Is the current benefit system unfair?

22 Dec 2009 08:23p.m.

Okay wrote:

Okay IOU.
Just how much spending money do we get and how much food for a family of 3?
I'm studying so under your proposal would how would childcare be dished out?

22 Dec 2009 06:51p.m.

lou wrote:

The benefit is not a career move, it was established to support those in need until they are able to support themselves. It should be monitored. WINZ should automatically pay the clients rent, and power. Give the client spending money, and a food voucher that doesnt allow for smokes or alcohol. Those luxuaries such as cell phone credit, vehicles, etc are just that 'Luxuaries' and should come out of their spending money. Many families who have recieved the benefit for a substantial amount of years, often move to Aussie and manage very well to work and support themselves, why is this?

29 Aug 2009 08:05a.m.

Frank wrote:

I find it amazing that benefits could be extended to families or personnel for such an extended period of time without the appropropriate screening and only just now audit is considered. On the other hand to reduce their benefits, what is the government planning to do when crime rates go up - set up more make-shift cells that are transportable?

23 Aug 2009 10:32a.m.

Barbs wrote:

Yeah if ministers cut out spending on travel and transportation, based on Chris Carter spending of $190 000 over just 6 months. $380 000 of travel and transportation alone (based on a period of a year) could pay for 7 of these families for a whole year! So in conclusion one ministers spending of tax payers money over a year could fund 7 of these families that receive $1000 over the same period. So we should all rally for the goverment to let go of this spending, as they have some of the countrys top wages and should in all honesty be able to afford unsibsidised travel. They should pay for travel like all other Kiwis in this country, what gives them the right to have cheap travel in the expense of tax-payers money.

23 Aug 2009 09:19a.m.

MATE wrote:

You know what! I think the top 50 earners in government should be audited instead, that makes allot more sense.

22 Aug 2009 09:34p.m.

John wrote:

How the Dept of dsw defines a relationship are so loose that students living together could be in a relationship

22 Aug 2009 01:08p.m.

MARMITEY wrote:

I think they should any put emphasis on people on the benefit, who have remained there over a certain amount of time 15ys is a long time, but 1,000 wouldn't go far with 8 kids and two adults with special circumstances like disabilities etc. Paula Bennett made a silly move by removing TIA, this would of helped people get off the benefit system, I don't think it should of been abolished, just a limit set in place e.g. for childcare and books. Then cheeky Paula said she was against the benefit debate getting ugly. She either is really stupid to think It wouldn't, or it was a very calculated move. So yes the benefit system to some extent is fair, but shouldn't be a long term method of income. The government should try to move these people off the benefit and into work with fair humane measures (not sterilization and total cut-off) The biggest mistake was to remove the TIA and some funded education. Lets get these people into education and into work with funded education with allot more options, this would help people to generate more confidence and employable qualities to move in the right direction (without the stress of childcare and other expenses). If people haven't moved into education and work after a set period of time possibly slowly deduct their benefits then. If we were to cut any benefits right down at this time it would generate a increase in crime and poverty. Compared to last year, I'm down an extra $80 a week due to rising costs, this is a bad time to be cutting any lower income families earnings/benefits.

21 Aug 2009 06:02p.m.

Debbie wrote:

Typical benefit/beneficiary bashing here! What utter nonsense... Bully Bennett is simply trying to make sure people on any benefit have no credibility with the great unwashed, the unthinking Joe and Joanne Average.

21 Aug 2009 03:50p.m.

Syreeta wrote:

Well said Jackie, I know what you mean. I have a cousin who has 5 kids and hasn't worked since being preganant to her first child, whom is now 13, her younger twins are now 7, so you would've expected her to have a job by the time her younger 2 were 4 or 5 years old, but lately she's been talking about having another child, talk about desparate measures to avoid going to work.

21 Aug 2009 02:24p.m.

jackle wrote:

The current benefit system is just asking for abuse. Its time to take the cash out of it completely this will remove any chance of abuse. Deposit their benefit into the likes of a debit card that can only be used at approved retailers, all necessaries are debited before payment is made ie power, rent, ph etc, the remaining balance is then used for other needs eg food. Mainstay items are very heavily discounted at the supermarket with the Govt picking up the tab, but the likes of beer, smokes etc are not able to be purchased at all. This is a taxpayer grant to assist the needy you are not able to have luxuries, at the taxpayers expense if you dont like these conditions get a job easily fixed.