You know the left wing run the media when your commonsense comments to an article never get printed and this article is an example of that. I queried about the comment of how all her partners income went on the mortgage yet there is no mention of what happened to the house when they broke up. As her partner of clearly more than 2 years given they have four kids together, she is entitled to half their assets. Given they lived in Mangere, a suburb of Auckland, their house prices would have skyrocketed as they have been steadily increasing over the past 10 years as this article shows http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11344724. How much money they made depends on how long ago they brought their house but they must have been sitting on a goldmine. They separated three years ago so the property split should have come to a resolution by now, but no mention, maybe it got eaten up in lawyers fees through custody battles, but why is her owning a house completely disregarded? That would be because it’s hard to say someone lives in poverty when they own a house. To me this story is pointless when you don’t know what happened to the house that even had they brought with 100% finance would have gone up by likely 100k so they must have had at least $100k equity. So with this kind of equity in a home any poverty should be short term whilst things get settled.
I also find the abusive story hard to believe when she had four children with the guy. Having kids when you are in an abusive relationship is irresponsible and simply abuse to your children. I have a friend who is separated from his wife and she claimed abuse and when I asked he said it was emotional abuse because he was tight with the finances and occasionally yelled at the kids when they misbehaved. (Everyone yells at their kids when they misbehave!) The court gave her full custody and she moved cities which has him spending a fortune on petrol driving 3 hours each way to see the kids, on accommodation when he goes to see the kids and for any family court hearings, $20k on lawyers to see his kids and she is racking up the legal aid probably at the same level as him so if they do get back together, which she will if he moves to the city near her parents – where there is no work for his skills, then he will be responsible for her debt too. You can see why he had to control the finances, she doesn’t have a clue. She has never worked and he brought all the money into the relationship. So I have my reasons for doubting people who call abuse. But assuming the abuse was so bad that she had to move cities, why didn’t she move somewhere there was work in her field rather than needing to retrain? And Nelson is beautiful, that’s why it’s so expensive, still cheaper than Auckland but there is a lot of other places to go that are cheaper than Nelson.
Finally, when you have four kids to feed, why would you start doing a degree. Work to feed your family! I completely understand wanting to better yourself and wanting to get a degree that interests you, I would love to further my study too, but right now my kids come first and providing for them is my number one priority. Plus, I have a family member who recently completed a social work degree, great worker, fantastic personality, yet she couldn’t find work and is still doing the work she did prior to getting her qualification so there is no shortage of social workers, so she has no guarantee of work afterwards. In Nelson, a place many go to retire, there is a shortage of home care workers for aged care and it’s also home to a lot of agriculture and we import workers from overseas for picking berries – which whilst seasonal work is still work and there is a lot of tourism work as well. Yet she choose to study. The NZ taxpayer is already putting a roof over their heads, food on the table, paying for her pet and her son to do boxing and rugby so being pretty generous. She is following her dream of being a social worked, most likely through a student loan that the government had kindly given her through our interest free student loan scheme. She has it pretty good. At the end of the day her situation is the result of her choices. I’m not saying it isn’t easy but who has an easy life? Not many. We all make our choices in life and she has chosen to study rather than provide for her four children. Prior to leaving her partner all his money went to pay the mortgage and she paid for everything else so if she got the same job with same pay elsewhere instead of choosing to study the only shortfall would have been the roof over their head – which she may have qualified for a accommodation supplement or they could have cut back a little – and things are cheaper in Nelson anyway and between a little savings and the child support that her ex would have to pay despite their mortgage (hense why the house must have been sold, right? Where’s the equity gone?) then they should have been able to get by just fine, especially when the equity for their Auckland home comes through. So despite the media who are clearly blaming the government and expecting them to do something about the situation, I believe people need to make the smart choices for their kids, it is not the NZ taxpayers responsibility to pick up the bill to fund other people’s lifestyle choices.