Money for court but not for food or shelter?
Not a day goes by that there isn’t an outrageous insane and expensive court cases going on.  Napier City Council are being challenged over their bylaw preventing begging. I can’t understand how beggars can afford to take a case to court – lawyers costs, cost costs, possibly being told to pay the court costs of the side they are taking to court as well as just transporting themselves to and from court. Surely if you have the resources to sue a council for banning begging you can in fact provide for yourself and don’t need to beg. Often the ‘human rights’ of one impact on another. Not allowing beggars protects the human rights of the many to walk the streets fairly without feeling threatened or harassed by beggars, what about everyone else’s human rights if this case wins? There is no reason for people to be begging in Napier. The surrounding farms are begging for workers. Get a job and then you won’t have to beg. I might have a human right to read in peace in quiet but my son might think it is his human right to play on the computer without headphones on –  someone has to make a compromise or someone has to rule whose rights are held above the other. Anyone can say anything impacts on their human rights, it’s ridiculous. To me every human being deserves to be treated with respect but treating people with respect and letting them do whatever they want are too different things. Beggars do harass people, the councils should be able to protect citizens from this behavior. We have a benefit system in this country so we all get enough provided for food and right now there is even enough work.

University student Sarah Thomson is taking the government to court over current emissions targets. I can’t understand this. Firstly, who is paying? If it is Sarah, fine, her money lost if she loses and has to pay court costs. But what if she wins? Would the government have to pay her court costs? I think some people forget the government’s money is our money. If the government loses we pay. That money could be going towards cutting hospital waiting lists, more teachers aids in schools, better roads, more police but instead it is going to lawyers costs, maybe even appeals. Here is what the money should be going to, in my opinion, A young woman losing her hearing and $90,000 would save it. False economy to do nothing. Helping her in my opinion as she could end up on benefits for life due to her disability. Fix her hearing and she is as capable as the rest of us ( of course some deaf people work but being deaf would definitely limit someone’s options). Legal costs often add up to tens of thousands of dollars. It could even end up taking from the very cause she wants to support. Surely it would be better to campaign the government and get public and opposition support to her policies and then it could be a topic for the upcoming election rather than a possible expense to the country. I’ll just say, if she loses she better pay costs. We have more important things to pay for than one person grandstanding.

Applying for 20 jobs in a month is not hardcore job hunting.

90,000 youth are unemployed and in no training in one article, 4,000 of those from Canterbury.  In the next article the mayor of Canterbury is campaigning the government to let more immigrants into the country to do unskilled work as there is a shortage. Farmers are complaining that they train new immigrants up and then they leave the country because their visas expire and then they find it hard to find someone and have to go through the whole training procedure again. What we really need to do is match up those complaining there is no work with those who are looking for workers. Shouldn’t be hard to do as surely that is what WINZ are there for? We know who is getting the job seekers benefit so why is this so hard?

Kyle Goldman is one of the unemployed and he says he is trying because he applied for 20 jobs last month. Sorry but that is not trying. There are 30 days in a month, he didn’t even manage to apply for a job per day. It is so simple to apply for jobs. Go to Seek or another job website and you upload your CV so every job you apply for takes 5 mins to apply for a job, you might have to modify your covering letter to more tailor to the job you are applying for but it is very easy. So this guy is claiming he is trying because he spent 5 mins per day Mon-Fri sending off an email. It doesn’t say he followed up on any emails he sent but it does say he got 8 interviews, which is a pretty great strike rate for sending off only 20CVs. 40% of people he sent his CV to gave him their time for an interview. Why didn’t he get those jobs? Well we don’t know because the article didn’t say but if he really wanted a job he would have asked why and got some feedback to do better next time. Maybe it was lack of experience, maybe he should consider doing some volunteer work. Even if the volunteer work doesn’t lead to a job where you volunteer, it’s great for your CV, gives you a reference and stops the social isolation that this article talks about.

People complain about minimum wage jobs but the thing is that’s where most of us started. Yes, my first job was minimum wage, it led to much greater things. So no, I don’t feel sorry for young people starting on minimum wage, it’s right of passage and it’s the best time to earn minimum wage before you have kids to support and often you still have family support or can fit in with flat mates rather than rent your own house. Also some of these minimum wage jobs come with accommodation. Minimum wage on a farm where they give you a house onsite is actually great because you are not paying rent, a saving of several hundred a week, save money on petrol – you work from home and often you get some food from the farm or garden. Some people are spending 50% of their wages on housing so there are a lot of other benefits in farming so I don’t understand why we have a shortage of farmers.

It also annoys me the argument that the minimum wage is too low and that only migrants will work for it. NZs minimum wage is quite high compared to other countries but the problem is our benefit system is so generous that people don’t want to work for free and they see themselves working for free when the benefit they are getting now gives them as much as they would working.

My solution? WINZ comes up with jobs and if they turn down three of them they lose their benefit. We can’t keep paying money to people to sit on their butts and do nothing and then import people to do unskilled jobs because our people are too lazy to do them. People like Kyle can move for work. I’ve moved for work, yes I missed family but it was a great experience and it helped my career. People just put too many excuses in front of working. It would be best for his self esteem to have a job he just needs to be pushed into it. We complain too much in NZ rather than looking for solutions. When I moved back to NZ from overseas I immediately applied for several jobs, got 3 interviews for the next day and then got all three jobs I got to pick my favorite of the offers. People need to approach job hunting like a job. You spend the whole day doing it. You are either sending off job interviews, following up the job interviews you have sent out, visiting companies you want to work for to ask if there is any work and leaving your CV or filling in an application form and going for job interviews and you don’t stop until you get a job. Always ask for feedback from a failed job interview. Yes, you feel sad that you missed out but what was it that had you miss out and can you change things so next time you get it right? We have lots of jobs in this country right now. There is no reason we should be importing unskilled labour to New Zealand. We need to import the skilled labour we are short of and train up our own for jobs that provide training. We also need communication to High School students which industries are looking for workers so they can study in areas where there is need.

The boarding house didn’t cause the baby’s death.–who-died-just-days-later
This article seems to imply this baby’s death was related to the conditions of the boarding house but given it is under the crime section of the news and it says the baby died of suspicious circumstances I think the child being in a boarding house is not not the problem but having bad parents. Doesn’t matter if you live in a mansion, if you have parents who are abusive, or abusing drugs or alcohol, then you have kids who are at risk and vulnerable. The reason it’s often the poor kids who get into these situations is if you spend all your money on drugs and alcohol you are more likely to be poor. Over the years I’ve heard many a story of rich people who lost all their money due to their addictions. 

Firstly, when you live in a boarding house you are not in a financially stable position and you should not be having a baby. Secondly, this boarding house is in Favona, South Auckland so medical care is easily accessible. I used to know a lady who was a midwife at Middlemore Hospital, a hospital in South Auckland. She said so many woman didn’t seek out medical care and just showed up at hospital to give birth and this made life difficult as they didn’t know the history so couldn’t predict risk factors. Midwife care is free in NZ so there is no excuse not to take up this offer and it is likely that this person didn’t use midwife care because why would you choose to have a home birth in a boarding house where there are fleas when you could choose a hospital where they would treat her for free. Surely a midwife would advise against birthing in a boarding house. The problem with not seeing a midwife is you don’t get scans, so you don’t know when the baby so due and there are risk factors with a baby that is born prem and potential health issues when the baby doesn’t arrive 10 days after the due date – which is when they would normally induce if baby hadn’t arrived. The scan also checks if the child has any anatomy issues as they may need treatment after birth and checks to see if there are twins. Blood tests throughout the pregnancy check for diabetes, pregnancy diabetes is common and there are risk factors for baby and mum so this needs to be monitored. Preeclampsia is also a serious medical condition that can harm mum and baby so a midwife watches for these things. Lots of stuff can go wrong during pregnancy but the great thing is most of these risk factors can be managed under midwife care to result in a good outcome for mum and baby. Not getting midwife care has nothing to do with poverty, not only is it fully funded by government but they also give extra help such as referrals to HNZ to help get a house in circumstances like this when they are in a boarding house and they also put you on to Plunket after the birth who also ensure baby has the best start to life. For the first 6 weeks the midwife visits you at home. Any issues with the child would have been picked up if that had happened. If they’d don’t get proper medical care then it is their fault. Don’t link NZ with third world countries where they don’t have access to help. We have choices in NZ. We are lucky. Not only do we have prenatal care for free, we have vaccinations for free, Plunket help for free and free medical care for children under 13 – definitely not third world. We get so much help, it’s insulting to countries which woman don’t get the help they need when pregnant and afterz. To say we have third world, we have the best access possible, if people choose not to access it then it is their decision. A boarding house is not third world conditions either, third world is a tent, mud shack not your own room in a building.

The government isn’t to blame for this baby’s death. No matter what killed the child had it been born in hospital and under midwife care there would have been a much higher chance of survival so it is on the parents, not the government.

Criminals compensation should go to their victims or a crime prevention charity.
Phillip Smith killed the father of a boy he molested and now he gets a payout for $3,500 because Corrections wouldn’t let him wear a toupee because it’s his human right to wear a wig. When he used the wig to disguise himself to escape the country he should have lost the right to the toupee but no. Our soft touch justice system is paying him $3,500 for the indignity of not having his toupee, not wearing a toupee is nothing like the indignity he inflicted on his victim and their family. I’m disgusted that the taxpayer pays for this. He didn’t even use to wear a toupee so it’s not like he hadn’t been seen without one.

Why are we so relaxed with evil criminals? Why are we so lacking in respect for victims? Why do criminals have more rights than victims? Who pays for them to sue? The money should be confiscated for the victim, their family or for a charity that relates to the crime – something like Lifeline that supports others. We are paying to keep this guy fed, a roof over his head – he has cost us enough. I don’t want to see prisoners abused but not wearing a toupee is not abuse. The ruling should only determine if it’s against his human rights to see if he can wear in the future. This is mad enough, without backdating retribution for his imaginary hardship. Nothing he goes through will compare to his victim and their family’s suffering. We really need to show more respect to the victims of crime, not those committing crime.

Criminals deserve to be deported.
Seriously, are we supposed to feel sorry for this guy because he’s getting deported to New Zealand when all his family is in Australia? The guy assulted someone causing their glasses to get embedded in their eye, hit someone with a golf club, hit someone in a face with a bottle, assulted a taxi driver then set his car – the possession that supports the taxi drivers family, on fire. You know who I feel sorry for? His victims! You don’t recover quickly from glass in the eye, can he still see? Can you imagine the pain his victims went through? Do they still have scars from their attacks? Or any long term injuries such as brain damage from being punched or hit with a golf club? And the guy thinks his offending is minor! I think the victim impact statements would show the offending was not minor. Was the cab driver okay to go back to work? You can understand him being scared to and if he did, how many days work did he lose from not having a vehicle? I’m hoping he was insured but he was still out the excess and loss of business insurance would be a lot for a cab driver so unlikely have that would just have to suck up the loss. He’d have to wait on the insurance payout and then wait on getting the trip metre and probably security cameras after that experience. Silao Sau doesn’t even sound sorry for his crimes. Its not fair on his family. Wrong! It’s not fair on the victims that he hurt and their families for him to stay in their country. He was a guest and he is no longer wanted. If Sau’s family want to be near him then they can move to Australia. 

I don’t want him in NZ. He clearly isn’t rehabilitated, he says he will fall back into crime if he comes to NZ. We should just have an island for these type of people that both NZ and Australia don’t want. I don’t want our people to be put at risk. But he is a citizen of our country so we have no choice. Australia has a choice and I salute them to protecting their citizens. Can we have this policy here?

Those who pay the most in tax miss out.
This makes me angry. The decile system is plain wrong. Here we have a group of people who assuably pay the most tax as that’s what makes them a Decile 10 school, missing out. A school needs a school hall. They don’t have one. They should get one. Funding should never be based on the income of the parents and if it was it should be the opposite, those who pay the most for the service should get the most, not the least. We have these resilient kids missing out but they will still probably do better than Decile One schools because they learn if you want something in life you have to earn it. Money grows on trees in the Decile One zones. The parents at the high Decile schools work all week only to be asked to fundraisers at the weekend and to pay the highest fees. The Decile system needs to be scrapped. Every school should get the same amount of funding for a standard pupil and additional funding should be based on professionally approved need, like diagnosis of ADHD, autism or dyslexia for example. Fund on the need, not on the income. They try and fund the Decile One schools extra to make up for the shortfall of the parents but it will fail as the number one influencer on kids is their parents. They see how they live and if they see work hard and achieve, that’s what they will likely follow. If they see don’t bother and get given, then that’s the path they’ll likely take. Throwing money at Decile One schools won’t achieve the goal they desire so make the system fairer. Stop one group of people paying three times over (taxes, fees, fundraising) for a service that others get for free. It maybe that this school would still need to fundraiser to get their school hall even if there was fair funding, but you don’t mind fundraising to fill the shortfall, it’s a different story to fundraisers because you are not getting your fair allocation of funding.

Government funded homes with cleaners?
One of the biggest expenses of going on holiday is accommodation – especially as we are a family of 7 as even though we don’t mind sharing beds or using airbeds motels have a limit of people per room so we often need to book 2 rooms – annoying when you have the adults in separate rooms but normally we have managed to get adjoining rooms. So because this is such a big expense for us, it makes me angry to read that the government spends huge amounts of money housing people in motels. In a motel you get someone come in every day to vacuum your floor and clean your bathroom – wouldn’t we all like that? I think it is extremely unfair that we are paying for people to live in motels. Do they appreciate this huge expense? No. This article shows that a motel owner estimates 40% of the state funded tenants damage stuff or steal stuff – that’s pretty high. They take a bond so keep taking them on taking them – the tax payer pays. It makes you question how many of them are not a result of a housing shortage but the result of being bad tenants Damaging the property is just one form of being a bad tenant, there’s the non-payer, or the party tenant which the neighbours continually complain about.

Those using motels for accommodation are supposed to pay back their debt, but we know most of them won’t. Read about this family: This family of 10 live in a one bedroom motel room, must be one of the few motels that don’t limit numbers of people per room. They have racked up a debt of $78,000. They were apparently cleared of drugs which kicked them out of the HNZ house in the first place but are still blacklisted, there must be a reason for that. The motel she is in now is her third, why do they keep getting kicked out? And even more concerning is they had two of their kids whilst living in the motel. There are people who fall on hard times and people who dig themselves into one and this family have put themselves in this situation. You would think it would be impossible to get pregnant when living in a one bedroom motel room with 6 kids. Both her and her partner are on the job seekers benefit – which is a joke. You are not looking for a job when you are constantly pregnant or breastfeeding, she had deliberately made herself virtually unemployable. Sue Bradford says they shouldn’t have to pay debts which is the governments fault but this is not the governments fault – they lost their house through bad behavior and then had more kids despite not being able to afford a roof over the heads of the kids they have. I have 5 kids and that’s expensive, to have 8 kids you have to be very well off to be able to afford them. This is entirely their fault. They should have to pay but the reality is I doubt they ever will.

So what’s the answer? I don’t know. It’s not fair on the kids of these irresponsible people but it is not fair on the taxpayer for them to be taking a bottomless pit of money. We have more deserving people on hospital waiting lists and money should be spent on health rather than paying for people that fail to provide for themselves even though they are healthy enough to do so. We need people to take personal responsibility. Society only functions smoothly if everyone plays their part.