The Greens want to increase child tax and they admit it.
The NZ Green Party is a far left socialist party first, a feminist party second and only then is it a green party. This is why they are mostly vocal about socialist policies rather than environmental ones.
The logic of their latest policy is difficult to follow in detail. As I understand it they simply want to take yet more money from tax players and give it to solo mothers. Now this is not so politically easy to sell anymore so they just extend it to all
custodial mothers … err…. I mean families.
I raise all this because of how they describe a key part of this policy:
“We particularly support extending the in-work tax credit — which is really a child support payment — to all families with dependent children.”
— which is really a child support payment —
1. Well yes it is. In NZ there is no child support only child tax. What the Greens are pointing out is that this would just be an increase on the existing general tax on the population to give money to intact families and custodial parents. IN the NZ terminology this is child support. Other people would call it communism but I’ll let the reader decide.
2. By describing this as “really a child support payment” they are one step ahead of point one. Point one prompts you to ask why should the tax payer pay for other people’s life choices to fund what “is really a child support payment”? So the Greens/feminists say – oh quite right we should just increase child support.
What is remarkable about all this is that people usually don’t see the deep flaws in the rationale behind this idea at all.
“It is well known that New Zealand has become one of the most unequal societies in the OECD. This inequality impacts hugely on the lives of children, leaving about one in five living in poverty.”
Where is the supporting evidence?
I don’t know that at all.
However if it is true then obviously more of the same policies we have had for the last 20 years is not the answer.
Poverty in a developed country is not actual poverty like in the 3rd world. It is just a figure which shows which people are poor compared to the average. It doesn’t mean they suffer from poverty. It only means they are relatively poor. Poverty in the 3rd world is real poverty and is terrible.
All the leading studies have shown that it is not 1st world poverty that is the main factor in poor outcomes for NZ children. My father’s family were dirt poor and prior to his generation few people completed high school. They still reached good outcomes in life. In contemporary society 1st world poverty is not the main factor to a whole host of negative outcomes for children. Fatherlessness is the most significant factor followed by several others before money really matters.
Think about it. Everything a child needs is provided by our welfare state already in abundance. Children don’t get smacked up, neglected, wag school, become teenage parents, suicide, starve, etc because their parents don’t get enough handouts. How many beneficiaries do you know have a veggie garden? These kids wont have an iPod but that is not what is creating such negative outcomes.
Groups such as the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) are in fact a major impediment to addressing the real causes of negative outcomes for children. This is because their noise and political correctness prevents the real causes even getting mentioned.
When is NZ going to wake up?
…or as the late LAURIE O’REILLY, COMMISSIONER FOR CHILDREN from 1994 until his death in 1996, said when he took on the job of protecting the nations children.
“The most serious problem facing NZ is children growing up in Fatherless homes”
Dave i’m still thinking about this and trying to figure out excatly what the greens are saying/
CPAG dont suprise me.
Yes Scrap it is hard to follow. I think the problem is that they believe all these feminist, socialist myths to be Gospel truth, self evident and beyond question. Hence they don’t even realise other people have no idea what radical assumptions they made to come up with their rationale.
As I understand it, they want the tax payer to give people with custody of their children even more handouts. Basically they want to extend the DPB to all custodial parents working or not.
In a nut shell, businesses and separated fathers pay yet more for other people’s life style choice.
We all know what a complete disaster the DPB has been for children. (and fathers). The Greens want to go further. According to their ideology this would somehow create a complete reversal of the outcomes that the DPB creates. This contrary to all available evidence that working parents independent of the state create vastly superior outcomes for children.
Why doing more of the same socialist policies would create the complete opposite outcome is never explained. But you see if you were really Green you would just BELIEVE and not ask inconvenient questions. Obviously this means you don’t care about the environment. You should be ashamed of yourself! 😉
Stuff the environment!!!!! But as a custodial parent myself thats owed over $40K in the current child support scheme (I Know!) but has a husband that pays his $900 per month dues i’m am totally with you guys here! What the greens are saying is crap, obviously there’s no one in their party that stuck in the CS war! They obviously don’t know its a complete abortion, they’re just thick! No one can support, question or go with the current CS system until they know everything about it and quite honestly if they agree with it they no nothing! Its a nightmare, an abortion – hey and should i go on, no! We all we know is what its about! But even as a custodial parent with a paying husband the system sucks!
Good piece Dave, thanks for your thinking. I would say that providing incentives to intact families may be a positive thing rather than facilitating sole parenthood. But I realise that is not what the Greeens are suggesting. While they want to provide more support for intact families, they also seem happy to maintain and increase state encouragement for busting up families.
This article is at the heart of the problems we are making for our families. It is rather easy to write a policy that looks good, to a cursory reading, but the constructive challenge is to write a policy that will work in the real world.
In the real world, a dollar spent, cannot be spent again, somewhere else. Thus a benefit given, is a dollar taken from somewhere else, maybe given, maybe taken.
In giving out – as of right – benefits to solo parents, we are actually influencing peoples’ decisions to create children. These incentives are perceived as larger, perhaps by the very parents who have in general less ability to take care of their children. Thus continuing these policies, we are accumulating increasing social liabilities, as exemplified by the new prison tower block being built beside the motorway in Mount Eden and more around the country.
We have a situation, where the recipients are behaving like poorly behaved teenagers. Many are literally teenagers, who are childishly making decisions that will largely define their life path. The Government has de-powered their parents, by providing youth alone benefits, as an alternative to constructive parental discipline.
In buying over the children, is the Government applying superior wisdom and incentives to the parents? To take the controls and then fail to use them properly, is in the end just being destructive.
Alas, the present Government policies, set by Nabour and Lational parties, seriously lack wisdom, in terms of the real world incentives, as seen by our teenagers and young adults.
Perception is all….
By the time these kids have worked out the real situation, they are well stuck into the monster that they have created for themself. Greater openness about consequences would help our children to make wiser life decisions. There is a lot of heartbreak when Government removes children from less capable parents. There is a lot of luck too! Most social workers are poorly trained and removal decisions contain a large element of gambling, mixed with sympathy as a substitute for relevant evidence. Some parents can use the advantages of wealth to cover for their poor parental skills, poorer parents will not have this option.
These problems are accumulating and also growing more serious. I hope that National will address them constructively. This will require the goodwill of a large part of society, to be successful. Doubtless, to solve them, a lot of sacred cows will have to be slaughtered. The suffering can be maximised, if we maintain the secrecy!
To a large extent, the efficiency of together families, has been exploited by Government and left together families with higher effective tax rates. This has gone so far, that many are deciding that the system is unfair and they are adjusting their arrangements, to not be disadvantaged by comparison to single parents. In UK now, the discrepancy between census and tax records, for single / together, is over 1 million people! You can only bleed people for so long.
It is very important to get these policies right, as changes in direction are socially and financially expensive. The sooner that corrections can be correctly made, the lower the final cost. NZ must greatly improve our policy performance.
While we bleat about being behind Australia, we are missing the point. If we were able to undo NZ’s 15 largest policy mistakes of the last 20 years, we would have about $50 billion in our pockets. We are our own worst enemies, by poor self management. The Australians may have resources, but the big issue is they don’t damage themselves, as much as we do!
As they say – don’t be your own worst enemy!
I think you are spot on there Murray.
NZ is constantly bickering over who should get which part of a pie. This pie is growing smaller in relative terms not only compared to Australia but compared to the OECD.
What we need are policies that generate wealth. There is a different attitude in Australia. Polices that generate wealth are popular. In NZ policies that generate wealth rarely get onto the radar.
The same goes for social polices. I think virtually everyone supports a system that gives people a hand up when they really need it. Unfortunately in NZ there is a very long history of giving a hand out. So much so that this is seen as a right. This is combined with a whole raft of nanny state laws that remove responsibility. The combination is a disaster – particularly for children.
Well said Murray. I agree that it is important to get these policies right, it is also important to get them sorted when a sympathetic government is in power. Imagine a complete overhaul taking place under a Labour/Green government!
Because my ex has chosen to go on the dole and punish me through the IRD I’m paying half of my income in tax (two thirds at the marginal rate) and not a cent is going to my kids. The ex is constantly putting her hand out and pleading poverty. Where is my incentive to work harder and earn more, and how am I going to save for my retirement? Multiply this by goodness knows how many thousands of others and what is the cost to the country?
Surely the Greens are pragmatic enough to see that the current policy is nuts. Now that Sue Bradford has gone maybe they will mellow but my vague thoughts of voting for them are now gone for good.
Your ex is obviously being supported by the Taxpayer.Do you think this is right?Is it fair?Have you thought about the fact that a lot of the taxpayers that are paying for your ex and children are not saving for their retirement?Some dont even have dependents.
The formula for paying Child Support means you will NOT be paying half your income.Check out the IRD formula available to anyone in NZ to see.Are you paying penalties and backpay?Like I said there is a set formula for all to see.
I Like your comment.It is true as times get tougher more and more people will be fighting for their piece of pie.So far with a National Govt I have not heard anything about how they will seriously grow the economy only how they will divide the smaller and smaller pie.Not that any other government we seem to get does better.
Mostly what a relief for your comment not to put women down.
I appears that the most a liable parent can pay is 30% and that is calculated after a living allowance of up to $19000 plus has been deducted from calculation.Please no more bullshit just check out the IRD website.Im not saying that this does not amount to a lot of money.But children are not cheap to keep.Ask anyone who has teenagers.Also you would still have to pay if you lived with them.
what you’re not acknowledging is that the 30% child tax payed by so called liable parents is on top of paying income tax which already goes into the governments general fund and in turn is used to dole out DPB and a whole raft of other benefits (housing, educational and vocational, health)to mostly women solo parents.
Talk about incentivizing the destruction of fatherhood and marriage!
Women, who have a dozen different methods of birth control at their disposal are the gatekeepers of reproduction.
Did you know then that despite that facts a man cannot get a DNA test which shows he isn’t the father accepted in NZ courts?
Apparently all women’s word is sacrosanct and men aren’t worthy of justice and human rights.
Further that men are routinely assessed to pay child tax not according to their means but upon IRD ‘calculations’ oftentimes based on sums of money they used to make prior to being laid off from jobs, becoming injured and/or disabled, in other ways incapacitated?
That this is then used in turn by feminist ‘scholars’ and bureaucrats to beat men in general with the stereotype of being slackers and many men as being demonized with the misandric label of being deadbeat Dads?
What part of men being victimized by these matters don’t you understand?
Skeptik, it is quite clear from all earlier correspondence from Tania that despite what she says she is not here to understand men at all. If she was, she would have at least made the effort to put her opinions aside, and actually listen to what is being communicated.
All she appears to want to do is ask condescending questions and push her opinions onto other people, many of which have literally DECADES of dealing with feminist nonsense and have direct experience of what they are talking about, not just some quaint theory.
The situation isn’t exactly complicated, if she is unable to understand a male perspective at this stage then I think it is fair to say that she is beyond the ability to do so (and therefore there is little point trying to inform further). Some people are simply too close minded, and have a mind that is so full of opinions that there is no room for anything else.
A rather famous man once said that you need to empty your wineskin before you can fill it up again (this is a metaphor), likewise this is what Tania needs to do, but she is clearly not about to do so, probably because if she does, she will have to take full responsibility for her actions.
She is however being very successful in keeping a large amount of attention on herself, (isn’t this called narcissism?) while simultaneously showing a world-view that is not in touch with reality (delusional behaviour) and distracting members of the site from actually focusing on doing anything about the problems that are out there.
Personally I have stopped replying to her. Because while she is willing to ask numerous questions, she doesn’t actually seek answers, all she wants is attention.
@Phoenix – I agree. Malignant narcissism is characterized by, among other things, (1) lack of analytical skills, (2) laziness and solipsism, (3) manipulation and deceipt, (4) short sightedness and inability to plan, (5) compulsive pathological lying, (6) opportunism and parasitism, (7) addiction to power and control and attention, (8) shallow affect, (9) no internal locus, (10) irresponsible and blames others, and (11) chronic victimhood.
These are, not coincidentally, characteristics of feminism. Feminists can be both women and their male enablers. Her questions have been answered so many times in in a variety of quantitative ways that she poses them repeatedly is condescending and that posing them repeatedly implies I and others on this site have not invested considerable effort accommodating her with answers is insulting and offensive. That she does not possess the sense to know when she has wasted inordinate amounts of time of other people and when enough is enough shows how senseless she is. Typical feminist.
If allowed to do so, she will continue wasting the time of those around her to satisfy her addiction to narcisstic supply until the entire system collapses. She doesn’t even have the sense to know that when the system collapses, it will collapse on her too just like everyone else. Again, typical feminist. She doesn’t even have the sense to be ashamed of herself, so everyone else has to that for her too. My favorite response to women like this is, “Get over yourself.” It’s my more polite way of saying, “Go f**k yourself”, but sometimes I say that too.
Thank you Pheonix and Darryl X.
Points well made.
I have persisted with Tanya to date in the vain hope that something I write may spark a humane response. Alas it seems as you both point out a worthless exercise.
I can only hope that some readers have drawn some insight from our correspondence to date either in themselves or feminists they have to deal with in their everyday life.Returning to topic apparently this show is a humdinger. I haven’t heard it yet as I’ve been very busy of late (intend to soon) but give the link as it seems very pertinent to the theme of this thread. It is about how increasing numbers of men are dealing with feminist culture by being Men Going Their Own Way – MGTOW – as they redefine themselves not as Alpha nor Beta but as Zeta Males.
I imagine it will be fascinating listening.
Skeptic & DarrylX & Phoenix,
I know you cannot resist in replying with put downs and assumptions,generalizations and so forth.I will spare you the temptation to reply by not trying to participate on this site again.
I truly wish you all the best,happiness,love and resolution to all your woes.
Yet another participant driven from the site.
MENZ is not what it used to be.
@Allan – Get over yourself.
I have no doubt that this wont be the last we hear from Tanya, there might be a reincarnation to another user name but that will be about it.
I think you nailed it best Phoenix when you said
“while she is willing to ask numerous questions, she doesn’t actually seek answers“
Well, I see you side with the female aggressor Allan!
Tarumpatarumptaaaataaaa! banner flying, armor shining.
BTW she CHOSE to leave, in a hissy fit too, because as others have pointed out too she didn’t get her own way.
She wasn’t, repeat, wasn’t “driven away” as you white-knightingly say.
She merely finally got the message that several of us had got fed up with her lack of listening skills, attacks and time-wasting and we’d ignore her to move discussion forward about MEN’S ISSUES, based on MEN’S EXPERIENCE.
To say she was driven away is hystrionic BS in my view.
NOBODY banned her from the site! Duh!
Oh! The irony of her parting comments!
So, the site isn’t what it used to be eh Allan?
I’m glad this site isn’t what it used to be.
It’s great to nowadays see it’s matured as have many of the contributors IMO.
Men these day that I respect at MENZ appear to be standing strong in their opinions and values, holding firm to the truth of their experience, fiercely supporting one another in a caring manner instead of trying to outdo one another for female approval, cowering and acquiescing and pandering to feminist bullying and finally, finally, finally instead routinely challenging feminists and their supporters clearly and assertively.
BTW, Check out the Voice for Men latest broadcast about recent polling research done on Japanese men where 70% of men aged 18 – 35 polled said they identified as grass eaters (their term for men who opt out of relationships with women and the concomitant struggle to scale the corporate ladder and accommodate themselves at every turn to women’s ‘needs’). These Zeta males are showing western men the way to be MGTOW Men going their own way. They are forging a massive marriage strike which will have huge implications for Japan socially and economically. The implications of this are staggering and causing ripples of concern and interest glonbally as the news seeps out about this phenomena.
And Oh! My Goodness! This is before the new non hormonal birth control pill even arrives too.
The Greens will have a hard time getting child tax money from men who follow the Japanese Men’s lead!!!
There is a new social reality arriving.
Amen to that brother!
I have to say something.Just one last comment.Let wipe women out. Its the only way you wont have anything to complain about again.They are not much use anyway.
Japanese men are fighting a culture not feminism and it is silly to think readers don’t know the difference especially feminists.
They are expected to marry into their own culture but there’s the Japanese women aren’t there.
I hope they can fight their parents and the culture. Good form them.
Tanya, grow up, and see the world for what it is. Woman and girls are abusive as men and to say you won;t care for a man equally as a woman is yesterday’s era – those days are gone.
Put aside the anti feminism on this site and concentrate on equality if that’s what you believe in. If not, and you want to spout ‘fists for feminists’ then go to a feminist site.
To quote myself
“I have no doubt that this wont be the last we hear from Tanya, there might be a reincarnation to another user name but that will be about it.”
yep Im really starting to understand the mindset of these entitlement princesses.
I know it was an easy prediction given Tanya’s previous postings but I still await the reincarnation under another user name
Silence from me …………?????…..!!!!….????…..
@Mits (25); oh it’ll be back in one incarnation or another. It doesn’t take a forensic expert to figure out that Bill(ette) was Tanya – just look at the punctuation in her compositions. I won’t venture into the psychology of her postings for fear of awakening another of her schizophrenic allies.
Errrp. WRONG. Japanese men have got sick of feminist BS and have taken a stand against it, doesn’t take too much research to figure that one out. Their reaction is a response to women no longer being worth the effort. These men have realised that in the modern world a man fulfilling the traditional role is tantamount to slavery and refuse to play the game. It’s a Japanese version of MGTOW.
Tanya, it’s not about you being silenced but the ????”¦..!!!!”¦.???? is not necessary. You’re not a victim for being told to grow up.
Feminist work has been going on for decades and it’s not about feeling sorry for women but finding solutions so women can be empowered and plenty of women are sacrificing themselves and have sacrificed themselves by working for low wages if they’re lucky to being volunteers because they came out the other end and happen to know more than they women they help.
Fighting over victimhood is incredibly stupid but you’re allowed to be stupid for a little while as you grow up. All men and women who pay taxes and give their free time to help victims are giving but they get upset when they come across men and women who think they deserve to be taken care of for life as a victim.
We are now at the stage of taking kids off victims because we can’t allow them to duplicate themselves and sometimes they have more than one child. We can’t survive as humankind when victims keep popping up and we can’t help other countries who have it sooo much tougher. Personally, I think we should invest in sending our young people overseas to see just how tough life can be so they realise how much they have and forget about how much they want.
I received an email from a lawyer yesterday who is a tough woman because as she says, “I grew up in Sth Auckland as a white girl”.
She has a reputation of winning 80% of cases against CYF for her clients that include women’s refuge clients.
Her email said she was concerned for the mother because her PA (secretary) could hear the father in the background telling her things and felt if he is this controlling, the mother should be taken to a safehouse.
I wrote back saying this family is not how it seems as all families and explained how dad keeps the family going.
I wrote, “Dad would love to give up controlling everything, he’d love to not be phoned for every problem and he’d love to not have to run around for mum and the kids. It’s just that no-one else wants the responsibility”.
Dad has no support and is considered an animal because he growls dealing with the wife while our lawyer and women’s refuges and women’s centres are made up of dozens of women who support each other when dealing with women like her. They all get to knock off at 5pm which our father doesn’t.
Ummm, well, I don’t see it this way. NZ men suffered from American soldiers coming to NZ because many women wanted the American soldiers instead if NZ men. I guess they thought it a step up.
Japanese women did this too but the America soldiers were shown to dump the Japanese women for America woman (Madam Butterfly).
Now western men adore Japanese women because they are yesterday as in behind our fast moving capitalist world. Japanese men know have to compete and they are asking whether they should try when they are up against sooo much competition.
What they need to do is still a problem for many western men. They need to look elsewhere for women – gone are the days of pure breed.
Here’s an offer…..
If anyone wants to push forward a men’s issues…. I am willing to set you up. No expectations, no contract, just get things out there.
Julie you say –
For a starter I’m sure you haven’t asked any more than a tiny fraction of ALL western men their views on whether they adore Japanese women or not.
So what a bizarre statement you make!
How about having the courtesy of asking us men what we think of Japanese women?
Is that too much to ask for?
In fact men are checking out.
Had you done so I could have told you this.
I’ve frequently gone to Japan with male buddies and we avoid Japanese women like the plague for the same reasons our Japanese ‘grass eating’ brothers do.
far from being as you portray them to be
we find them to be as modern, individualistic and at least as narcissistic as western women we know.
To deny such is to invalidate not only the views of 70% of thousands of Japanese men polled on the issue of becoming MGTOW, but the views of a great many western men too.
Another thing I think you’ve failed to recognize is how incredibly tough it is for foreigners to integrate into Japanese culture which strikes me as being economically outgoing but socially is a very homogenous country unlike multi-cultural places.
So I think your ideas about MGTOW men going their own way – eschewing relationships with women whilst opting out of the concomitant rat race to gain assets they attract women with are naive wishful thinking.
I reckon you and a few other folks who occasionally appear posting at MENZ need to get used to the idea that due to the internet and modern day travel systems there’s a huge amount of male GLOBAL male consciousness raising going on ‘under the surface’. Paul Elam’s A voice for Men radio show which told of the Japanese ‘grass eating’ men went out to thousands of folks live. That’s before it’s listened to as an archived podcast. Then one brief comment to Angry Harry, another to Men’s News Daily and the news about Japanese women and what a terrible deal they are for ANY man is then catapulted far and wide to men’s networks in EVERY part of the globe.
Gone are the days when such a phenomenon could be suppressed too as teh whole process quickens, gathering pace exponentially with ever increasing MOBILE computer power and ease of personal connectivity, numbers of men connecting and international travel.
Welcome to the new paradigm.
Oh, and bringing this back to the topic of the thread.
I doubt after listening to the radio show at A voice for men that NZ guys are going to rushing off to Japan to grab a ‘traditional’ wife!
Skeptic,…. I accept men know what men are about and expect MRAs to know it well. 🙂
If 70% of Japanese men fall into the online MRM net, then so be it.