Comparing Kids Lunches

Forums › Off topic › Comparing Kids Lunches

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

532 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 28

#688652 20-Sep-2012 10:53

networkn: If it could be fixed for $4M Owen Glenn would have been all over it already. Perhaps it never occurred to him and someone should contact him about it. :)

I wonder

?

Maybe he has also just had enough of pathetic NZ'er's accusing him of having selfish grandstanding motives when he gives, such as, for example, they have regarding his past donation of $7.5 million towards the University of Auckland's Business School building

. "How dare some rich guy show off his money, especially his being a kiwi, he should be modest fair minded little hobbits like the rest of us"

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15468

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#688654 20-Sep-2012 10:55

John2010:
networkn: If it could be fixed for $4M Owen Glenn would have been all over it already. Perhaps it never occurred to him and someone should contact him about it. :)

I wonder ?

Maybe he has also just had enough of pathetic NZ'er's accusing him of having selfish grandstanding motives when he gives, such as, for example, they have regarding his past donation of $7.5 million towards the University of Auckland's Business School building . "How dare some rich guy show off his money, especially his being a kiwi, he should be modest fair minded little hobbits like the rest of us" .

I know a number of extremely wealthy people who are trying to help NZ and donate a substantial sum each year, and I don't envy the politics and complications related to it.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#688665 20-Sep-2012 11:03

networkn: I think the overall problem is worse than your sisters hurt feelings if that was indeed the case, which it probably wouldn't be, and secondly, do you think the good that comes from all the people who are deciding to not feed their kids in favour of alcohol, drugs and cigarettes are more important than a few hurt feelings?

My concern is the impact of hurting my sister in laws feelings while attempting to fix a problem that I doubt the proposed solution will really address.

I suspect the majority of people on a DPB benefit don't have any issue with budgeting to the point where they're spending money on alcohol, drugs and cigarettes before putting food in lunch boxes.

I also suspect that if you 'manage' the budget of those people who do have a problem then all you'll do is move the problem. Rather than lunch it will become power for heating so we'll then see more illness and a blowout in the health budget.

But while you just move the problem, you create a new problem. You're taking control from people who are currently managing and sending them a message about your perception of their ability.

You're also sending them the message that they don't need to try to figure it out, they just need to follow the states colour by numbers approach and everything will be ok.

This showed up on Facebook yesterday.

Paula is a great example of the state rising up to do the right thing. Loaned her money for a home that any right thinking commerical bank wouldn't consider (and I'm guessing at an interest rate she could afford), provided additional funding to learn and then created a job she knew all the dynamics of to ensure her a great future in well paid employment.

Is the problem here that we're not properly looking after the our DPB parents?

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

Byrned

455 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

#688682 20-Sep-2012 11:15

Why stop with food. Are we sure children at decile 1-3 schools are doing there homework at night? Not spending too long playing games or watching TV? Getting enough physical activity? All important things for ensuring their education.

Lets just make all decile 1-3 schools boarding schools. The children can all become wards of the state. The state knows best and should not be questioned.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15468

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#688688 20-Sep-2012 11:19

Is the problem here that we're not properly looking after the our DPB parents?

You must be joking! Surely. Budget Advisory should be a mandatory requirement for Beneficiaries, and at the end of the day your sister is getting "free" money and should be expected to comply with any reasonable attempt to improve the situation she is in. It may not be entirely your sister in laws doing she is requiring assistance at this point, but it certainly isn't anyone elses fault either.

This is not meant as a dig at your sister in law, though it seems you are taking it that way.

For the record, I come from a long line of family members who have been beneficiaries, and I spent some time on one myself whilst I got myself together, and I am not suggesting anything I wouldn't happily accept if I was receiving money from the government. I spent the vast majority of my young life well below the breadline, so I am speaking with knowledge from both sides of the argument.

I suspect you are more concerned about hurting your family members feelings than she would be!

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#688689 20-Sep-2012 11:21

Byrned: Why stop with food. Are we sure children at decile 1-3 schools are doing there homework at night? Not spending too long playing games or watching TV? Getting enough physical activity? All important things for ensuring their education.

Lets just make all decile 1-3 schools boarding schools. The children can all become wards of the state. The state knows best and should not be questioned.

If my history is right... I think we've already tried this approach before.

Perhaps a better approach would be to set the minimum wage for men to $25 an hour so we can then focus on having the woman folk at home looking after the kids like in my parents generation?

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15468

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#688698 20-Sep-2012 11:24

DonGould:
Byrned: Why stop with food. Are we sure children at decile 1-3 schools are doing there homework at night? Not spending too long playing games or watching TV? Getting enough physical activity? All important things for ensuring their education.

Lets just make all decile 1-3 schools boarding schools. The children can all become wards of the state. The state knows best and should not be questioned.

If my history is right... I think we've already tried this approach before.

Perhaps a better approach would be to set the minimum wage for men to $25 an hour so we can then focus on having the woman folk at home looking after the kids like in my parents generation?

I imagine you will be more than happy with the massive explosion in inflation and the massive increase in the price of all the basic services and costs you currently pay? A lot of off shoring of jobs and small business failures, all which cost money. You need to understand the entire eco system of economics to understand why this would be a terrible terrible idea.

Byrned

455 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

#688702 20-Sep-2012 11:34

DonGould:
Byrned: Why stop with food. Are we sure children at decile 1-3 schools are doing there homework at night? Not spending too long playing games or watching TV? Getting enough physical activity? All important things for ensuring their education.

Lets just make all decile 1-3 schools boarding schools. The children can all become wards of the state. The state knows best and should not be questioned.

If my history is right... I think we've already tried this approach before.

Perhaps a better approach would be to set the minimum wage for men to $25 an hour so we can then focus on having the woman folk at home looking after the kids like in my parents generation?

Set the min wage to $25 per hour, and then the price of everything will go up to reflect this, then the min wage will have to go up again.

Wages is typically the second or third highest cost of any business and you want to almost double it???? Don't forget that by increasing the min wage you also drive up the wages of all others as well. We're already harping on about the fact that we're not competitive on the world stage with our exports and you've just made it worse. So we've now gone backwards a few billion bucks a year. It's not rocket science. It just requires thinking through the consequences for actions. Funnily enough I believe not understanding the consequences for ones actions is the leading cause of the worlds problems.

Remind me never to take financial advice from you please.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#688703 20-Sep-2012 11:36

DonGould:
networkn: I am not in the least bit concerned the message it sends, whilst they are on a benefit at the expense of the tax payer, and they are not acting responsibly, then they can be offended all they like, or opt out of receiving a benefit.

My sister in law was married and is now on the DPB, bringing up a 6 year old on her own with no help from the father. It's not her fault. Is this the message you'd send to her?

The father is still responsible for his kid no matter what. Its sad that he has taken the no care attitude. It seems to be the done thing these days with many dads in NZ.

Where I come from its a criminal offence to NOT pay maintenance towards your children. There is no DPB.

Its nice your sister receives DPB, but I believe maintenance should still come from the other partner. Only if he/she is unable to provide (as determined by the court), then DPB should be an option. I know of a few broken marriages where either the mother or father pays 0 maintenance, they get away with it. But hey its OK, there is always the DPB.

networkn:
Yup, the actual cost of the food is likely to be the cheapest part of the equation, people just aren't thinking this through. The amount of time it takes to arrange something like this, and then the exposés done by Campbell live when standards aren't met... Additional pressure on schools which are struggling for resources.... The list of quite endless.

Agreed.

1 case of food poisoning, then what?
Suddenly its the schools who forced to take responsibility. Not the irresponsible parents.

These parents need to be held accountable. I am actually quiet taken aback that nothing is being done to prosecute these parents? Its their responsibility to feed their kids... end of story. As someone else mentioned earlier. Its not OK to smack your kids, but hell its perfectly OK to send them to school hungry.

Its a weird country we live in ...

We cannot compare ourselves to the States either. Thats a capitalist country with mostly private schools and private healthcare. NZ is a socialist country so what works in the UK and the US is simply not going to work here ... If people were forced to pay school fees then things may be different, the tax payer should not be supporting food for the kids, it should come out of school fees etc ..

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#688706 20-Sep-2012 11:42

networkn:
Is the problem here that we're not properly looking after the our DPB parents?

You must be joking! Surely.

No, when compared to the help that Paul Bennett got, it seemed like a very valid question to me.

networkn: Budget Advisory should be a mandatory requirement for Beneficiaries, and at the end of the day your sister is getting "free" money and should be expected to comply with any reasonable attempt to improve the situation she is in.

I would agree that if WINZ felt that a DPB parent required a budget adviser then they should get one.

I would also support a call that if a WINZ center manager, budget adviser and local school felt that a child would benefit from a parent being imposed a 'balanced benefit funds access card' (for want of a term) then that would be a good thing.

However, I do not support the blanket assumption that my sister in law should have such a card imposed on her just because some other DPB parents aren't coping.

networkn: It may not be entirely your sister in laws doing she is requiring assistance at this point, but it certainly isn't anyone elses fault either.

It wasn't her fault at all. It was her husbands, so it was very clearly someone elses fault.

networkn: This is not meant as a dig at your sister in law, though it seems you are taking it that way.

No. Please don't be mistaken. I introduced my sister in law in to the discussion and I am not taking your comments as a dig at her at all. I am reading your comments as an attempt at an open expression of your views, which is great! :)

networkn: For the record, I come from a long line of family members who have been beneficiaries, and I spent some time on one myself whilst I got myself together, and I am not suggesting anything I wouldn't happily accept if I was receiving money from the government. I spent the vast majority of my young life well below the breadline, so I am speaking with knowledge from both sides of the argument.

Thanks for sharing something of your position. It does help put your presentation in some perspective.

I get the impression that you feel that you've worked hard and as such don't see why others in the same position shouldn't also work as hard.

You seem to be applying your personal expectations of life on others. In some ways that's not reasonable, but in other ways it's very reasonable and acceptable as well.

networkn: I suspect you are more concerned about hurting your family members feelings than she would be!

Quite right.

Being buried in a situation not of her making, well beyond her control, and an accepting person who may feel she knows her place in life, you are probably right.

I on the other hand have a different perspective and perhaps more vision than some for how fragile hers and people like hers situations really are.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

Byrned

455 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 27

#688711 20-Sep-2012 11:45

networkn:

Is the problem here that we're not properly looking after the our DPB parents?

You must be joking! Surely. Budget Advisory should be a mandatory requirement for Beneficiaries, and at the end of the day your sister is getting "free" money and should be expected to comply with any reasonable attempt to improve the situation she is in. It may not be entirely your sister in laws doing she is requiring assistance at this point, but it certainly isn't anyone elses fault either.

This is not meant as a dig at your sister in law, though it seems you are taking it that way.

For the record, I come from a long line of family members who have been beneficiaries, and I spent some time on one myself whilst I got myself together, and I am not suggesting anything I wouldn't happily accept if I was receiving money from the government. I spent the vast majority of my young life well below the breadline, so I am speaking with knowledge from both sides of the argument.

I suspect you are more concerned about hurting your family members feelings than she would be!

I don't believe imposing budgetary advise to beneficiaries (or anyone for that matter) is a bad thing. Far from it. Teaching people to understand where there money is going is hugely empowering.

Unfortunately I see people everyday who are in debt and can't understand why. They're trying to budget and they think they're right, but they don't understand that not allowing for the small things blows out your budget easily. $5 here. $2.10 there. Repeat every day over a month plus a few others here and there and suddenly they've spent $300 they couldn't afford. Oh, I'll go see instant finance cause they'll help me get over the next few months. Everything is fine for a few months but they still haven't fixed the original problem so with the interest and repayments they're now down $500 per month.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 164

#688713 20-Sep-2012 11:45

Byrned: Remind me never to take financial advice from you please.

I think you missed the question mark and context of what I was saying and my obvious view on the comment I was responding to and the obvious context of the view of that respondent.

Yes, if I'm offering up that advice then please don't come to me.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15468

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#688714 20-Sep-2012 11:46

The father is still responsible for his kid no matter what. Its sad that he has taken the no care attitude. It seems to be the done thing these days with many dads in NZ.

100% Agree with this. Situations are complicated, but I can't imagine a situation whereby if my wife and I split up, where my kids would not be still considered 50% my responsibility, but then I am that kind of guy and have always been that way. I can't see how it could possibly be any different, and more time should be spend on making parents responsible.

berry

61 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 2

#688716 20-Sep-2012 11:48

Perhaps a better approach would be to set the minimum wage for men to $25 an hour so we can then focus on having the woman folk at home looking after the kids like in my parents generation?

I know this is a sidetrack but I can't help but comment. Its quite unnecessary to assign genders to the roles there, it's sad that flippant remarks like this are still made.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15468

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#688725 20-Sep-2012 11:57

berry:

Perhaps a better approach would be to set the minimum wage for men to $25 an hour so we can then focus on having the woman folk at home looking after the kids like in my parents generation?

I know this is a sidetrack but I can't help but comment. Its quite unnecessary to assign genders to the roles there, it's sad that flippant remarks like this are still made.

Ah c'mon, majority of primary caregivers are still female, no need to be so politically correct, the inference does not change the intent or effect of the statement.

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11