roar off from Auckland to Palmerston North in the then very flash Valiant. Four girls in the back, me in the middle of the bench seat with my face upto the window.
    With the winding horrible roads we used to have we would still be in Palmerston by 7am, at which point I’d have to clean the vomit from the outside of the car as there was no time to stop.

    Ahhhh yes……. the good ol days.
    Sorry Mr Plod, dad is now dead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Pete George (22,754 comments) says:

    Jail them, crush the car and remove the kids…..

    Crush them, remove the car, and jail the kids in a few years.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. OTGO (510 comments) says:

    It’s OK though. Lowering the blood alcohol limit to .05 will stop this sort of thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. slightlyrighty (2,496 comments) says:

    But CYPS want to keep the kids with the family, don’t they?

    Jeez. These two “parents” are a peice of work. Their children need to be removed. Now and permanently.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    The low iq mother was probably drinking heavily during pregnancy too, so the kids are likely to have cognitive impairments.

    A good example of that movie ‘Idiocracy’ being true to life.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysgenics

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. MT_Tinman (2,985 comments) says:

    The sprog sharing a seat belt thing is not unusual.

    Several times I’ve had to explain to people (more often than not foreigners) why this is not a great idea.

    The pissed mother thing also is not unusual although drinking while taking a breath test I suspect is.

    Were these people Pig Islanders? Sounds like it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Put it away (2,888 comments) says:

    Remove the kids, crush the car with the parents in it. Problem solved.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Monty (962 comments) says:

    No doubt all have a stupid first name.

    But it does remind me of growing up in a large Irish Catholic Family – every outing with the whole family will have all 8 of us sitting in the 1967 Chevy Impala with my youngest sister (as a baby) perched on my mother’s lap, four of us in the back seat unrestrained, and one more unrestriained on the front bench seat. Only two seat beats in the front seat.

    That was pretty normal back in the 1970s. That “normal” behaviour also had the road death rate are nearly 800 one year from memory. Now we look back in horror.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. ben (2,396 comments) says:

    OTGO: I had the same thought.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. ben (2,396 comments) says:

    Several times I’ve had to explain to people (more often than not foreigners) why this is not a great idea.

    Christ, Tinman, you sound like a barrel of laughs to be around.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Dyannt (28 comments) says:

    “But CYPS want to keep the kids with the family, don’t they?
    Jeez. These two “parents” are a peice of work. Their children need to be removed. Now and permanently.”

    What’s the betting the guy isn’t the father of either of the kids.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Inventory2 (10,092 comments) says:

    Any bets that the parents’ names were Dion and Cheryl?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Manolo (13,327 comments) says:

    Any bets that the parents’ names were Dion and Cheryl?
    Are you insinuating there is an underclass in NZ? Do you dare to contradict the D.L, now exiled to New York, on this matter?

    More benefits, more social engineering, more bureaucracy, more money thrown at it, more taxes to prop the rotten edifice of the welfare state. That’s what NZ needs according to Labour and its successor Labour-lite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. MT_Tinman (2,985 comments) says:

    ben (1,435) Says:
    January 18th, 2011 at 10:28 am
    Several times I’ve had to explain to people (more often than not foreigners) why this is not a great idea.

    Christ, Tinman, you sound like a barrel of laughs to be around.

    Oh, I am ;-)

    Part of being a cabbie unfortunately is ensuring that halfwits don’t cost me my license by their stupidity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. GPT1 (2,087 comments) says:

    Yes, of course the kids should go but here’s the real problem – why are people this stupid breeding in the first place. How do we get to a point where society isn’t so conservative that out of wedlock mother’s are sent off to the country to have their child and women are trapped in violent relationships for appearances sake but completely useless people aren’t breeding? I can think of a few laws tha would be tempting to pass but the term draconian would apply and they would not be appropriate in a free society – yet the flip side is that the taxpayer has to fund stupid breeding practices (I won’t even suggest a thought out choice is made).
    It is infuriating, costly and, frankly, the underclass is out breeding everyone else.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Inky_the_Red (734 comments) says:

    My question is, if we take kids off parents what do we do with them?

    There are a shortage of foster parents in NZ. Who here is volunteering?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. jag (54 comments) says:

    GPT1:
    “why are people this stupid breeding in the first place… the taxpayer has to fund stupid breeding practices”

    Interesting that this piece of news (and your comment) should come out on the same day as Susan St John is lobbying for lump sum payouts to parents of new born children (Breakfast this morning).

    Is she really that naive and deluded to think that a lump sum payment similar to that in Australia (A$5,000) would actually end up being used to pay for the care of the child?

    Another case of the liberal elite thinking that there is a money fairy at the bottom of the garden printing cash to piss away (literally).

    I can’t believe St John, as an “economist”, is so blind to the incentives such a policy would create. All that a lump sum payment would do for the like of the people in this story is effectively move the address of the the nearest WINZ office to their partner’s vagina.
    Here’s a novel idea Susan, how about people save and budget for the arrival of a child instead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    ***Interesting that this piece of news (and your comment) should come out on the same day as Susan St John is lobbying for lump sum payouts to parents of new born children (Breakfast this morning).***

    This is actually a good idea, provided it is to parents who have iqs over 100. As Professor Jim Flynn observed a few years ago:

    “An internationally recognised expert on intelligence warns New Zealand children could get dumber in three or four generations unless women with higher education started producing more babies.

    Otago University emeritus professor Dr Jim Flynn was commenting on census figures that show mothers without a higher education were the anchor of New Zealand’s current fertility rate.

    “Everyone knows if we only allowed short people to reproduce there would be a tendency in terms of genes for height to diminish. Intelligence is no different from other human traits,” he told the Sunday Star-Times.

    “A persistent genetic trend which lowered the genetic quality for brain physiology would have some effect eventually.”

    Statistics show women without tertiary qualifications who had reached their early 40s had produced 2.57 babies each.

    In contrast, women with a higher education were producing just 1.85 babies each.”

    http://www.buildingblocksplaygroup.com/blog/brainier-mums-needed-to-maintain-future-generations-intelligence-says-professor/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    ***Here’s a novel idea Susan, how about people save and budget for the arrival of a child instead.***

    The problem is that many people have low future time orientation so end up having children irrespective of the incentives. This is why I suggest making a 3 monthly birth control shot a condition of signing up for WINZ. This is something the Child Poverty Action Group, that Susan St John is asssociated with, should be championing.

    http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/contraception/contraception_depo.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Murray (8,838 comments) says:

    Neuter the pair of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. dad4justice (7,729 comments) says:

    They’ll get a legal aid lawyer to blame the earthquake and the judge will order counselling treatment. Yeah right. My city has gone mad? Poor kids.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Chuck Bird (4,667 comments) says:

    My question is, if we take kids off parents what do we do with them?
    There are a shortage of foster parents in NZ. Who here is volunteering?

    There is no shortage of adoptive parents. Many people do not want to foster children to have them go back into bad environment they came from.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. jag (54 comments) says:

    “This is actually a good idea, provided it is to parents who have iqs over 100.”

    If a woman has an IQ over 100 I think she would have the cognisant ability to, you know, pre-empt and plan for the arrival of having a child (as radical as that might sound)…. wait that is exactly what is currently happening!

    Understanding why highly educated women wait to have children and have fewer children is not rocket science – they are:
    1) waiting until they can afford the next child; and
    2) not having more children than they can afford.

    If you set an absolute $ value for each new born child I think what you’ll find is that our spiral into the stupidity mire will only increase. That’s for one simple reason:
    Ask yourself this: Do you think the marginal utility of $5,000 will be higher for an educated woman or an uneducated woman (or for that matter a man that has a violent relationship with a woman and pressures her into having more children)?

    The answer of course is no – ergo, It’s NOT a good idea at all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. plum (38 comments) says:

    @ Bob R – women with higher education will continue to have fewer babies unless the provisions for paid maternity leave and employer attitudes about re-hiring mothers who have been out of the workforce for a while, improve. At the moment the opportunity cost of having a child is too high for high flying, intelligent women.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. jag (54 comments) says:

    “The problem is that many people have low future time orientation so end up having children irrespective of the incentives.”

    Low future time orientation?

    And you still think that lump sum payouts are a “good idea”?

    So… I’m a generic uneducated couple, our relationship is violent, we’re having trouble paying for the hire-purchase on that big-screen TV (that we bought 3 years ago with no interest for 24 months) and missing rent payments…. but wait a minute… the state is offering $10k for each new born and Cheryl has an empty uterus.

    You mean low future time orientation like that example??? And lump sum payments are still a “good idea”???

    “low future time orientation” is nice jargon to have up your sleeve but it really doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    ***@ Bob R – women with higher education will continue to have fewer babies unless the provisions for paid maternity leave and employer attitudes about re-hiring mothers who have been out of the workforce for a while, improve. At the moment the opportunity cost of having a child is too high for high flying, intelligent women.***

    Plum,

    That is why I am supportive of targetted assistance to make it easier for such women to have children. Lee Kuan Yew recognised the importance of this in Singapore.

    It’s particularly important for maco-economic success.

    http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/hsw/psychologie/professuren/entwpsy/team/rindermann/publikationen/08IntEco.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. jag (54 comments) says:

    Plum: “At the moment the opportunity cost of having a child is too high for high flying, intelligent women.”

    Exactly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    ***jag (48) Says:

    January 18th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
    “The problem is that many people have low future time orientation so end up having children irrespective of the incentives.”

    Low future time orientation?

    And you still think that lump sum payouts are a “good idea”?***

    Re-read my post. I think they are only a good idea if they’re restricted to reasonably intelligent, productive people. Of course that’s not politically acceptable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Viking2 (11,125 comments) says:

    Don’t bother spending more of my tax money thanks.

    At the moment the opportunity cost of having a child is too high for high flying, intelligent women.
    Well just don’t have them or realise that having them and remaining a high flyer is not intelligent.

    Easy choice really. be sensible with your child raising or get a divorce and stuff up your children. Happens all the time with intelligent high flyers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Inky_the_Red (734 comments) says:

    Chuck.

    My wife and I are currently looking at adoption and long-term fostering. I have a brother and his wife are foster parents of a girl. As well I am related to two boys who have not seen their mother in 5 years. As their father did not return them to an unsafe environment of his ex-wife.

    They vet you and train you before you can adopt. However it is emphasised that it is important to keep contact. I can confirm that the two boys really want to see their mother despite the danger they love her (she is their mother)

    With fostering yes parents do sometimes get their children back. I admit that in some cases that is the wrong choice. However I do think people can improve and they do. People can fix their lives and become better parents so the option to return the kids needs to be there. Remember that foster children are wards of the state and ultimately the courts decide where children end up.

    Taking a child from a parent and giving it to someone else is not really an option.

    When the births parents give a child for adoption it needs to be their choice not something forced by the state.

    What we need is more trained professionals so that parents that endanger their children can be assisted. Either by education of the parents or removal of the children to a safe place.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Chuck Bird (4,667 comments) says:

    “Taking a child from a parent and giving it to someone else is not really an option.”

    you mean in your not so humble opinion. If parents grossly neglect or are abusive to children they can and should be removed permanently.

    There have been too many case of grandparents caring for children and have the biological parents get them back against the wishes of the grandparents and the children end up abused and in some cases dead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Inky_the_Red (734 comments) says:

    Chuck,

    you have a lot of common sense

    http://rescomp.stanford.edu/~cheshire/EinsteinQuotes.html
    “Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Chuck Bird (4,667 comments) says:

    Inky, sadly we have a lot of people like you working for CYF who give children back to their parents to be seriously abused or killed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Pete George (22,754 comments) says:

    “At the moment the opportunity cost of having a child is too high for high flying, intelligent women.”

    Intelligent women would realise that having a kid is not just the matter of a few bucks.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Inky_the_Red (734 comments) says:

    CYF staff do not give children back to be abused. That is a very stupid statement.

    CYF has limited resources and a finite number of people who volunteer (and who are safe) to look after children.

    It is scary but many kids are in a much worse state than being driven by a drunk mother and no secured in a motor vehicle.

    I certainly do not advocate CYF gives children back who are in danger. However people do change (both for the better and worse) and we need to value children enough to give CYF the resources needed to do the job we (society) expect.

    Blaming CYF achieves nothing. Volunteering to be a foster parent helps.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    Inky

    Good on you.

    My kids God parents are wealthy and wanted to adopt . Fiscally they could handle several plus they are great people.

    They rock up. Sorry one party is too old, ( he was 53 at the time) wife being 40.

    Hello. kids would have grown up in a loving environment wanting for nothing in a material sense either , they even already lived in the best school zone in Auckland.

    The rule book says …………………FFS……….. and they wonder why they can’t get parents

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Chuck Bird (4,667 comments) says:

    Inky, do you ever read the paper?

    There have been so many children murdered that I forget their names. One case comes to mind. Most people will remember the 7 year old girl murdered by a P addict. The girls father complained to CYF. He was ignored. This is not an isolated case.

    CYF needs people with common sense that you joke about. They have blood on their hands.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. plum (38 comments) says:

    @ Pete George – “Intelligent women would realise that having a kid is not just the matter of a few bucks.”

    Intelligent women do realise that. That’s why they’re choosing not to have them. You can’t have it both ways – either highly educated women are given better incentives to have children, or you can’t complain about the fact that the bulk of the birth rate is carried by low-educated, low socio-economic women, resulting largely in children that fit the same demographic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Pete George (22,754 comments) says:

    Plum, are you referring financial incentives to have kids? Even more financial incentives than there are now? At all socio-economic levels I’d hope that people would have kids for much better reasons than money. Very sad if they become a financial decision.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. dad4justice (7,729 comments) says:

    “One case comes to mind. Most people will remember the 7 year old girl murdered by a P addict. The girls father complained to CYF. He was ignored. This is not an isolated case.’

    RIP Coral.
    Nothing has changed – CYFS are that dysfunctional they are dangerous to all children. Kids deserve better!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. BeaB (2,056 comments) says:

    Dumb and dumber. Though I wonder how we survived our childhoods as some of you have already pointed out.
    The sad fact is, although some of you think you have all the answers, there is nothing to be done about low IQs and stupidity.
    And control-freak wowsers like Geoffrey Palmer think passing even more laws to piss off the law-abiding will have any effect at all on morons like these two.
    Like the poor, the dumb are always with us and there’s no point ranting on about them.

    OMG Dreadful thought. The Nats wouldn’t make Palmer our next GG, surely.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. KiwiGreg (3,169 comments) says:

    “What we need is more trained professionals so that parents that endanger their children can be assisted. Either by education of the parents or removal of the children to a safe place.”

    I’d prefer to tackle the source of that problem – people that would endanger their children becoming parents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. plum (38 comments) says:

    Pete George, as above, I was referring to better provisions for maternity leave, and better attitudes from employers when mothers return to the workforce. I imagine most commenters on this blog would argue that having children ought to be a financial decision – that’s surely the basis of all the comments regarding enforced contraception for those receiving benefits.

    While I don’t hold a view that extreme, I do think that incentives of all kinds influence people’s behaviour. As a full-time working woman with a post-graduate qualification myself, there are several factors that have influenced my decision not to have children so far, one of which is the large amount of income my family would have to forgo.

    What do you think would encourage more highly educated couples to have children, assuming that that is a desirable outcome for the country?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Chuck Bird (4,667 comments) says:

    “What do you think would encourage more highly educated couples to have children, assuming that that is a desirable outcome for the country?”

    Income splitting

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. tarrant (35 comments) says:

    Perhaps this is where homosexuality in the so-called “underclass” should be encouraged and promoted, perhaps through a suitable social-media advertising campaign. Any inklings toward such behaviour in either sex should not only be tolerated, but actively encouraged – nurtured even. That would eliminate a lot of thoughtless, unplanned, and unwanted procreation … okay well it’s a novel idea, at least… :P

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Pete George (22,754 comments) says:

    I think income splitting could be worthwhile, maybe just for married couples, to even the tax burden a bit.

    It may just be that I’m not up with the times, but wanting to have kids was like, wanting kids, one of the most basic human instincts, and you found a way to pay the bills.

    Plum, you could look on it as an investment, an investment in family, an investment in humanity. I’ve just had my daughter and granddaughter staying, they are visiting from Europe. If I could go back a few decades, and was offered a win in Lotto Powerball or kids, I wouldn’t hesitate to choose kids, they are the best achievement and the best thing I’ve had in my life, and they wil remain that. If you get your mind into family mode some time you will understand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    ***What do you think would encourage more highly educated couples to have children, assuming that that is a desirable outcome for the country?***

    It is a desirable outcome (see link above on the importance for the countries economic wellbeing). Plus a whole host of other things, like health and civic involvement.

    Would subsidised daycare/nannying help?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Rufus (621 comments) says:

    Plum – some good points.

    Pete George: “At the moment the opportunity cost of having a child is too high for high flying, intelligent women.”

    “Intelligent women would realise that having a kid is not just the matter of a few bucks.”

    But Pete, it does cost a lot in fore-gone income. I agree that you find a way to pay the bills, but you do have to sacrifice something to manage this.

    I find it frigging annoying when I see responsible young couples having to struggle, save and scrimp to prepare for kids, and then go through some lean times in the first few years of having kids while at the same time there’s a whole sector of society which is essentially being paid to breed irresponsibly.

    Income splitting might help.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. jcuknz (704 comments) says:

    It is a pity there are not more intelligent parents who appreciate the world doesn’t need a whole lot more kids and have just one or none. We have reached the stage with the devlopment of machines that there is no need for a lot of population and hopefully there will not be another world war to prove me wrong. Population is for religions to widen and increase their power and industrrialists to have a large ssurplus of workers to hold wages down for their profit. There should be a penalty on those on the UB and SB who have children. This is not bene bashing but simple pragmatic appreciation of the situation the world is in. As for Rufus’s final para .. if those young persons don’t have the intelligence to hold off until they are financially secure they deserve the lower standard of living. It may be a biological natural to have kids but irresponsible breeding will see the end of humanity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Chuck Bird (4,667 comments) says:

    “It is a pity there are not more intelligent parents who appreciate the world doesn’t need a whole lot more kids and have just one or none.”

    What would the population of NZ, Oz or most European countries be at current birthrates be in a few years without immigration? Many countries need to increase the birthrate but not of no hopers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. jcuknz (704 comments) says:

    Chuck Bird ….that was what Hitler was about. Obviously you do not appreciate the tremenous problem the world faces as we use up its resources and face climate change/disaster such as happened last week in Australia which seriously affects food production. You need to wake up and get real I am afraid.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Manolo (13,327 comments) says:

    What would the population of NZ, Oz or most European countries be at current birthrates be in a few years without immigration? Many countries need to increase the birthrate but not of no hopers.

    Not to worry, Chuck Bird. NZ will bring thousands of hard-working Somalis to fill the gap.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. KiwiGreg (3,169 comments) says:

    @ jcuknz What a load of crap. do you think the world would be a better place if your parents had chosen not to have kids? Or is it just other people “using up the worlds resources”. This crap about running out of resources has been spouted by everyone from Malthus to Ehrlich and it was, and remains, arrant nonesense.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. phobius (46 comments) says:

    MT_Tinman (1,223) Says:
    January 18th, 2011 at 9:51 am
    “Were these people Pig Islanders? Sounds like it.”

    What is this supposed to mean? Are you being derogatory?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Bob R (1,335 comments) says:

    ***What would the population of NZ, Oz or most European countries be at current birthrates be in a few years without immigration? ***

    It might be lower, but does that really matter? The important issue is the quality of the immigrants rather than just focussing on numbers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. jcuknz (704 comments) says:

    KiwiGreg … you are entitled to your eronious views even if in your words they are arrant nonsense.

    If you skin a Somalian you would find the same as if you skinned a european or Maori. It is education and willingness to assimilate with the people of the new country that matters. New Zealand is a good example of this since there are very few if any pure blood Maori and it is only later arrivals who are pure european stock … though because there are more of them they tend to breed with their own, and so the assimilation is slower, though my grand-daughter is part Creole.

    When I was born it wasn’t commonly known about the population explosion endangering homo sapien but unfortunately they did have more than is sensible in today’s knowledge. I’m happy I had one child and he too just one child in light of my current knowledge as he is too.

    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.