http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year,
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do with child neglect and most likely abuse.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their children and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? Which National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do with >child neglect and most likely abuse.
I'm sure they will "go for another term", but many confidently expectIt is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their children >and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? Which >National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 11:13:14 UTC+13, Allistar wrote:The children did not havethe option of choosing another parent.
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do with
child neglect and most likely abuse.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their children >> and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? Which
National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.
"Poverty" in NZ is the fault of the "impoverished" and nothing to do with the government. People are in "poverty" because of their own choices, laziness and stupidity.
Perhaps I should rephrase and say it is the fault of themselves and their parents, along with the prevailing attitudes of society where people are lazy, unmotivated and expect others to support them in this and get away with it.So your answer is to blame the victims? If one of the children died
Case in point - we have a plumber working on our renovation project. He has noapprentice and I asked him why, given he's flat out to the extent of working on
But most of them are dropkicks.time, work hard, and you will not be in poverty. Or get a job as a labourer. We
Anyone in poverty? Get a haircut and go get a job as an apprentice. Turn up on
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year, but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 11:13:06 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do with >>child neglect and most likely abuse.
Do you deny that the children at least are in poverty?
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
I'm sure they will "go for another term", but many confidently expect
them to fail - just as they are failing to dequately fund hospital
services or to ensure that chldren ae given equal opportunities -
remember the state house boy made good? National are using neglect to
ensure it is unlikely to happen again.
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their children >>and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? Which >>National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
Neglect of the cause and control of drugs - P is about as esy to get
as it ever was, and the number of addicts continues to climb, but
addiction servicesand police are squeezed.
Mental services have also
been squeezed, which may have also been a feature in this case.
Reduction per capita in hospital funding, leading to this family not
being seen soon enough for the mother to stay.
Beneficiary and bottom
end wages lower in real terms than before they started - the stress of
tryng to provide for children on a low income with the tempation of
addiction and mental stress of a single parent are directly causing so
many children to be in poverty.
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:02:33 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 11:13:14 UTC+13, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do
with child neglect and most likely abuse.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the >>> > year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their
children and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? >>> Which National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your
needs.
"Poverty" in NZ is the fault of the "impoverished" and nothing to do with >>the government. People are in "poverty" because of their own choices, >>laziness and stupidity.
The children did not havethe option of choosing another parent.
Perhaps I should rephrase and say it is the fault of themselves and their >>parents, along with the prevailing attitudes of society where people are >>lazy, unmotivated and expect others to support them in this and get away >>with it.
So your answer is to blame the victims? If one of the children died
through the neglect of a parent you would be among the first to say
the government should have taken the children away . .
National used to claim that they represented "comassionate
conservatism" - there is nothing compassionate about leaving children
to physical and mental harm, with a broad spweeping "blame someone
else" mentaility such as you offer..
Case in point - we have a plumber working on our renovation project. He
has no apprentice and I asked him why, given he's flat out to the extent
of working on Auckland Anniversary Day. His answer: not worth the hassle. >>There is a lack of quality young people to take up the work. The sort of >>people he's tried are entitled little snowflakes who want to be the boss >>from day one, don't like doing shit jobs, aren't reliable etc. The few
good ones, who are prepared to turn up on time every day, work hard and
not complain get snapped up, and come out after 4 years of paid training >>with a valuable qualification and start to make serious money, often >>starting their own business.
Nothing to do with the article or the problems presented in it. Some
people don't work well with apprentices - but the government removed incentives and organisation support for apprentices, and encouraged
employers to bring in people from overseas. Remember those
"contractors" from overseas doing welding on a project - forced to
live on site with food and lodging costs deducted - they were earning
well below minimum wage, and prevented qualified NZ welders from
getting jobs on that project. Do you expect the children to get a job
to support themselves?
But most of them are dropkicks.
Anyone in poverty? Get a haircut and go get a job as an apprentice. Turn
up on time, work hard, and you will not be in poverty. Or get a job as a >>labourer. We also have on site 3 foreign "students" working for AWF. >>They've been sweating their guts out digging a drainage trench in the >>basement. Can't get an unemployed Kiwi to do it, despite the $20+ per hour >>pay rate. Too hard, too hot, too lazy and can get by being a useless >>layabout.
How does that help this mother and her children, JohnO?
On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 11:13:06 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do with
child neglect and most likely abuse.
Do you deny that the children at least are in poverty?
I'm sure they will "go for another term", but many confidently expectIt is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
them to fail - just as they are failing to dequately fund hospital
services or to ensure that chldren ae given equal opportunities -
remember the state house boy made good? National are using neglect to
ensure it is unlikely to happen again.
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their children >> and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? Which
National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
Neglect of the cause and control of drugs - P is about as esy to get
as it ever was, and the number of addicts continues to climb, but
addiction servicesand police are squeezed. Mental services have also
been squeezed, which may have also been a feature in this case.
Reduction per capita in hospital funding, leading to this family not
being seen soon enough for the mother to stay. Beneficiary and bottom
end wages lower in real terms than before they started - the stress of
tryng to provide for children on a low income with the tempation of
addiction and mental stress of a single parent are directly causing so
many children to be in poverty.
Rich80105 wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:02:33 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 11:13:14 UTC+13, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do
with child neglect and most likely abuse.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the >>>> > year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is >>>> > try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as >>>> > many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they >>>> > can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their
children and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that article? >>>> Which National minister made those adults make such poor decisions?
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." >>>> creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your
needs.
"Poverty" in NZ is the fault of the "impoverished" and nothing to do with >>>the government. People are in "poverty" because of their own choices, >>>laziness and stupidity.
The children did not havethe option of choosing another parent.
Perhaps the children need to be reparented. Children should be protected
from abuse and neglect even if it means removing them from their parents' >are.
Perhaps I should rephrase and say it is the fault of themselves and their >>>parents, along with the prevailing attitudes of society where people are >>>lazy, unmotivated and expect others to support them in this and get away >>>with it.
So your answer is to blame the victims? If one of the children died
through the neglect of a parent you would be among the first to say
the government should have taken the children away . .
Yep. Because that's the right thing to do for the child.
National used to claim that they represented "comassionate
conservatism" - there is nothing compassionate about leaving children
to physical and mental harm, with a broad spweeping "blame someone
else" mentaility such as you offer..
I've not seen you advocate children being removed from their parents' care >before. There's hope for you yet.
Case in point - we have a plumber working on our renovation project. He >>>has no apprentice and I asked him why, given he's flat out to the extent >>>of working on Auckland Anniversary Day. His answer: not worth the hassle. >>>There is a lack of quality young people to take up the work. The sort of >>>people he's tried are entitled little snowflakes who want to be the boss >>>from day one, don't like doing shit jobs, aren't reliable etc. The few >>>good ones, who are prepared to turn up on time every day, work hard and >>>not complain get snapped up, and come out after 4 years of paid training >>>with a valuable qualification and start to make serious money, often >>>starting their own business.
Nothing to do with the article or the problems presented in it. Some
people don't work well with apprentices - but the government removed
incentives and organisation support for apprentices, and encouraged
employers to bring in people from overseas. Remember those
"contractors" from overseas doing welding on a project - forced to
live on site with food and lodging costs deducted - they were earning
well below minimum wage, and prevented qualified NZ welders from
getting jobs on that project. Do you expect the children to get a job
to support themselves?
Forced to live on site? I'm sure you filed a civil suit when you found out >about this? If not, did anyone else because that doesn't sound legal to me.
But most of them are dropkicks.
Anyone in poverty? Get a haircut and go get a job as an apprentice. Turn >>>up on time, work hard, and you will not be in poverty. Or get a job as a >>>labourer. We also have on site 3 foreign "students" working for AWF. >>>They've been sweating their guts out digging a drainage trench in the >>>basement. Can't get an unemployed Kiwi to do it, despite the $20+ per hour >>>pay rate. Too hard, too hot, too lazy and can get by being a useless >>>layabout.
How does that help this mother and her children, JohnO?
How does the mother getting a job help the mother? Are you kidding? How it >helps the children is obvious.
On Wed, 01 Feb 2017 16:24:11 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 15:02:33 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 February 2017 11:13:14 UTC+13, Allistar wrote:
Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
That article wasn't anything to do with poverty and everything to do >>>>> with child neglect and most likely abuse.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in >>>>> > the year,
By "go" you mean "go for another term in power".
but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is >>>>> > try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that >>>>> > as many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so >>>>> > they can at least attempt to respond . . .
What mistakes has National made that causes people to abuse their
children and become addicted to substances as mentioned in that
article? Which National minister made those adults make such poor
decisions? --
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his
needs." creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize >>>>> your needs.
"Poverty" in NZ is the fault of the "impoverished" and nothing to do >>>>with the government. People are in "poverty" because of their own >>>>choices, laziness and stupidity.
The children did not havethe option of choosing another parent.
Perhaps the children need to be reparented. Children should be protected >>from abuse and neglect even if it means removing them from their parents' >>are.
Perhaps I should rephrase and say it is the fault of themselves and >>>>their parents, along with the prevailing attitudes of society where >>>>people are lazy, unmotivated and expect others to support them in this >>>>and get away with it.
So your answer is to blame the victims? If one of the children died
through the neglect of a parent you would be among the first to say
the government should have taken the children away . .
Yep. Because that's the right thing to do for the child.
National used to claim that they represented "comassionate
conservatism" - there is nothing compassionate about leaving children
to physical and mental harm, with a broad spweeping "blame someone
else" mentaility such as you offer..
I've not seen you advocate children being removed from their parents' care >>before. There's hope for you yet.
Case in point - we have a plumber working on our renovation project. He >>>>has no apprentice and I asked him why, given he's flat out to the extent >>>>of working on Auckland Anniversary Day. His answer: not worth the >>>>hassle. There is a lack of quality young people to take up the work. The >>>>sort of people he's tried are entitled little snowflakes who want to be >>>>the boss from day one, don't like doing shit jobs, aren't reliable etc. >>>>The few good ones, who are prepared to turn up on time every day, work >>>>hard and not complain get snapped up, and come out after 4 years of paid >>>>training with a valuable qualification and start to make serious money, >>>>often starting their own business.
Nothing to do with the article or the problems presented in it. Some
people don't work well with apprentices - but the government removed
incentives and organisation support for apprentices, and encouraged
employers to bring in people from overseas. Remember those
"contractors" from overseas doing welding on a project - forced to
live on site with food and lodging costs deducted - they were earning
well below minimum wage, and prevented qualified NZ welders from
getting jobs on that project. Do you expect the children to get a job
to support themselves?
Forced to live on site? I'm sure you filed a civil suit when you found out >>about this? If not, did anyone else because that doesn't sound legal to
me.
Apaprently it was legal - they were foreign workers working for a
foreign contractor.
teh New Zealandwelders were not able to get jobs.
From memory Natoal promised to look into it, but I think the job was finishing soon anyway
But most of them are dropkicks.
Anyone in poverty? Get a haircut and go get a job as an apprentice. Turn >>>>up on time, work hard, and you will not be in poverty. Or get a job as a >>>>labourer. We also have on site 3 foreign "students" working for AWF. >>>>They've been sweating their guts out digging a drainage trench in the >>>>basement. Can't get an unemployed Kiwi to do it, despite the $20+ per >>>>hour pay rate. Too hard, too hot, too lazy and can get by being a >>>>useless layabout.
How does that help this mother and her children, JohnO?
How does the mother getting a job help the mother? Are you kidding? How it >>helps the children is obvious.
Are you offering to employ her? With 2 small children she could
probably not afford child care anyway . . .
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-child-poverty-alive-and-well/
The newspaper put this under opinion, but there seem to be a few
observed hard facts in Rachel Smalley's article.
It is easy to say that it willall change when National go later in the
year, but even then it takes some time to correct the mistakes of the
last 9 years - and we have a winter to get through. All we can do is
try and make sure that everyone is aware of the problems, and that as
many as possible express their concern to National Ministers so they
can at least attempt to respond . . .
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 47:37:32 |
| Calls: | 2,096 |
| Files: | 11,143 |
| Messages: | 950,024 |