PDA

View Full Version : Hungry Kids



mzee
31-08-2014, 07:34 PM
I am getting really pissed off with hearing about hungry kids in New Zealand!
What is wrong with the parents feeding their kids? Why should the Tax Payer pay for feeding other peoples kids?
I know a solo mother who had 4 kids. They always had breakfast and she always gave them packed lunches. She had cancer and lived for her kids. All the kids have done well, are polite and generally nice people.

I will probably be growled at, but I can't help noticing that all the hungry kids in the schools appear to be Polynesian. If the Europeans and Asians can feed their kids, why can't they?

plod
31-08-2014, 07:45 PM
Well we feed the kids because the parents don't for whatever reason? The reason doesn't really matter. Or would you prefer to let them starve.

tweak'e
31-08-2014, 09:09 PM
there can be a big range of social problems at play here.
from beaten up trodden on abused solo mums, fathers who take there beer money first, gambling problems, housing problems (eg massive rents), parents who let "kids raise themselves these days", to simply stressed out parents who can't get out of bed in time.

i've been in their shoes, so please please feed the kids.

Bobh
31-08-2014, 10:23 PM
Way back in the 1950s we were a family of nine. Our mother was a widow. We cooked our own porridge for breakfast at home and took jam sandwiches to school for lunch. We did not starve. Every kid at our school did get a free half pint of milk given to them at every morning playtime. Other than that we drank plenty of water out of the water fountains.

I remember being told that in England the kids over there were given a free lunch.

Nowadays I hate porridge and jam sandwiches.

Kids going to school hungry may be a case of parents getting their priorities wrong. The first priorities should be food and shelter.

Krakka
31-08-2014, 10:47 PM
Kids going to school hungry may be a case of parents getting their priorities wrong. The first priorities should be food and shelter.

I couldn't agree more, but we wouldn't jail a victim of assault, so why would we make a hungry child starve to pay for their parents failure? There is no easy fix, and I don't think it's up to government to do anything either. It has to come from society since it is a societal problem.

mzee
01-09-2014, 12:16 AM
Well we feed the kids because the parents don't for whatever reason? The reason doesn't really matter. Or would you prefer to let them starve.

There is no need for the kids to starve! The problem is the parents, sort them out, help them with budgeting, and ensure that absentee fathers support their kids. Bottom line is, if you can't afford kids you shouldn't have them!

gary67
01-09-2014, 06:38 AM
Way back in the 1950s we were a family of nine. Our mother was a widow. We cooked our own porridge for breakfast at home and took jam sandwiches to school for lunch. We did not starve. Every kid at our school did get a free half pint of milk given to them at every morning playtime. Other than that we drank plenty of water out of the water fountains.

I remember being told that in England the kids over there were given a free lunch.

Nowadays I hate porridge and jam sandwiches.

Kids going to school hungry may be a case of parents getting their priorities wrong. The first priorities should be food and shelter.

At my school in England the kids were called up one at a time to pay their dinner money to the teacher, we as part of the poor were not called up. Everyone in my class knew who we were, do you want to know how degrading that is, it made me work extra damn hard to achieve everything I have with no help. Never been on a benefit ever, except ACC when my arm/should fell completely to pieces and needed major re-constructive surgery a few years ago. If your going to give handouts do it in a way that doesn't cause this type of embarrassment to the kids. Not ranting at you Bob just telling how the "Free" dinners worked.

plod
01-09-2014, 06:52 AM
There is no need for the kids to starve! The problem is the parents, sort them out, help them with budgeting, and ensure that absentee fathers support their kids. Bottom line is, if you can't afford kids you shouldn't have them!if only people that could truely afford to have kids had them, who do you think will be cleaning toilets, looking after the elderly, packing your groceries. I had my two kids while an apprentice and without a handout of sorts from the government things would have been so much different. Unfortunately when you are at the bottom it can be mighty hard work your way out. Only just now a year off 40 have I managed to buy a house and that was with government help.

pctek
01-09-2014, 07:42 AM
Way back in the 1950s we were a family of nine.

But welfare was better then.
Rents weren't as bad. Power was cheaper.

There's an article in the Listener on children and poverty, the doc says it's not all solo mothers and welfare kids anyway, often it's just low incomes and with the cost of housing and power and stuff, there just isn't enough left.

It's not the kids fault, regardless of the parents situation.....why say oh well too bad.

And it did happen in the past too, there was a girl in my primary school who used to go round and eat everyones apple cores, so I started to share my lunch with her. My mum must have just thought I ate more all of a sudden.

Husband lived in a tiny town with 7 siblings, no running hot water etc....they older kids worked in the market gardens, they used to eat the stuff often, raw swede and so on. His mum had her own garden and chickens and all that but still, they were pretty poor.

In the end they got enough money to move to Akld and both got jobs, so the younger kids didn't have to do that.

CliveM
01-09-2014, 07:43 AM
I have yet to see one of these staving kids in NZ. If anything most in Sth Ak look overfed if anything.

1101
01-09-2014, 09:21 AM
I have yet to see one of these staving kids in NZ. If anything most in Sth Ak look overfed if anything.

+1
Lack of a marmite sandwich at lunchtime does not make you starving.
$1 for a loaf of bread, $5 for some marmite. Problem solved

Jim Bolgers famous quote on this issue: 2 pieces of bread, some slices of cheese.

If you value your kids, you will feed them.

R2x1
01-09-2014, 09:33 AM
Eating Marmite is the problem; Vegemite on the other hand (and face) . . . . . . ;)

mzee
01-09-2014, 10:44 AM
There are lots of starving kids in Africa, swollen bellies (Kwashiakor), weeping eyes, match stick limbs. I have never seen any like this in New Zealand. There are always hungry kids, but hungry is not starving, in fact the problem is more likely to be obesity.

pctek
01-09-2014, 12:17 PM
$1 for a loaf of bread, $5 for some marmite. Problem solved


Actually it's not.
It's why you get fat poor people. They live on cheap bread an potatoes. And taro probably.

It's not exactly nutritious.

Look:
Job Seekers
Married, civil union or de facto couple (with or without children) Weekly Net: $348.42

Pension
Married or in a civil union or de facto relationship, both qualify Weekly Net: $638.46

Now, you see pensioners complain a lot, most, I grant you not all, don't have a mortgage anymore.
The families do or have rent.

The maximum accommodation allowance in Auckland is $125 a week, it does not matter what the rent is.....$300 a week, $600 a week, whatever....That's the max.
Its considerably less in most other places except Christchurch.

Don't know what your power bills are, my sons goes up to $500 a month or so in Winter. Yes, it's an electric heater.
He did have a fireplace in the last rental, but not this one. Granddaughter has a lot of colds and gets asthma, although that hasn't been too bad now they have the heater rental - the last rental had a major mould problem which I'd say didn't help there.

He can pay it, but then they're not on low income or benefits.
You know unemployment was almost non-existant once......most people I know that are poor do work, but don't have the ability to cover all the bills.

You get some appliance breakdown or whatever and it kills it.
Public transport? It's not cheap in Auckland, it's slow and unreliable too.

If I caught it, it would cost me $13.40 a day. Bugger that.
It doesn't matter what you SEE, you don't SEE peoples budgets or situations, you just look at what you think is the case.

Sure there are useless people, but they are not the majority.
National keep on about how many jobs they "created". Uhuh, where, Christchurch?
How many have been lost?

I know Akld Uni is shedding staff like mad, and have been for the last 2 years, it's still ongoing.
One of my friends colleagues lost his job there, lost his house (he'd divorced years back and was mortgaged), and he couldn't get another job, being 60 probably didn't help, so he hung himself.

ruup
01-09-2014, 02:44 PM
Well said pctec... Those who can't see what is happening re the working poor are willfully blind. A clear case of I'M ALL RIGHT JACK.

gary67
01-09-2014, 04:52 PM
There is jobs here but no housing spare. Catch 22

Paul.Cov
01-09-2014, 07:31 PM
Problem is, while it may be good to feed the hungry, it just gives more families an excuse to further mis-direct the cash they do have... so more families will neglect to feed their kids on the basis that they'll be fed for free at school. Then those in a slightly less impoverished position will also look to exploit this hand-out that they don't actually need. Then those who are not struggling will get into the free feeds at school, and the problem of the nanny state snow-balls until all but private school toffs are getting a free breakfast and lunch 5+ days per week.

Should your taxes be feeding the kids of people who find the cash for smokes and drinks each day of the week?
And for those families already on a benefit: Should MORE of your taxes be feeding the kids of people who find the cash for smokes and drinks each week?

Benefit amounts aren't pulled out of thin air. There's a lot of sweat goes into assessing what is an adequate amount, and a lot more sweat goes into assessing and addressing the needs of those who for one reason or another find that amount to be insufficient.

First step if I had hungry kids because of the crazy city rents would be to move the family to a smaller city, or if in gainfull employment to move to a cheaper suburb / smaller home. AND to make sure there would be no more kids added to a family I was unable to properly support.

At what point do some adults ever take financial responsibility for the possible consequences of their fornication? Each birth should result in proportionately more financial 'pain' for the parents, not greater and greater handouts that further dilute any desire to be responsible.

DeSade
01-09-2014, 08:38 PM
Problem is, while it may be good to feed the hungry, it just gives more families an excuse to further mis-direct the cash they do have... so more families will neglect to feed their kids on the basis that they'll be fed for free at school. Then those in a slightly less impoverished position will also look to exploit this hand-out that they don't actually need. Then those who are not struggling will get into the free feeds at school, and the problem of the nanny state snow-balls until all but private school toffs are getting a free breakfast and lunch 5+ days per week.

Should your taxes be feeding the kids of people who find the cash for smokes and drinks each day of the week?
And for those families already on a benefit: Should MORE of your taxes be feeding the kids of people who find the cash for smokes and drinks each week?

Benefit amounts aren't pulled out of thin air. There's a lot of sweat goes into assessing what is an adequate amount, and a lot more sweat goes into assessing and addressing the needs of those who for one reason or another find that amount to be insufficient.

First step if I had hungry kids because of the crazy city rents would be to move the family to a smaller city, or if in gainfull employment to move to a cheaper suburb / smaller home. AND to make sure there would be no more kids added to a family I was unable to properly support.

At what point do some adults ever take financial responsibility for the possible consequences of their fornication? Each birth should result in proportionately more financial 'pain' for the parents, not greater and greater handouts that further dilute any desire to be responsible.

Hear Hear!

WalOne
01-09-2014, 09:01 PM
At what point do some adults ever take financial responsibility for the possible consequences of their fornication? Each birth should result in proportionately more financial 'pain' for the parents, not greater and greater handouts that further dilute any desire to be responsible.

Well said, Paul.

My take is we should look after the kiddies born now and dependant on the State for - in some cases - their survival. They exist and are with us through no fault of their own.

These unfortunate kids are not at fault. They are the product of indiscriminate pairing by their parents.

But let the parents of any future progeny be aware of their reponsibilities. Cease any benefit payments for new additions. Let the parents take reponsibility.

And if all else fails give some thought to sterilisation to these feral breeders.

mzee
01-09-2014, 10:00 PM
Maybe we should bring in the Chinese policy of one child per family, no child per single person.

Krakka
01-09-2014, 10:27 PM
But let the parents of any future progeny be aware of their reponsibilities. Cease any benefit payments for new additions. Let the parents take reponsibility.

And if all else fails give some thought to sterilisation to these feral breeders.


With this I agree to some extent. The idea at first glimpse has merit. Unfortunately the parents who have kids to stay on the benefit have no real interest in the kids so they will still spend the money on smokes or booze or drugs or any combination of the above.

I saw it next door to me a couple of years ago :
Girl rents house with 2 kids.
Boyfriend (aka dad) is on the dole, a wannabe gangster, well known by police and unable to rent a house, moves in after a week and proceeds to hold parties from Tuesday to the following monday.
She is on full DPB and accommodation supplement because dad is unkown and not living with her. (Yeah right).
Kids are left free to roam the streets, just so long as they don't get in the way of dad's drinking and dope smoking.

And folks, this is not just Sth Ak. This is happening in a suburb or small town near you.

Agent_24
01-09-2014, 10:59 PM
But let the parents of any future progeny be aware of their reponsibilities. Cease any benefit payments for new additions. Let the parents take reponsibility.

I don't think it would make any difference, parents like that are just useless and the kids would probably just end up dead. Though I expect some of you would see that as "problem solved"...

notechyet
02-09-2014, 06:04 AM
I will probably be growled at.....?
No. Listen National Radio every morning between 6.30 and 7 o'clock the business news. The corporates are telling their 100's of millions of profit they make. In the afternoon listen to other people talking about feeding the kids at school. The parties talking openly about feeding the kids at school.
The Labour government privatised Telecom in the 90's and send 100's or 1000's of people home. Telecom made 100's of millions profit after that. The public has just injected 1.2 billion to upgrade the network. Isn't that success?
National continues privatising!
Brilliant results coming out of that soon.:eek:
You know who to vote for :)

B.M.
02-09-2014, 06:54 AM
Well, we have one lobby group prattling on about starving kids and we have another prattling on about obesity in our children. :confused:

By way of observation I don’t see either as being rife, just another beat-up by the media. :rolleyes:

pctek
02-09-2014, 07:43 AM
Should your taxes be feeding the kids of people who find the cash for smokes and drinks each day of the week?

First step if I had hungry kids because of the crazy city rents would be to move the family to a smaller city.

All poor do not smoke and drink you know.
Again you base your ideas on a few.

As for moving, how? You know it cost us over $8000 to move back here. There was a lady I came across down there, she'd moved to take advantage of the free Polytech and then without work could not move back out and was stuck without work.

And you know you are not allowed to move to certain places like small towns if on a benefit, you must move to a place with a lot of jobs (big city).

Greg
02-09-2014, 08:55 AM
I was raised in a poor family after my father died. But mum was canny and frugal, so all us kids were fortunate. I never recall ever being too hungry - that only happened a few times after I was independent and was occasionally without work.

1101
02-09-2014, 09:05 AM
No. Listen National Radio every morning between 6.30 and 7 o'clock the business news. The corporates are telling their 100's of millions of profit they make. In the afternoon listen to other people talking about feeding the kids at school. The parties talking openly about feeding the kids at school.
The Labour government privatised Telecom in the 90's and send 100's or 1000's of people home. Telecom made 100's of millions profit after that. The public has just injected 1.2 billion to upgrade the network. Isn't that success?
National continues privatising!
Brilliant results coming out of that soon.:eek:
You know who to vote for :)

Ah yes.
The only alternative to that is Communism . We all know how well that worked
Envy of those doing well & hammering those doing well can only make things worse

prefect
02-09-2014, 06:19 PM
Parents need to target the money to the kids not TAB, alcohol, ciggies, KFC, tattoos, owning a car. If the parents cant feed the kids they should be removed from them and given to childless couples who can look after them properly.

R2x1
02-09-2014, 07:01 PM
Bit of a problem with lent kids in that demographic, the odds are a bit against the kid from before birth.

notechyet
02-09-2014, 07:33 PM
Ah yes.
The only alternative to that is Communism . We all know how well that worked
Envy of those doing well & hammering those doing well can only make things worse
Do we have to go from one extreme to the other?

Colpol
04-09-2014, 11:02 AM
Well, we have one lobby group prattling on about starving kids and we have another prattling on about obesity in our children. :confused:

By way of observation I don’t see either as being rife, just another beat-up by the media. :rolleyes:

Media beat up- yep.
Recent coverage by Campbell Live emphasised the empty fridge, showing several examples. What you didn't see or hear mentioned was the Pantry.
One fridge also appeared to have 1 doz cans of beer.- go figure.

Poverty is living on a rubbish tip in Mumbai, or in Mexico city, not in a state house in NZ

dugimodo
04-09-2014, 03:34 PM
All poor do not smoke and drink you know.
Again you base your ideas on a few.

That's true pctek but all poor do not struggle to feed their children either. Several members of my family have spent long periods on a benefit for one reason or another and while it's clearly a struggle at times the children where always fed and the rent was always paid. Those that receive the same benefits as everyone else and fail do do this are either incompetent and in need of some kind of help other than financial or just don't care enough about their own children.

Smoking and drinking get mentioned so often because that stereotype of the heavy drinking, chain smoking, unemployed is so easily observed in many parts of New Zealand. Tell me you can't think of someone who fits that description either now or in the past. While I can't personally say I know those people are the same ones with the "starving children" I suspect there would be a high degree of correlation.

In all parts of society there are good and responsible people and there are those that are not. It's an unfortunate thing that when the irresponsible are also poor their children suffer for it and learn all the wrong lessons from their upbringing. I do not think living on a benefit should be easy or comfortable particularly for the able bodied and young. All that does is encourage the idle lazy people to stay that way.

I spent 12 months working part time on minimum wage when I was laid off, I probably qualified for a housing allowance or some dole payments for part of it but I never received anything (WINZ volunteer nothing if you don't know to ask for it). I reduced my mortgage to minimum payments, cancelled all unnecessary expenses (except internet and my wow subscription :)) and managed to survive and pay all my bills until I found a real job again. It was an eye opening experience and I certainly had no money to spare but it wasn't as bad as people make out. And no I didn't have any savings to fall back on, only advantage I had was a mortgage that's cheaper than the average rent.

pctek
05-09-2014, 06:35 AM
Smoking and drinking get mentioned so often because that stereotype of the heavy drinking, chain smoking, unemployed is so easily observed in many parts of New Zealand. Tell me you can't think of someone who fits that description either now or in the past.


.
No.....can't say I do. I know drinkers and smokers but they feed (or fed) the kids.
Know one guy who lived on porridge and lettuce sandwiches for quite some time but he was late '50s and didn't have kids to feed.

An example perhaps would be neighbour over back, they smoke, the older kids come round and drink, Housing Corp place....but she does feed them actually. (The young ones)
Asks for stuff from our garden on occasion but hey, she has a wee garden of her own too.

But school staff would know better the situation of some families.......they see it each day and have talked to parents (however infrequently).

I'll allow that a lot of people don't know how to shop....they just trundle down to the supermarket and that sure isn't the cheapest place if on a strict budget.

CliveM
05-09-2014, 09:20 AM
It is called pimping the poor. Keep in mind there is an election just around the corner and if you spend a small amount of time on google it is perhaps not surprising to find that those put up as examples by the MSM usualy seem to be union reps or closely connected to the Labour or Green party in some other way.

kahawai chaser
05-09-2014, 09:42 AM
Priorities can take over for certain cultures. I recall when David Lange was PM, he noted for his electorate, that Island folk were donating too much to their churches, leaving little for kids school costs. This caused a bit of a local backlash towards Lange.

DeSade
05-09-2014, 10:19 AM
Priorities can take over for certain cultures. I recall when David Lange was PM, he noted for his electorate, that Island folk were donating too much to their churches, leaving little for kids school costs. This caused a bit of a local backlash towards Lange.

The backlash was because he was right but well we know what religion does to ordinarily rational and sane people......

dugimodo
05-09-2014, 12:58 PM
we know what religion does to ordinarily rational and sane people......
Annoys them when other people practice it? :p

B.M.
05-09-2014, 03:18 PM
There is no easy fix to the problem.

I know of an instance where W&I arranged a Budget Advisor to help a Solo Mother with 4 children. The Budget Advisor did a good job and saved some money whereupon the Solo Mother sacked the Budget Advisor and purchased some “Personal Plates” for her car. :groan:

Seems there was nothing W&I or the Budget Advisor could do.

The only answer I can think of is cumbersome, but they are given food chits in lieu of money.

dugimodo
05-09-2014, 03:36 PM
There is no easy fix to the problem.
I think that about sums it up.

Any solution like food chits will only work with honest people. The rest will find ways around it no matter what. There always seem to be shops willing to risk selling things they are not supposed to for vouchers given to people on a benefit to avoid just that.

Case in point, a local 2nd hand dealer got in trouble around here some time back when a common WINZ scam was discovered to be going on routinely using their shop. Someone on a benefit would convince WINZ they had an urgent need for a fridge, couch, some other appliance, get a voucher for a 2nd hand dealer, "buy" the item and immediately sell it straight back to the dealer - without it ever moving an inch.

I'm sure it's still going on and they've just gotten smarter about it. When it comes to finding a job or supporting their kids some people are totally useless but then show some real ingenuity maintaining their lifestyle at everyone elses expense.

plod
05-09-2014, 05:18 PM
I think that about sums it up.Any solution like food chits will only work with honest people. The rest will find ways around it no matter what. There always seem to be shops willing to risk selling things they are not supposed to for vouchers given to people on a benefit to avoid just that.Case in point, a local 2nd hand dealer got in trouble around here some time back when a common WINZ scam was discovered to be going on routinely using their shop. Someone on a benefit would convince WINZ they had an urgent need for a fridge, couch, some other appliance, get a voucher for a 2nd hand dealer, "buy" the item and immediately sell it straight back to the dealer - without it ever moving an inch. I'm sure it's still going on and they've just gotten smarter about it. When it comes to finding a job or supporting their kids some people are totally useless but then show some real ingenuity maintaining their lifestyle at everyone elses expense.The amount of times I was offered food grant vouchers for half of face value would shock you. Had people coming up to me with 150 voucher walk through checkout with me so their could sign. Then I would gand them $ 80 for there trouble. Was good for me as I Had a young family and not earning much and the beneficiary got smokes and booze

Cicero
05-09-2014, 07:55 PM
I suspect this sort of thing will not go away, even worse to come with the no discipline generation.

B.M.
05-09-2014, 08:11 PM
I think that about sums it up.

Any solution like food chits will only work with honest people. The rest will find ways around it no matter what. There always seem to be shops willing to risk selling things they are not supposed to for vouchers given to people on a benefit to avoid just that.

Case in point, a local 2nd hand dealer got in trouble around here some time back when a common WINZ scam was discovered to be going on routinely using their shop. Someone on a benefit would convince WINZ they had an urgent need for a fridge, couch, some other appliance, get a voucher for a 2nd hand dealer, "buy" the item and immediately sell it straight back to the dealer - without it ever moving an inch.

I'm sure it's still going on and they've just gotten smarter about it. When it comes to finding a job or supporting their kids some people are totally useless but then show some real ingenuity maintaining their lifestyle at everyone elses expense.

Yeah, like I said, cumbersome.

So what I’d do is call tenders amongst the supermarkets, and any other party that can perform, and have a chit for solo+1, solo+2, solo+3, and so on. The chits can only be redeemed at the nominated shop, and if they get smart with the rules, they’re out.

But the wonderful thing about rules is from the moment you write them, you know damn well someone is going to flout them. :lol:

R2x1
05-09-2014, 09:21 PM
". . . But the wonderful thing about rules is from the moment you write them, you know damn well someone is going to flout them. ."

There is an entire industry that makes a meal out of this. It's called the law. :(

B.M.
05-09-2014, 09:37 PM
There is an entire industry that makes a meal out of this. It's called the law. :(

Well you can't start a f'n argument like that. :lol:

Blue Druid
06-09-2014, 01:52 PM
:mad::mad::mad::mad:And not a word from any of the do-gooders about the pensioners who are going hungry and cold just to pay for their electricity, rates, rent doctors, etc. etc.

These are people who have worked all their lives, contributed to society, paid their taxes and don't pour their pensions into the pokies, drug dealers and buying the publican's wife a new fur coat.

They're needy, too, but the politicians prefer to ignore them. Neglect them for long enough and they'll die anyway. No more problem.

prefect
06-09-2014, 02:20 PM
Well they had 50 years or so to put money aside for their retirement

Krakka
06-09-2014, 02:29 PM
Well they had 50 years or so to put money aside for their retirement

Not sure if that was tongue-in-cheek or not.

The sad thing is, they were given an expectation they would be looked after in retirement with a super fund. Over time the politicians have gouged away at those savings and re-routed to election bribes to a point that they are now only offered pittance to live on. Many of those who had money saved were essentially forced to find other "quick" ways to grow what money they had. Often resulting in high risk investments, were it was lost in share market crashes and/or dodgy CEO's.

plod
06-09-2014, 03:03 PM
Not sure if that was tongue-in-cheek or not.The sad thing is, they were given an expectation they would be looked after in retirement with a super fund. Over time the politicians have gouged away at those savings and re-routed to election bribes to a point that they are now only offered pittance to live on. Many of those who had money saved were essentially forced to find other "quick" ways to grow what money they had. Often resulting in high risk investments, were it was lost in share market crashes and/or dodgy CEO's.So by greed

prefect
06-09-2014, 03:15 PM
Not sure if that was tongue-in-cheek or not.

.
No its like the squirrel who does not put any nuts away for the winter

pctek
06-09-2014, 03:38 PM
:mad::mad::mad::mad:And not a word from any of the do-gooders about the pensioners who are going hungry and cold just to pay for their electricity, rates, rent doctors, etc. etc.

These are people who have worked all their lives, contributed to society, paid their taxes and don't pour their pensions into the pokies, drug dealers and buying the publican's wife a new fur coat.

.
How do you know they don't? There was an article the other day in the paper about some old guy who won a large bet on the horses, Said he bet often.
Loads of old people drink too.

And the pension is way more than the dole. And, usually, they haven't got a mortgage, or much left of one by then either.

kahawai chaser
06-09-2014, 03:59 PM
I think also it's not just about just working anymore. Need a long term work path strategy. It helps to work to build a career to at least mid level, or own a business, asset, or partnership. More likely to bring income near or at retirement. I have come across people who have worked over 25 - 30 years in varying trades, but end up with nothing substantial. If a semi skilled worker (particularly without any management skills) - no matter how experienced - employers will always asses you as a worker. Heard that from people when applying for another job. Back to where they started, with less pay, longer/twilight hours, multi-tasking, etc.

Difficult at times when laid off, then apply for another job, since up against 100's of younger less experienced candidates - which all the company may need. Too good/experienced a worker you risk becoming a threat (e.g to a supervisor/floor manager) if applying for a job.

I know of workers (e.g. mechanic, builder, plasterer) ending up working for younger managers - whom they (the worker) once trained several years ago. Working class families may struggle here, along with their kids, unless the parents up-skill.

Read in our local courier where a middle age Island lady, a cleaner, struggling with kids, studied part time for 8 years, graduated phd in healthcare got a good job in health. Certainly raised the bar for her family.

Blue Druid
06-09-2014, 04:16 PM
True, not all pensioners are poor just as all kids are not starving. True some have lived dissipated lives or have hurt many people in their career. But so many others have raised, fed and clothed their families on not much more than the minimum wage. They've helped those kids to buy homes and other necessities in the difficult days of setting up a family home for themselves and the grandkids. So they don't have much left, not because they were greedy but because they spent what they had for the sake of their kids, unlike others who would rather see their kids starve than miss their pub time or their supply of rolling green. And then, with their brains bent out of shape, beat and abuse and sometimes kill those same starving kids.

Meanwhile, the little old 87 year-old misses seeing the doctor, doesn't collect her prescriptions because she can't afford the $5 charge, makes do with one meal a day and spends that day in bed to keep warm. The last new outfit she bought was 20 years ago. And who is advocating for her? Winston come closest but what use is free travel on a super gold card if you can't afford a cup of tea when you get there? I say again, not all old people are poor just as all kids are not starving. But the country is full of people advocating for the kids but not a word is spoken about the aged poor.

plod
06-09-2014, 08:00 PM
True, not all pensioners are poor just as all kids are not starving. True some have lived dissipated lives or have hurt many people in their career. But so many others have raised, fed and clothed their families on not much more than the minimum wage. They've helped those kids to buy homes and other necessities in the difficult days of setting up a family home for themselves and the grandkids. So they don't have much left, not because they were greedy but because they spent what they had for the sake of their kids, unlike others who would rather see their kids starve than miss their pub time or their supply of rolling green. And then, with their brains bent out of shape, beat and abuse and sometimes kill those same starving kids.

Meanwhile, the little old 87 year-old misses seeing the doctor, doesn't collect her prescriptions because she can't afford the $5 charge, makes do with one meal a day and spends that day in bed to keep warm. The last new outfit she bought was 20 years ago. And who is advocating for her? Winston come closest but what use is free travel on a super gold card if you can't afford a cup of tea when you get there? I say again, not all old people are poor just as all kids are not starving. But the country is full of people advocating for the kids but not a word is spoken about the aged poor.it would seem like the children need to step up and return the favour then. I certainly wouldn't let any parent of mine go without a cup of tea or prescription . That borders on elder abuse.

plod
06-09-2014, 08:00 PM
.

Blue Druid
06-09-2014, 08:42 PM
Agreed, Plod. Sadly, so often the kids so often are so preoccupied with their own kids dancing lessons, sports, school trips, etc. that they have no idea that their elders are living in penury. And the old folks are too proud to tell them. When the occasional duty visit occurs, the youngsters have no notion of what to look for. They exchange polite pleasantries and tell grandma how little Johnny is off on a school trip to Japan and little Mary is off to boarding school next year. Grandma spent the last of her fortnight's pension to buy a packet of biscuits to entertain them.

That same grandma is conscientiously saving $5 a fortnight to help pay for her funeral when she goes so as not to be a burden on her kids. She knows it's not much but it's the best she can do.

I believe that what is missing to create both situations (starving kids and poor pensioners) is love within the family. No one looks after people who they don't love. And no magical political measures or tossing of money at the problem will instil love in the hearts of people who have never known love. The money and the measures will vanish down the same deep hole as always and the problem will not only remain but will get worse as the population ages.

DeSade
07-09-2014, 10:40 AM
Agreed, Plod. Sadly, so often the kids so often are so preoccupied with their own kids dancing lessons, sports, school trips, etc. that they have no idea that their elders are living in penury. And the old folks are too proud to tell them. When the occasional duty visit occurs, the youngsters have no notion of what to look for. They exchange polite pleasantries and tell grandma how little Johnny is off on a school trip to Japan and little Mary is off to boarding school next year. Grandma spent the last of her fortnight's pension to buy a packet of biscuits to entertain them.

That same grandma is conscientiously saving $5 a fortnight to help pay for her funeral when she goes so as not to be a burden on her kids. She knows it's not much but it's the best she can do.

I believe that what is missing to create both situations (starving kids and poor pensioners) is love within the family. No one looks after people who they don't love. And no magical political measures or tossing of money at the problem will instil love in the hearts of people who have never known love. The money and the measures will vanish down the same deep hole as always and the problem will not only remain but will get worse as the population ages.

Damn Druid, this hit right in the feels.....

plod
07-09-2014, 11:58 AM
Damn Druid, this hit right in the feels.....
Drinking already? Cheers

pctek
07-09-2014, 02:21 PM
That same grandma is conscientiously saving $5 a fortnight to help pay for her funeral when she goes so as not to be a burden on her kids. She knows it's not much but it's the best she can do.
.

Oh really.
Actually my mum is 82. She does not save anything, she's already said she has no idea how I will bury her.

Husband is 66. He's solved that issue by (along with me) donating his corpse to Akld Med School.