Beneficiary bashing crocodile tears

144 comments on “Beneficiary bashing crocodile tears ”

• Comments are now closed

1. One Anonymous Knucklehead 1

   26 July 2013 at 8:10 am

   Hardly surprising that dog-whistle policy has unintended consequences. As for Bennett’s false expectations, it’s hard to tell whether she’s

   1. Trying to look stupid or illiterate or both, or

   2. Just saying whatever because that works for Shonkey.

   I can’t imagine the minister is reading this so can someone point out to her that comprehending the fucking legislation you authored would be a good start.
   • AsleepWhileWalking 1.1

     26 July 2013 at 9:38 am

     lol that 3rd point.
     I’d have to add that expecting “nous” might be going a bit too far. These are stressed, over worked and now over run workers operating in an environment that invites abuse.
     • One Anonymous Knucklehead 1.1.1

       26 July 2013 at 9:49 am

       I’m not sure whether you’re referring to Bennett or WINZ employees: your comment is applicable in either case 🙂
2. Tiger Mountain 2

   26 July 2013 at 8:24 am

   A line has been crossed here I sense with the WINZ punishment machine winding up to maximum attack speed.

   I see more beggars on the street in the ’burbs too. Thousands of ‘job seekers’ (ex parents, carers, too sick to regularly work, unemployed and underemployed) have their backs against the wall. One missed appointment away from being cut off the pittance paid anyway. This is serious stuff when the Nats are pushing NZ workers into the Bangladeshi model of employment relations on the back of high unemployment. Good on the thousands of unionists that have made a submission to call bullshit on Simon Bridges.

   Will people turn on each other more or get organised? Mana is the only parliamentary party that truly takes this on, and to some extent the Greens. Labour over 9 years never reinstated the Richardson benefit cuts. A universal basic income of some sort is way overdue.
   • bad12 2.1

     26 July 2013 at 9:50 am

     LOLZ, think about that, sure Labour did not reverse the Richardson/Shiply 1991 benefit cuts, but, while shying away from the likes of National’s direct punitive attacks upon beneficiaries Labour as far as maintaining welfare in a ‘livable’ financial state have been less than white knights in shining armor,

     far, far less…
     • just saying 2.1.1

       26 July 2013 at 10:11 am

       Only “liveable” for those with intensive or extensive external support.
       At the far end, Social Security can be part of a pleasant lifestyle for a small minority from the comfortable middle-class, much like Super is for well-off superannuitants. Unfortunately these are the only beneficiaries that people in the media and other middle-class professions with clout, are likely to know personally, so it is more difficult for them to imagine the majority of beneficaires as being in genuine hardship, with a subsection in dire circumstances, except as authors of their own misfortune.

       And for some reason, “genteel poverty” is more likely to attract compassion, and generosity. It seems that the well-spoken and well-dressed fallen into hard times, or those starving in overseas famines are the only people deemed worthy of whole-hearted compassion.
3. Thrash Cardiom 3

   26 July 2013 at 9:40 am

   The WINZ internal culture is one of inflexibility and it has been deliberately developed over the years.

   Paula Bennet must know that when you set up a set of inflexible rules to apply to groups of people, those rules are going to be applied rigidly.
   • Mary 3.1

     26 July 2013 at 10:52 am

     Yes, this is where the real damage is done. Most people don’t stand up and challenge things and the few who do receive the “ooh, sorry about that” treatment which serves the further purpose for Bennett of coming across as caring. Slashing numbers of people receiving the invalid’s benefit by ringing the person’s doctor to say “the rules have changed so please change your medical certificate” (when the rule haven’t changed at all) is just one more method that’s being used on a similar scale as what’s going on with ACC and has done for years now but of course it’s only beneficiaries so the general public doesn’t care and the media aren’t interested.
4. weka 4

   26 July 2013 at 9:42 am

   I’m guessing that given the timeframe since the reform roll out, and knowing how WINZ bureaucracy works, that many of these cases will be computer generated letters that haven’t taken into account personal circumstances like age or situation. Smart WINZ staff will put these people to the back of the line (deferring any action indefinitely), stupid ones will carry on as usual.
5. srylands 5

   26 July 2013 at 9:47 am

   “Labour over 9 years never reinstated the Richardson benefit cuts.”

   There is a reason for that. The gaps between average wages, minimum wages, and benefits are low. Increasing benefits would destroy any incentives to work for low skilled unemployed.

   Higher benefits for short term unemployed is worth looking at. Those who are unemployed for 6 months or less often deplete their savings. A higher time limited UB is worth looking at. However for LT unemployed, it comes down to incentives and skills. For young LTU get them into education. For the older LT unemployed the choices are very limited. For those aged 60+ trasit them to NZ Super.

   On work testing sole parents I agree that we should not be targetting the grandparents. I don’t think that interests Paula anyway. But for the 20-50 year old age cohorts – they should be put through a rigorous work test. Incentives do matter.
   • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.1

     26 July 2013 at 9:51 am

     You’re pointing the wrong way. What matters is that there are enough jobs.
   • bad12 5.2

     26 July 2013 at 9:56 am

     Incentives to work???, so the ‘minimum wage is absurdly low, what a jolly good f**king reason to starve those reliant upon benefits,

     Turn the minimum wage into the ‘Living Wage’, remove the taxation from all WINZ benefits and give to beneficiaries with dependent children access to Working for Families tax credits…
     • srylands 5.2.1

       26 July 2013 at 10:00 am

       “so the ‘minimum wage is absurdly low”

       Sorry you misunderstood me – the minimum wage is very high compared to average wages. It really stands out internationally – close to the replacement ratio in France – and look what state they are in. I would reduce it to $11 per hour.
       • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.2.1.1

         26 July 2013 at 10:03 am

         I would have Objectivists deported to Somalia.
         • weka 5.2.1.1.1

           26 July 2013 at 10:14 am

           What have you got against Somalia?
           • One Anonymous Knucklehead 5.2.1.1.1.1

             26 July 2013 at 11:07 am

             😆

             *Owes Somalia his deepest apologies*
             • weka …

               26 July 2013 at 11:12 am

               😀

               Could send them to Planet Key. Or as suggested below, to the stupid camp.
         • bad12 5.2.1.1.2

           26 July 2013 at 10:22 am

           In a really leaky boat…
       • bad12 5.2.1.2

         26 July 2013 at 10:10 am

         No, i didn’t ‘misunderstand you at all, i picked you as a ‘nut-job’ from the out-set, OAK above points out the simple truth to you which obviously you refuse to address,

         Tell me, when since the 1970’s has there been enough employment in the New Zealand economy to employ all those able to work…
       • Richard Down South 5.2.1.3

         26 July 2013 at 12:25 pm

         The minimum wage is low, but what makes it worse, is when you’re working say 25 or 30 hours a week… sure you can sometimes qualify for a little top up from WINZ, but you have to jump through paperwork hoops, and go to all sorts of courses on how do interviews, do cover letters, etc etc
       • tricledrown 5.2.1.4

         26 July 2013 at 3:51 pm

         France is in trouble because of corruption and because its part of the EU so can’t lower its currency to bolster exports!
         But their is a bright spot with car production ramping up again as the demand for smaller cars is increasing rapidly!
       • Foreign Waka 5.2.1.5

         27 July 2013 at 11:05 am

         It may interest you that even India and Brazil are lifting wages. I am surprised at your comment as I feel that an economy that aims at the lowest denominator to suppress people and create a psychological environment that will enforce the underlying “survival” instinct is nothing short of inhuman – and this is not just a throw away comment. As I see it, there is no difference whether someone holds a weapon or a rule book if the outcome is suffering. Collectively, as a human race, we seem to be not moving intellectually at all. Technologically perhaps, but all that does is giving the torturer a new tool.
   • weka 5.3

     26 July 2013 at 9:56 am

     “However for LT unemployed, it comes down to incentives and skills.”

     And availability of jobs. You do realise there aren’t enough jobs to go around. How does that factor into your plan?

     What you are suggesting is that it’s better for more people to cycle on and off the benefit than for some people to get permanent work and others to remain long term beneficiaries. I disagree. Cycling on and off a benefit is stressful, and costs the individual fincancially because of stand down periods. It’s better to let the people who less able to work, to remain on a benefit and provide incentives for them to contribute to society in other ways that are within their means.

     A universal basic income would solve the wages/benefit issue. The current WINZ abatement process is a big block for some beneficiaries getting into work. I’ve yet to see any useful suggestion for changing that other than a UBI.
   • Draco T Bastard 5.4

     26 July 2013 at 2:49 pm

     There is a reason for that. The gaps between average wages, minimum wages, and benefits are low. Increasing benefits would destroy any incentives to work for low skilled unemployed.

     Well, the employers could always increase wages so as to incentivise people people to work for them.
6. weka 6

   26 July 2013 at 9:47 am

   “This is forcing elderly people who are caring for traumatised kids back into work,” GRG chairwoman Diane Vivian said. “It is just appalling.”

   Yes Diane, it is appalling. In the same way forcing ill people back to work when they are not ready or capable is. Or forcing women on the DPB into work when they’re struggling to raise kids and run a home. Let’s hope that you’ve woken up and understand reality for beneficiaries now, or is it only people who are like you that deserve to be treated with respect and dignity?

   https://ideologicallyimpure.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/oh-look-diane-vivian-paula-bennett-did-come-for-you/
7. srylands 7

   26 July 2013 at 10:11 am

   “It’s better to let the people who less able to work, to remain on a benefit and provide incentives for them to contribute to society in other ways that are within their means.”

   Or we could provide incentives foer them to lift their ability to work.

   Some people will indeed be permanently unable to look after themselves. I have no problem with that.

   I do have a problem with paying vast amounts of tax (which I do) and paying for people who have limited incentives to change their dependency on the taxpayer.
   • weka 7.1

     26 July 2013 at 10:18 am

     Show us where all the jobs are for these people that need incentivising.

     (and use the reply button otherwise the conversation gets out of sync.
     • srylands 7.1.1

       26 July 2013 at 10:25 am

       Here is a list of all the skill shortages in NZ. You do realise that we are importing thousands of immigrants to fill these jobs? So yes people do need incentivising. Any unemployed person in New Zealand could undertake training in 6 months to get thmselves a high paying job in ChCh.

       The labour mrket outlook in NZ is brilliant for the next 5 years at least.

       http://skillshortages.immigration.govt.nz/
       • bad12 7.1.1.1

         26 July 2013 at 10:29 am

         Oh so there are a couple of thousand jobs on offer during the Christchurch rebuild, how do you propose to divvy them up among the current ‘job-seeker’ category of WINZ recipients numbering in the 100,s of thousands…
         • srylands 7.1.1.1.1

           26 July 2013 at 10:37 am

           a “a couple of thousand” ?
         • Rosetinted 7.1.1.1.2

           26 July 2013 at 12:46 pm

           Ruthless Richardson’s time – a young chap was restructured out of his Post office job in the top of the south. But he could get one near Dunedin. But he had to travel there at his own expense. But they restructured down there after a year or so and he was out of work again. This is how the cold-blooded politicians and business leaders treat people who are in their control and workless and feeling helpless not knowing what to do for the best.
       • weka 7.1.1.2

         26 July 2013 at 10:39 am

         “You do realise that we are importing thousands of immigrants to fill these jobs?”

         Yes I do, and some of the jobs I am aware of are seasonal with poor rates of pay. Hardly full time permanent work. So that goes back to my point about cycling on and off benefits.

         “Any unemployed person in New Zealand could undertake training in 6 months to get thmselves a high paying job in ChCh.”

         ‘Any’? What about all the people that are leaving Chch because they can’t stand the stress? You want ill people to uproot from their homes, families, communities and shift to a city under chronic stress and try and find work? You want women on the DPB to shift away from their support systems to live in a stressed out city so they can work part time and lose most of that in childcare payments?

         You should read the intros to those skill shortages lists. They’re not backing up what you are saying.
         • srylands 7.1.1.2.1

           26 July 2013 at 10:58 am

           Your alternative seems to be a large underclass of people dependent on the taxpayer.

           Choice A = Be on welfare forever or

           Choice B = retrain as a (trck driver/builder/insert any number of high quality jobs) and move to ChCh and give something to the country.

           And they ae not all ill and stressed. I was there for 6 months. It was a great place to work.

           Your conterfactual is a life on welfare is a worthwhile life. It is not. It is a life of dependency.

           If people don’t want to work in NZ there are still plenty of jobs in Western Australia. I don’t care where they go so long as I don’t have to pay for them being idle.
           • weka 7.1.1.2.1.1

             26 July 2013 at 11:11 am

             “Your alternative seems to be a large underclass of people dependent on the taxpayer.”

             No, that is National’s alternative (and all they are doing with the welfare reform is juggling numbers in a nasty and cruel way for beneficiaries).

             Until successive governments choose to run teh economy with a zero unemployment rate, there will always be people who need welfare. Pushing ill people or those raising kids into a job market that is already tight is just fucking stupid. You do realise that that is what the reforms are doing?

             Again, please provide some evidence that there are enough jobs (full time) in NZ for the number of people available for full time work. If you can’t do that, then everything you have said in this thread is ideological with no grounding in reality.

             “And they ae not all ill and stressed.”

             I didn’t say that all people in Chch are ill and stressed. I said the city itself is a population under chronic stress (some people will be ok within that, others won’t) and that it doesn’t make any sense to uproot people from their lives and force them when ill to move into such a situation.
           • Murray Olsen 7.1.1.2.1.2

             27 July 2013 at 12:28 am

             You don’t get to decide what our alternatives are. Nor does John Key. I have far less than zero interest in the opinions of anyone who thinks the minimum wage is too high.
         • Rosetinted 7.1.1.2.2

           26 July 2013 at 12:48 pm

           weka
           What about the costs of getting training and while living and travelling which all need money, and it would help if there was a progression at the end to a job.
       • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.3

         26 July 2013 at 2:56 pm

         Any unemployed person in New Zealand could undertake training in 6 months to get thmselves a high paying job in ChCh.

         Yeah, right.
   • burt 7.2

     26 July 2013 at 10:49 am

     srylands

     You don’t get it do you. Spending on welfare is about the same as the combined spend on health and education – and it’s not enough. I personally pay more tax than the average income and it’s simply not enough – The Labour party is not likely to get elected while people on benefits can’t afford a new house in central Auckland. Shut up and pay your tax so the glorious Labour party can use that money to get elected.
8. Sable 8

   26 July 2013 at 10:21 am

   I didn’t know Bennett had tear duct.
   • bad12 8.1

     26 July 2013 at 10:25 am

     She does, in the Bennett model the designers decided to install the tear ducts just under…LOLZ i had better not…
9. Sable 9

   26 July 2013 at 10:21 am

   I didn’t know Bennett had tear ducts.
10. srylands 10

    26 July 2013 at 11:01 am

    I think I will go back to Kiwiblog. It is too depressing here 🙂
    • Rosetinted 10.1

      26 July 2013 at 11:22 am

      srylands
      Yes it can be depressing when you look at what terrible things government is doing. We like to have a few laughs so perhaps you could give us some satire or something to cheer us up.
    • bad12 10.2

      26 July 2013 at 11:32 am

      Like i said to you in an above comment, i picked you as being a nut-job from your first comment, there are now 100’s of thousands of ‘job-seekers’ classified by this National Government as able to work,

      There are not 100’s of thousands of available jobs in the New Zealand economy where these people could find work a FACT that nut-jobs blithely disregard in their attacks on those they deem ‘idle’,

      Your proposal that it is simply a matter of ‘the idle’ unemployed undertaking a bit of training and en masse heading off to Christchurch to seek employment is absolutely ludicrous on too many levels for me to want to bother to spend the time educating a ‘hard-core nut-job’ such as you,

      At best anything you propose is simply ‘rotational employment’ and of course in this scheme of ‘rotation’ it is not YOU who propose to swap places on the dole with some-one presently there, for the nut-jobs of your ilk it is always ‘someone else’ who can become unemployed while one from the ranks of beneficiaries is whipped into their previous employment,

      When you and your ilk are prepared to give YOUR employment position to someone else while YOU survive on the doles miserable pittance for 6 months of any year your whining might just hold some legitimacy,

      F off back to the sewer from whence you have slithered, you will not be missed…
11. Rosetinted 11

    26 July 2013 at 11:20 am

    This post demonstrates what I have said before that parents and children are not supported by this country because it is a good thing to do, actually essential, for a country that wants to find its potential through all its citizens growing up healthy and happy in a fair society, finding their own potential. That would produce a nation that in all its good achievements would rise exponentially.
    We have potentially an exponential rise! But we need to value people, and particularly parents who can make the largest difference on the outcomes for young adults.

    Michael Apted talking on Radionz this morning about his docos done each seven years on the lives of some British children remarked how it was difficult to know how they would develop. He has noticed how many have gained in confidence and found strengths that have carried them to have extremely successful lives, not just judged on money though. I think that an approach by SWD of being prepared to be surprised by what people can achieve instead of looking at them disparagingly as if they are less useful than worms would turn the system round. Finding what people think are their talents and asking them to seek work in a place using those talents, saying that they may be surprised how well they can do. What a good approach that would be.

    And realising that parents are doing the most important creative thing in bringing up their children since they first conceived them. And grandparents or carers too. Helping them to do a good job of it. Now that would be practical. Could SWD surprise me by taking that approach? I wish.
12. srylands 12

    26 July 2013 at 12:53 pm

    “When you and your ilk are prepared to give YOUR employment position to someone else ..”

    I am looking to employ a number of people and I just can’t get the people with the right skills so I am importing people from overseas to fill the jobs. These are jobs paying $100,000 plus. There are not enough locals that can do the work. Can you explain that?

    ChCh will generate around 60,000 jobs. That is enough to soak up maybe half of those unemployed for 12 months or less. So it is not trivial.

    There is a mismacth bewteen (too many of) the unemployed and vacancies. that is my point. We need to inject more flexibility into the labour market and part of that is about incentives.

    What is distressing is that you are not thinking laterally about how labour markets work, and about how we live in a globalised labour market. As I said, there are lots of jobs in Western Australia. What is stopping a welfare recipient here getting on a plane and trying their luck? Whining and blaming “rich pricks” gets you nowhere.
    • One Anonymous Knucklehead 12.1

      26 July 2013 at 12:59 pm

      I just can’t get people with the rights skills who want to work for me at the salary I’m offering. FIFY
      • weka 12.1.1

        26 July 2013 at 1:39 pm

        Or the salary is ok but the other work conditions aren’t good. Or it’s known to be shit company to work for.
        • QoT 12.1.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 8:49 pm

          God, this. New Zealand is not a big place, especially in particular industries or cities. Word of a shitty manager gets around.
    • Dv 12.2

      26 July 2013 at 1:11 pm

      sryland where are the ads for the positions you are offering.
      • Murray Olsen 12.2.1

        27 July 2013 at 12:32 am

        In his head.
    • Arfamo 12.3

      26 July 2013 at 1:12 pm

      “What is distressing is that you are not thinking laterally about how labour markets work, and about how we live in a globalised labour market.”

      What’s distressing is that you are not thinking laterally about how countries work and about how their governments are supposed to govern for the welfare of all their people – not for the wealthy, for global corporates, and for global financial and labour markets.
    • weka 12.4

      26 July 2013 at 1:31 pm

      “What is distressing is that you are not thinking laterally about how labour markets work, and about how we live in a globalised labour market. As I said, there are lots of jobs in Western Australia. What is stopping a welfare recipient here getting on a plane and trying their luck? Whining and blaming “rich pricks” gets you nowhere.”

      You are talking about destroying communities and families. I guess you don’t care about that as long as you can feel secure that a fraction less of the small amount of your taxes goes to welfare.
    • bad12 12.5

      26 July 2013 at 1:59 pm

      ”Can i explain that”, well yes there is a 90 percent chance that you are simply a t-roll trotting out the usual right wing nut jobs pet fallacy of the month with your ”i want to employ a whole lot of people for 100 grand salary”,

      Give us the name of your business and links to ALL the places you have advertised for these 100 grand employees and you will be believable otherwise you are just as i describe above, a f**king nut-job,

      In the unlikely situation that you are genuine in your search for these 100 grand a year employees YES, ”i can explain that”,

      IF you cannot find such employees anywhere in New Zealand what it shows is that contrary to your self held view that your ‘special’ you are in fact an extremely poor businessperson, you have No skills at forward planning and you have failed to ascertain the growth potential in your particular market field and also failed to gradually increase your workforce by hiring suitable trainees befor the need for these skilled employees became a crisis of having to import labor from elsewhere,

      By even claiming to be hiring skilled workers elsewhere you are in fact part of the problem of unemployment in this country helping to keep the unemployed in that position,

      Whichever way i look at your latest piece of ‘Drivel’, be it the lies i believe you to be pedaling, or, your lack of business skill i can only conclude that your a gross waste of space, a nut-job in other words…
      • Arfamo 12.5.1

        26 July 2013 at 2:16 pm

        +1.
      • Draco T Bastard 12.5.2

        26 July 2013 at 3:10 pm

        +1

        In everything that srylands says he proves that he’s part of the problem.
    • tricledrown 12.6

      26 July 2013 at 3:38 pm

      srylands the people with the skills you want can get better paid jobs overseas and have the money and mobility !
      Jobs are being retrenched in WA now and people on the benefit haven’t got the money to uproot and move find accommodation (have you seen the cost of accommodation in WA!)
      Just another right wing bully!
      Tell us what type of jobs you are trying to fill and we may believe your propaganda!
    • Draco T Bastard 12.7

      26 July 2013 at 5:04 pm

      I am looking to employ a number of people and I just can’t get the people with the right skills so I am importing people from overseas to fill the jobs.

      Frank Macskasy makes a great pointhere:

      “They need to have an ability to hit the ground running,” says John Hughes. What does that mean? Because what I’m getting from Mr Hughes’ statements is nothing but self-serving excuses that his industry – Rural Contractors New Zealand – has done stuff all to train workers to meet their needs.
      Who else is he expecting to meet the needs of the “marketplace”? The State?

      If you can’t find people with the skills you need it’s because you failed to provide them.
      • McFlock 12.7.1

        26 July 2013 at 10:11 pm

        Another good point.
        It’s silly saying “I’m advertising for a fully-qualified XXX and nobody’s applied, therefore the unemployed are just loafing”. If they can’t be trained and upskilled on the job inside of six months, then the employer should be lobbying for the government to provide that training in advance to the point that getting someone who can step up is trivial. But tories like spyland think it’s the unemployed person’s fault for not predicting empoyment conditions years down the line and dropping $30-60k on a three-year education.

        And there’s a good chance that the few people who did get that specific education got warned somewhere along the line to “avoid company Y, they’re arseholes to work for”.
        • srylands 12.7.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 11:47 pm

          ” If they can’t be trained and upskilled on the job inside of six months, then the employer should be lobbying for the government to provide that training in advance to the point that getting someone who can step up is trivial. ”

          This is missing the point. We are looking for people with skills that would take 10 years to develop. You can’t “train them up” in 6 months or tell the government to do it. These are not training jobs. They are roles that pay $150 – $200K. You either have what it takes or not.
          • weka 12.7.1.1.1

            26 July 2013 at 11:54 pm

            Sounds like another failure of the market eh?
            • Arfamo 12.7.1.1.1.1

              26 July 2013 at 11:59 pm

              Sounds more like a dodgy hard-sell door-to-door sales operation. “These are jobs paying $100,000 plus” has suddenly morphed into $150 – 200K.
              • bad12 …

                27 July 2013 at 12:12 am

                There are not any jobs full stop, IT has been asked to provide the name of it’s company and proof of it’s advertising efforts to attract these so called workers,

                The fact that it can’t shows it is just a bulls**tting TR0LL playing out it’s own pathetic little fantasy world here in the pages of the Standard…
                • Arfamo …

                  27 July 2013 at 12:15 am

                  Certainly looks that way.
                • Murray Olsen …

                  27 July 2013 at 1:04 am

                  That’s what it looks like to me. I’d put money on him just making it up.
            • McFlock 12.7.1.1.1.2

              27 July 2013 at 12:18 am

              I’m outraged that people who have been made redundant from a carpet factory aren’t fully qualified neurosurgeons. It took ages for us to find one for Dunedin, and I think the successful applicant was an overseas import. It’s like NZers just don’t want to work!
          • McFlock 12.7.1.1.2

            27 July 2013 at 12:46 am

            Just to recap:
            According to spylands, on Planet Key the skillset

            1. High numeracy
            2. Accounting qualificaions
            3. Ability to write clearly
            4. Ability to work under pressure
            5. Ability to manage demanding relationships with clients
            6. Public presentation skills

            “take 10 years to develop”.

            I am strangely unsurprised.
            • Arfamo 12.7.1.1.2.1

              27 July 2013 at 12:55 am

              Parking Meter Warden, 7 days a week, 16 hour days, with bonus scheme.
    • Sable 12.8

      27 July 2013 at 8:21 pm

      You are assuming the quoted figures for unemployment are accurate and I can tell you for a fact they are not. Employment is much higher than Keys would like the public to know.
13. Hilary 13

    26 July 2013 at 1:01 pm

    Heard about a young father whose wife has just died of cancer. Straightaway WINZ told him to get a job – no sympathy or flexibility for a parent trying to support a grieving family.
    • Mary 13.1

      26 July 2013 at 3:50 pm

      And then probably sent him a bill for the days she was paid a benefit while not alive.
14. Santi 14

    26 July 2013 at 1:15 pm

    No bashing at all. Fair is fair.
    Those able to work must look for work and seek it actively. Otherwise, they receive no benefit. Clear as limpid water.
    • srylands 14.1

      26 July 2013 at 1:24 pm

      Yes exactly
      • Arfamo 14.1.1

        26 July 2013 at 1:28 pm

        What exactly are the “right skills” you claim to be seeking and unable to get from potential employees in New Zealand?
        • srylands 14.1.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 1:35 pm

          1. High numeracy
          2. Accounting qualificaions
          3. Ability to write clearly
          4. Ability to work under pressure
          5. Ability to manage demanding relationships with clients
          6. Public presentation skills
          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 14.1.1.1.1

            26 July 2013 at 1:41 pm

            7. Dealing with a right wing bigot Randist superhero for a boss.
          • Arfamo 14.1.1.1.2

            26 July 2013 at 1:46 pm

            1. High numeracy
            2. Accounting qualificaions
            3. Ability to write clearly
            Why aren’t those skills available from within NZ?

            4. Ability to work under pressure
            What kind of pressure? What does the job involve?

            5. Ability to manage demanding relationships with clients
            What kind of demanding relationships? Why are they demanding? Are the jobs ethically dodgy?

            6. Public presentation skills
            That comes with experience and training. What are you doing about training and experience?
            • McFlock 14.1.1.1.2.1

              26 July 2013 at 10:17 pm

              2. Accounting qualificaions
              Oh, so spylands is just bitching that not enough NZers are dropping $20k on accounting qualifications (and $100k p.a. is sure beyond a graduate recruitment salary).

              To solve his problem we need to get rid of student loans and increase tertiary education funding. But no, spylands it’s the fault of laid off railway workers and forklift drivers that they don’t have an accounting degree in reserve.
          • tricledrown 14.1.1.1.3

            26 July 2013 at 3:44 pm

            srylands their are a lot of people in the hinterland with these skills who are under employed but probably not willing to move to Auckland without the promise of good accommodation and long term employment!
            99.999% of unemployed people will not have these skills otherwise they would be employed!
            You are just finding an excuse to bully so go back to the Kiwi Bullying site!
          • Sable 14.1.1.1.4

            27 July 2013 at 8:24 pm

            So we are all to be accountants now? God this country is going to be a boring place.
    • burt 14.2

      26 July 2013 at 1:27 pm

      Santi

      You can’t buy the votes when the people are independent…. Come on keep up – Labour have a vested interest in keeping beneficiaries on benefits…
      • One Anonymous Knucklehead 14.2.1

        26 July 2013 at 1:38 pm

        That explains why there are 80,000 more unemployed under National, and why 2007 saw the lowest unemployment rate in recorded history.

        Basically, reality says you’re lying or delusional. Care to comment?
        • burt 14.2.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 1:51 pm

          Yes I’ll comment. National could also reduce unemployment by employing thousands of people into the public service filling up the empty buildings again and sending the economy into recession like Labour have done the last 2 times they were in power.

          Care to comment ?
          • Santi 14.2.1.1.1

            26 July 2013 at 1:56 pm

            Yes, I do.
            Labour bloated the publi8c service ranks with countless bureaucrats adding little value to the economy. National decided not to make the same mistake.

            Dr Cullen and his boss Clark were harmful with their policies. Invented jobs for all and sundry regardless of productivity or necessity. Very bad.
            • One Anonymous Knucklehead 14.2.1.1.1.1

              26 July 2013 at 2:15 pm

              Newsflash, Einstein, the “make up any old shit” debating technique doesn’t work outside your echo chamber.

              17,000 jobs lost in the manufacturing sector and that’s just in the last year.
              • tricledrown …

                26 July 2013 at 3:23 pm

                Burt & santi 30,000 more on the DPB since 2008!
                National have spent more on consultants than Labour ever spent on equivalent cheaper public servants!
                Under Shipley and Bolger consultant spending went from $120million a year to in excess of $800 million !
                Clarks govt got that down to$140 million a year now Key has that back up to over $300 million not including CHCH rebuild!
                A lot of these consultants are former National MP’s and staffers!
          • One Anonymous Knucklehead 14.2.1.1.2

            26 July 2013 at 2:10 pm

            “Sending the economy into recession”? Not according to Bill English.

            I note you have just contradicted your own bullshit about Labour keeping people on benefits. Flailing around like a loser much?
          • bad12 14.2.1.1.3

            26 July 2013 at 2:11 pm

            ”Sending the economy into recession”, got any proof that the economy was in ‘recession” at any time during the 9 years of Clark Government???…
          • Draco T Bastard 14.2.1.1.4

            26 July 2013 at 3:19 pm

            Labour didn’t send the economy into recession. Recession is actually the normal state for a capitalist system. The boom that happened over the last Labour led government was an anomaly and the global economy going into recession was it actually returning to normal.
          • Sable 14.2.1.1.5

            27 July 2013 at 8:28 pm

            Actually in a perverse way that’s pretty much what National have done. Permanent public sector jobs have been disestablished in favour of contracts BUT contract rates are in some cases so high they are costing the country more not less. Still looks good on paper till someone asks to see the account balance for salaries.
      • Draco T Bastard 14.2.2

        26 July 2013 at 3:15 pm

        You can’t buy the votes when the people are independent

        This government doesn’t want people to be independent. If people are independent then the employers can’t exploit them. This is why they keep putting in place laws that take away workers rights while strengthening the power that corporations have. It’s why they’re selling off our assets.

        People actually being independent would destroy capitalism.
        • TheContrarian 14.2.2.1

          26 July 2013 at 3:31 pm

          So, Draco, you want people to realise they are part of a collective community as opposed to the individualistic “I am OK, jack” mantra while saying people’s independence would destroy the capitalist status quo.

          Huh…how about that.
          • Draco T Bastard 14.2.2.1.1

            26 July 2013 at 3:36 pm

            I don’t see what your problem is. Communities are interdependent. Capitalism tries to push the BS that people can be independent though and that they should be while also increasing the communities dependence upon the capitalists. It is that dependence that makes the capitalists rich.
            • TheContrarian 14.2.2.1.1.1

              26 July 2013 at 3:57 pm

              So people should be independent but also realise they can’t be independent? The “capitalists” (an as of yet undefined term by you) want to push people to be independent from their communities while you argue “they” don’t wish people to be independent.

              Hmmmm….
              • Draco T Bastard …

                26 July 2013 at 5:16 pm

                Show me where I’ve said that people should be independent.

                The “capitalists” (an as of yet undefined term by you) want to push people to be independent from their communities while you argue “they” don’t wish people to be independent.

                And there you’re purposefully misrepresenting me.
                • TheContrarian …

                  26 July 2013 at 7:34 pm

                  “Show me where I’ve said that people should be independent.”

                  OK…

                  “This government doesn’t want people to be independent. If people are independent then the employers can’t exploit them. This is why they keep putting in place laws that take away workers rights while strengthening the power that corporations have. It’s why they’re selling off our assets.
                  People actually being independent would destroy capitalism.”

                  This is your way of saying people shouldn’t be independent?

                  “And there you’re purposefully misrepresenting me.”

                  No, just trying to make sense of your seemingly contradictory POV.
                  • Draco T Bastard …

                    26 July 2013 at 10:30 pm

                    This is your way of saying people shouldn’t be independent?

                    No. It’s my way of saying that this government doesn’t want people to be independent and why. I didn’t say a damn thing about what I thought the way society should be.

                    No, just trying to make sense of your seemingly contradictory POV.

                    Considering that you managed to completely misread everything I said that would either suggest you need to take remedial English lessons (as you’ve got a degree I doubt that) or that you were lying.
                    • TheContrarian …

                      26 July 2013 at 10:48 pm

                      “It’s my way of saying that this government doesn’t want people to be independent and why. I didn’t say a damn thing about what I thought the way society should be.”

                      You have previously bemoaned personal independence in favour of collective responsibility. I am just trying to make sense of your jargon.

                      What I am hearing (reading) is that this government is promoting individualism which is bad however it is bad that this government is stopping people from being individuals. So…which is it? You can’t have it both ways, friend.
                    • McFlock …

                      26 July 2013 at 10:52 pm

                      this government is promoting individualism which is bad however it is bad that this government is stopping people from being individuals. So…which is it? You can’t have it both ways, friend

                      you can with a government this hypocritical and incompetent, guy.
                    • Draco T Bastard …

                      27 July 2013 at 3:48 am

                      You have previously bemoaned personal independence in favour of collective responsibility.

                      I’ve never said that. I’ve said that society is made up of individuals and that those individuals are interdependent. The collective bit is about those individuals self-governing as a collective, i.e, democracy to decide the rules (also known as custom/culture/tradition) that the society operates under.

                      What I am hearing (reading) is that this government is promoting individualism which is bad however it is bad that this government is stopping people from being individuals.

                      This government and the capitalists tell everybody that they should be independent while knowing that this is impossible, i.e, what they say is pure propaganda. They then set up society so that it becomes dependent upon the capitalists (selling state assets, undermining workers rights, empowering corporations, etc) so that the capitalists can rort ever more wealth out of society.
    • weka 14.3

      26 July 2013 at 1:37 pm

      “Those able to work must look for work and seek it actively. Otherwise, they receive no benefit. Clear as limpid water.”

      I’ll say it slowly…. there aren’t enough jobs to go around.

      So, someone who is volunteering at the local food bank or helps out an old person down the road from them, who is also on the dole, looks for work where that is appropriate but does’t jump through the hoops you want, they should stop helping the food bank or the old people, and instead spend their time at WINZ doing stupid fucking courses teaching them things they already know, and applying for jobs that are unsuitable just so WINZ and you can tick some boxes.

      I think you have seriously little understanding of how communities work, or about the lives of people in teh dole, or about what the reforms are doing.
      • unclemuzza 14.3.1

        26 July 2013 at 3:04 pm

        Well said, weka!
      • marty mars 14.3.2

        26 July 2013 at 3:06 pm

        “there aren’t enough jobs to go around.”

        Such a basic and pivotal point that these idiots just pretend isn’t there. All of their arguments are based on deliberately forgetting this fact. It is beyond a blindspot and just shows how callous and nasty they are.
        • pollywog 14.3.2.1

          27 July 2013 at 6:33 pm

          Why are there not enough jobs though?
15. srylands 15

    26 July 2013 at 3:16 pm

    “there aren’t enough jobs to go around”

    This implies that the numbers of jobs are fixed. I thought people stopped that catchphrase in teh 1970s.

    That is not how markets work, particualrly the upper end of the labour market. The numbers of jobs are a function of labour price and aggregate demand. Too many of the unemployed have no skills that are in demand. So at the low end sure there are not enough jobs (reducing teh minimum wage to $11 woudl help on that front). That means you need to retrain to match the demand.

    Over the next 3 years we will bring in many tens of thousands of skilled migrants to fill job vacancies. Why do you think that is?
    • Draco T Bastard 15.1

      26 July 2013 at 3:32 pm

      Too many of the unemployed have no skills that are in demand.

      And that bit of dribble is completely refuted by the sub 4% unemployment that we had just a few years ago.

      That is not how markets work

      Markets don’t work, never have done.
    • weka 15.2

      26 July 2013 at 3:43 pm

      “This implies that the numbers of jobs are fixed”

      No, it implies that despite most people being willing to work for a living, something structural prevents the unemployment rate from dropping.

      “Over the next 3 years we will bring in many tens of thousands of skilled migrants to fill job vacancies. Why do you think that is?”

      Too many jobs with shit wages and shit working conditions.
      • srylands 15.2.1

        26 July 2013 at 3:45 pm

        So either upskill or move to Australia.
        • weka 15.2.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 4:06 pm

          That’s not an answer to either of my points.

          And, because you seem interminably dull, I’ll repeat: there are not enough jobs for everyone.

          How about you come up with some constructive ideas on job creation. Or fuck off to somewhere else in the world that doesn’t have welfare, if you don’t like paying taxes for welfare.
          • srylands 15.2.1.1.1

            26 July 2013 at 4:39 pm

            “I’ll repeat: there are not enough jobs for everyone.”

            Well I call bullshit on that 1970s progressive mantra.

            I’ll repeat.

            1. The number of jobs is not fixed. Reducing taxes that affact incentives (like the current high marginal tax rate on labour), work testing benefits, and reducing minimum wages will help lift growth rates.

            2. There are serious shortages of skilled workers. That is why we need to import them. – i,e the biggest problem for employers is a SHORTAGE of workers, no matter how much we pay them.

            3. For unskilled workers, they are unemployed because it is not worthwhile getting a job at current wage rates relative to benefit levels.
            • weka 15.2.1.1.1.1

              26 July 2013 at 4:52 pm

              “The number of jobs is not fixed”

              I haven’t said it is. Obviously the number of jobs available fluctuates all the time.

              As for the rest, it’s you that’s got the dogma mantra going. Like I said earlier, it’s all ideology and you can’t put up anything to support what you say other than theory.
              • Arfamo …

                26 July 2013 at 5:00 pm

                Forget it. This guy’s just an airhead. Reduce the minimum wage he says. Then growth rates will lift. Jesus. When he shows he can live on the minimum wage for 12 months he can come back and talk about what a big improvement for everyone it would be to lower it.
            • tricledrown 15.2.1.1.1.2

              26 July 2013 at 4:55 pm

              Srylands the US effectively has no minimum wage yet has less growth and employement so where are your facts to back your failed theory !
              States controlled by republican governors have the highest unemployment and lowest growth they are implementing your policies and are miserably failing!
              Just keep repeating the mantra it will work one day yeah right!
              I’ve read economics going back to pre Egyptian times and this right wing mantra has never changed and never worked it leads to a downward spiral that can only reversed by spreading wealth around the economy and not just letting a few enjoy wealth at the expense of the majority!
              Go back to KB where all the other narrow minded selfish people stroke themselves!
            • Draco T Bastard 15.2.1.1.1.3

              26 July 2013 at 5:24 pm

              Reducing taxes that affact incentives (like the current high marginal tax rate on labour), work testing benefits, and reducing minimum wages will help lift growth rates.

              Never happened before. In fact, the most growth has come when we’ve increased taxes.

              There are serious shortages of skilled workers. That is why we need to import them.

              Incorrect, what you need to do is train them. IMO, though, NZers have the skills, they just won’t work for the peanuts you want to pay them.

              For unskilled workers, they are unemployed because it is not worthwhile getting a job at current wage rates relative to benefit levels.

              That’s probably true, the employers should pay more then as the benefit isn’t enough to live on and so what you’re saying is that the wages aren’t either.
        • Sable 15.2.1.2

          27 July 2013 at 8:33 pm

          You think Australia wants the unskilled, don’t kid yourself. I worked there for many years and they expect qualifications and ability.

          As to up skilling, given how expensive an education has become and how few jobs there are even for graduates this is an unconvincing argument. What we need is government that acts in the interests of its own people and does not let foreign multi nationals economically strip mine the country. Look at the tax avoidance on the part of banks alone, if you need an example. Suggest you bugger off to Kiwi blog or Whale Blubber you’ll fit right in there.
    • risildo 15.3

      26 July 2013 at 4:07 pm

      “”Over the next 3 years we will bring in many tens of thousands of skilled migrants to fill job vacancies. Why do you think that is?””

      Doh coz there have been tens of thousands deserting this sinking ship since the tories took over.

      They have had since the quakes struck to train up people for the rebuild and they have done SFA but create more unemployed..

      Not that bright are you
      • srylands 15.3.1

        26 July 2013 at 4:12 pm

        “They have had since the quakes struck to train up people for the rebuild and they have done SFA but create more unemployed.. ”

        Who is “they”? I assume you mean ‘the Government” Why do you think it is the role of the Government to “train people” or “create jobs”. That is the role of markets.

        Also reliance on large numbers of skilled migrants preceded the Canterbury earthquakes.
        • Arfamo 15.3.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 4:22 pm

          Well then, why aren’t you training the staff you claim to need? You’re in the market (or so you claim). If there’s a shortage of trained skills (as you claim) why is there a shortage?
        • bad12 15.3.1.2

          26 July 2013 at 4:43 pm

          Right stupid, if it not the role of Government to train people for the employment the Government has the means necessary to know what is needed and where, and, it is as you claim the role of the ‘market’,

          Then everything you have said as a comment in this post here today tells you one thing,

          THE MARKET HAS FAILED, even an idiot like what you obviously are should have been able to figure that out…
          • srylands 15.3.1.2.1

            26 July 2013 at 4:48 pm

            Yes we need a “hands on” government to fix the market. I am sure the Labour/Green government will fix things.
            • Santi 15.3.1.2.1.1

              26 July 2013 at 5:45 pm

              A Labour/Green government would only destroy the economy and enlarge the welfare state, so dear to the Left. Fortunately it will not happen in 2014. The Labour Party will see to it.
              • tricledrown …

                26 July 2013 at 5:51 pm

                grinch more on benefits under right wing gov!
                Tell a lie keep repeating it and some one will believe it!
                You are one of the best motivators the left have had for while keep it up grinch!
              • One Anonymous Knucklehead …

                26 July 2013 at 6:38 pm

                What was that again Chicken Little?
          • bad12 15.3.1.2.2

            26 July 2013 at 4:54 pm

            Further to the above comment as you claim to be part of that ‘market’ then it’s FAILURE is YOUR failure,

            Befor you get to asking one of your y questions, here i will give you a pointer to why the MARKET has failed in such a way, it’s because at the ‘markets’ helm is a whole community of fucking airheads like yourself who think and talk shit by the truckload…
        • tricledrown 15.3.1.3

          26 July 2013 at 4:58 pm

          Srylands according to your theory we should just forget about educating anybody and leave it ti the markets!
        • Sable 15.3.1.4

          27 July 2013 at 8:44 pm

          Boy but you are annoying. The role of government may not be to create jobs but its not to take them away either. Interference in employment legislation by out government at the behest of the markets you refer to (lets call them multi nationals because that’s who they are) has seen one person take on the work of two depriving people of employment whilst undermining the health of those in work.

          Allowing the same multi nationals to suck money out of the country in a way most other nations will not entertain and worse still not paying appropriate taxes further undermines local business and creates poverty and economic decline.

          Oh and I see you have rolled out the old Richard Epstein neo liberal argument about laissez faire economics too. The current economic collapse globally is due to embracing this nonsense. The market does not take care of itself, just look at General Motors a vicious supporter of neo liberal economics, who bailed them out in the end when greedy corporates had strip mined the business, that’s right the public of America.
    • s y d 15.4

      26 July 2013 at 4:23 pm

      because all our skilled workers left to avoid the brighter future
      • Arfamo 15.4.1

        26 July 2013 at 4:28 pm

        Can’t be that. Srylands is such a shit hot high-paying employer providing conditions so freaking good they’d be flocking to help him make a fortune.
    • tricledrown 15.5

      26 July 2013 at 11:04 pm

      because our govt and employers are not investing in training enough people with right skills!
      since the mid 1990’s
16. srylands 16

    26 July 2013 at 3:44 pm

    “Markets don’t work, never have done.”

    Right comrade 🙂

    Now I am defintely going back to Kiwiblog 🙂
    • tricledrown 16.1

      26 July 2013 at 5:03 pm

      srylands the sulker run back to where it its safe mummies boy!
      Markets need control to work effectively ask Simon Power !
    • Sable 16.2

      27 July 2013 at 8:46 pm

      No, not in the way you suggest, they most definitely do not.
17. Rosetinted 17

    26 July 2013 at 6:03 pm

    I’ve counted 16 comments from srylands since about 10 a.m. today to nearly 5 p.m. With one reply this would amount to 32 comments out of 103 or nearly 30% and of course many had two or more so that he has generated about half of the comments on this post. Is he getting paid by the post? He has stuck at it throughout the day. Is there something enticing for RWNJs about bashing beneficiaries. It perhaps gives them that halo ring of confidence in their own sanctity, as no doubt they have managed to not fall into the situation of needing it. It’s a get out of jail free card for these little-minded people.

    What does his opinion matter? And he doesn’t seem to add anything to the discourse. He seems to have risen from the gutter all of a sudden, perhaps he is Peter Dunne with a new persona. He seems to be taking the common-sense, we all know the truth, line of the right winger pretending to be centrist.
    • weka 17.1

      26 July 2013 at 7:55 pm

      The new Pete George (who I think reached such levels, but Jenny was the queen when stalking CV).
    • QoT 17.2

      26 July 2013 at 8:52 pm

      You’d think the time could be better spent trawling LinkedIn for those qualified overseas candidates he’s headhunting. If not actually working.
18. peggity gwes 18

    26 July 2013 at 8:05 pm

    Haw haw the keyster will be laughing all the way to Warner brothers ….. unless we get out and protest tomorrow !
19. srylands 19

    26 July 2013 at 10:36 pm

    I just wanted to check out the LWNJs. Someone told me about the views on the Standard. I decided to check it out. It was as he warned me but I was surprised by the whole throwback to the 70s “There are not enough jobs to go around”.

    The truth is there are no mainstream right wing politicians in NZ. The current National Government is less nutty than we would get from a Labour Government but it is a matter of degrees. The KB commentators generally appreciate this.

    So it was interesting.
    • Arfamo 19.1

      26 July 2013 at 10:41 pm

      It probably was for you. You’ve been nothing but boringly vacuuous for the rest of us.
      • McFlock 19.1.1

        26 July 2013 at 10:47 pm

        how many times has the fool announced their departure, I wonder 🙂
        • ak 19.1.1.1

          26 July 2013 at 11:30 pm

          Actually don’t be too hard on the srylands and burts of our world – they give us a valuable insight into the level of the best propagandists that the Natsy billions can buy, and the view is very encouraging. Dads and mumsy won’t be too impressed, but then they never were, which of course is their – and the Slipper’s, akshully – problem in a nutshell, poor wee saps.
          • srylands 19.1.1.1.1

            27 July 2013 at 8:42 pm

            “Dads and mumsy won’t be too impressed, but then they never were, which of course is their – and the Slipper’s, akshully – problem in a nutshell, poor wee saps.”

            Can you translate this for me?
            • felix 19.1.1.1.1.1

              27 July 2013 at 8:54 pm

              Not until you clean your room. Run along now fucko.
    • tricledrown 19.2

      26 July 2013 at 11:20 pm

      Srylands just another narcissistic boring bully!
      The pope says selfish individualism is creating inequality and the resulting increase in poverty in the world today!
20. Sable 20

    27 July 2013 at 8:49 pm

    Yep srylands a turd in life’s swimming pool, no doubt about it….

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS