Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 
95 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 22


  Reply # 1125192 9-Sep-2014 17:13
Send private message

SepticSceptic:
spronkey:
The other thing I find a bit disheartening is the attitude that both parents in a young family should be working. In my opinion, a single person working a 40 hour a week job should be able to support a family with 2 young kids, with warm housing, healthy food, clean clothes, and a few small luxuries outside that.


Our parents managed that OK in the 60's and 70's, something went wrong, somewhere.

Serviced a mortgage on an average house, not too far in the suburbs - Birkdale ( adjacent to Beachhaven), single car family, walked to school every day, had the occasional outing, though I don't recall going to the movies - plenty of trips to the beach though.
Never wanted for much. B&W TV.

Ahh, rose-tinted glasses, reality check in progress ..... embarassed



Yeah, one/two/three generations ago it was pretty common to have a single full time working parent, and maybe some part time work for the second (if that).

The cost of modern life, especially when we have to import everything and pay comparably twice as much as USians, adds up quick though.

$1000 for the compulsory laptop for each of the two kids every three years
$300 at least for a TV. Another $300 for the TV for your room because the kids want to watch something else
$200 at least for a mobile phone, each, and you've gotta give them to your teenage kids too these days of course
$50/month for broadband, because without it your kids will probably fall behind in school, or social standing (sigh), and you can't use trademe to get cheap stuff (so I guess it pays for itself)
$40/month for the mobile phone plan for you and your partner, and $19/month for your kids $19 prepay packs so they can facetwitsnapgram with their friends

That's $3.5k/year... not insignificant!


2482 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1139


  Reply # 1125240 9-Sep-2014 18:51
Send private message

While the discussion about the guys claims has been interesting, no one has asked whether they are actually true.

A friend emailed me this link to an article on Whaleoil about the person in question.

I'm not usually a Whaleoil reader (I loathe Slater), and anything on it needs to be taken with many grains of salt. Nevertheless, it looks like the story is a fake and Fairfax has been "had" by a political campaigner.

Talk DIrtY to me
4285 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2298

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1125249 9-Sep-2014 19:05
Send private message

spronkey:
SepticSceptic:
spronkey:
The other thing I find a bit disheartening is the attitude that both parents in a young family should be working. In my opinion, a single person working a 40 hour a week job should be able to support a family with 2 young kids, with warm housing, healthy food, clean clothes, and a few small luxuries outside that.


Our parents managed that OK in the 60's and 70's, something went wrong, somewhere.

Serviced a mortgage on an average house, not too far in the suburbs - Birkdale ( adjacent to Beachhaven), single car family, walked to school every day, had the occasional outing, though I don't recall going to the movies - plenty of trips to the beach though.
Never wanted for much. B&W TV.

Ahh, rose-tinted glasses, reality check in progress ..... embarassed



Yeah, one/two/three generations ago it was pretty common to have a single full time working parent, and maybe some part time work for the second (if that).

The cost of modern life, especially when we have to import everything and pay comparably twice as much as USians, adds up quick though.

$1000 for the compulsory laptop for each of the two kids every three years
$300 at least for a TV. Another $300 for the TV for your room because the kids want to watch something else
$200 at least for a mobile phone, each, and you've gotta give them to your teenage kids too these days of course
$50/month for broadband, because without it your kids will probably fall behind in school, or social standing (sigh), and you can't use trademe to get cheap stuff (so I guess it pays for itself)
$40/month for the mobile phone plan for you and your partner, and $19/month for your kids $19 prepay packs so they can facetwitsnapgram with their friends

That's $3.5k/year... not insignificant!



The one big thing that is a lot more expensive in real terms nowadays is of course housing. Either buying a house or renting.

And yes, most people seem to be addicted to gadgets that were not even invented 30 or 40 years ago. SKY TV, DVDs/videos/cellphones/internet you name it.




Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?


1351 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 240

Subscriber

  Reply # 1125294 9-Sep-2014 19:30
Send private message

minimoke: The Living Wage movement has an aim of reducing “Poverty” in NZ. “Poverty” (defined by the Child Poverty lobbyists) is 60% of median household income after housing costs are removed.  

Median household income is around $58,000 per annum. Tax on that is $10,420 leaving a household income of $47,580 or $915 cash in the hand a week.

Take off average weekly household costs of $13,177 or $253 a week we are left with $662 a week. 60% of that is $397 net a week. So that is the apparent poverty line.  

However we then need to take into account Working For Families. Lets say a family has two kids. An annual household income of $58,000 will see another $124 in tax credits a week go back into the family bank account. That’s $64 Family Tax Credit and $60 In Work Tax Credit.  

So we now have a New Zealand family in “poverty” bringing in $521 net cash a week, (after household costs) or a family of four with $27.60 a day each ($18.60 net income + $9 a day household costs) to live on.   We are essentially saying that with $18.60 each a family cannot afford to put a bowl of porridge in front of the kids each day. I can go on- line and shop at count down and buy 1.5kgs of Rolled Oats for $4.00. That’s 30 servings at $0.13 a serving.  

An earlier poster asked where does the money go; Transportation – sure but the kids could walk to school to help. Health care – which is free for kids under six and subsidised for 6 – 17 year olds, free basic dental health care, subsided injury expenses, decile one schools get the greatest level of govt funding so “donations” are the lowest. And clothing which at somewhere like SaveMart you can pick up pretty much anything for less than $2 a piece.  

Contrast our “poverty” definition with that of the World Bank which sets it as an income of $1.50 per person a day.  

I suspect that what the Living Wage movement is simply about wealth redistribution from the wealthy to others. So, at the Warehouse wealth distribution is shifted from Shareholders to Workers. In Wellingotn City Council Area it is from NZ tax payers to Wellington residents


So going by that logic that the 'The Living Wage' campaigners set then apparently I'm in poverty based on how much I earn and the fact that I don't have to access to working for families (because I have no kids) and I don't qualify for the community services card or accommodation supplement. I'm personally not pleading poverty because to be honest I'm living pretty much an ok life on what I have but I do question whether the problem are people coming up with are aspirations of a lifestyle and then demanding others to subsidise/support that lifestyle rather than living within ones means. 




Laptop: MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017)
Desktop: iMac (27-inch, 2017)
Smartphone: iPhone X 256GB 'Space Grey'
Additional devices: Unifi Security Gateway, Unifi Switch, Unifi AP AC HD, Unifi Cloud Key, Apple TV 4K 64GB
Services: iCloud, Lightbox, Spotify, Wordpress

 


gzt

9828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1471


  Reply # 1125346 9-Sep-2014 21:12
Send private message

JimmyH: While the discussion about the guys claims has been interesting, no one has asked whether they are actually true. A friend emailed me this link to an article on Whaleoil about the person in question. I'm not usually a Whaleoil reader (I loathe Slater), and anything on it needs to be taken with many grains of salt. Nevertheless, it looks like the story is a fake and Fairfax has been "had" by a political campaigner.

In fairness it's hard to tell exactly what happened here. Originally there was contradictory information in the article itself. Original title: "Woes of minimum wage felt by family" but the figures in the article did not look like minimum wage.

My guess is the reporter was rung by a political party with an "I've got a story for you about the minimum wage, go see this guy". Then off the reporter goes and writes the article on that basis. Either way it looks ham-fisted.

The article has since been substantially edited and given a new title: "Woes of minimum wage low wage felt by family".

If you read it like a mini-profile on a guy who earns a low wage for his job, finds it a bit tough, and is concerned about others earning even less then it makes a bit more sense.

561 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 84


  Reply # 1125910 10-Sep-2014 16:31
2 people support this post
Send private message

Hmmm.
Our (2 of us) income is $1333 a fortnight.
The mortgage is $700 a fortnight.
We're broke but hey I pay the biolls and we eat. Do have extensive food gardens but of course you don't get a meat bush or anything....cheese tree, whatever....

gzt

9828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1471


  Reply # 1125941 10-Sep-2014 17:08
Send private message

kawaii: So going by that logic that the 'The Living Wage' campaigners set then apparently I'm in poverty based on how much I earn and the fact that I don't have to access to working for families (because I have no kids) and I don't qualify for the community services card or accommodation supplement. I'm personally not pleading poverty because to be honest I'm living pretty much an ok life on what I have but I do question whether the problem are people coming up with are aspirations of a lifestyle and then demanding others to subsidise/support that lifestyle rather than living within ones means.

The Living Wage people believe that a Living Wage will reduce poverty. It does not follow automatically that they believe everyone currently earning less than the Living Wage that they advocate is living in poverty.

The main aim of the campaign is to find ways to increase wages in cooperation with employers by promoting the benefits of the Living Wage - eg; reduced staff turnover, retaining skilled staff, recognising employee skills etc.

2482 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1139


  Reply # 1126016 10-Sep-2014 18:53
Send private message

gzt:
JimmyH: While the discussion about the guys claims has been interesting, no one has asked whether they are actually true. A friend emailed me this link to an article on Whaleoil about the person in question. I'm not usually a Whaleoil reader (I loathe Slater), and anything on it needs to be taken with many grains of salt. Nevertheless, it looks like the story is a fake and Fairfax has been "had" by a political campaigner.

In fairness it's hard to tell exactly what happened here. Originally there was contradictory information in the article itself. Original title: "Woes of minimum wage felt by family" but the figures in the article did not look like minimum wage.

My guess is the reporter was rung by a political party with an "I've got a story for you about the minimum wage, go see this guy". Then off the reporter goes and writes the article on that basis. Either way it looks ham-fisted.

The article has since been substantially edited and given a new title: "Woes of minimum wage low wage felt by family".

If you read it like a mini-profile on a guy who earns a low wage for his job, finds it a bit tough, and is concerned about others earning even less then it makes a bit more sense.


Yes, but even so, if the Whaleoil article is correct then obviously people have a different definition of poverty and "woe" to mine.

Working a 40 hour week and being able to afford seven week holidays in the US isn't exactly the same as working "like an animal" or being unable to put food on the table.

Personally, I work significantly longer than 40 hours per week, and I can't afford seven week jaunts around the US.

I think it's fairly obvious that this was a puff piece from a political activist that was picked up by a lazy journo, and never fact checked. They need to do more than edit and retitle the story - they need to explicitly retract it, state the truth and apologise. Quite frankly, the whole thing is a set up and, IMO, fairly insulting to families who are in genuine poverty.

gzt

9828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1471


  Reply # 1126109 10-Sep-2014 20:56
Send private message

I'm reluctant to draw conclusions but it looks to me like the journalist was prepared with some information from somewhere and then goes round to interview the guy. He did not claim poverty. I doubt this guy wrote the story. Overall this looks like the work of some political party to get an item in the news. It's even possible he's the meat in the sandwich on this one.

Quite frankly, the whole thing is a set up and, IMO, fairly insulting to families who are in genuine poverty

agree.

1 | 2 | 3 
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

N4L helping TAKA Trust bridge the digital divide for Lower Hutt students
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:08


Winners Announced for 2018 CIO Awards
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:03


Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34


Enable doubles fibre broadband speeds for its most popular wholesale service in Christchurch
Posted 2-Jun-2018 20:07


All or Nothing: New Zealand All Blacks arrives on Amazon Prime Video
Posted 2-Jun-2018 16:21


Innovation Grant, High Tech Awards and new USA office for Kiwi tech company SwipedOn
Posted 1-Jun-2018 20:54


Commerce Commission warns Apple for misleading consumers about their rights
Posted 30-May-2018 13:15


IBM leads Call for Code to use cloud, data, AI, blockchain for natural disaster relief
Posted 25-May-2018 14:12


New FUJIFILM X-T100 aims to do better job than smartphones
Posted 24-May-2018 20:17


Stuff takes 100% ownership of Stuff Fibre
Posted 24-May-2018 19:41



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.