Lorde gives $20,000 to feed hungry kids

Forums › Off topic › Lorde gives $20,000 to feed hungry kids

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18661 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#198203 30-Jun-2016 10:30

I think this is a fantastic gesture and I think it just reaffirms what a decent, down to earth person she is. But it again raises the question of just whose responsibility it is to make sure kids don't go hungry in the first place. Before all the Tories start howling about bad parents who just want to spend their money on dope and alcohol, I do agree that the parents should be responsible for this in the first instance. My question is where the responsibly lies if the parents cannot or will not live up to this. Should the government step in? Should public money be spent on this? Is it the duty of a humane society to make sure children are fed regardless of whose fault it is? And if it is, why are there hungry children in this country at all? Seems to me like someone isn't doing their job.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 9

2856 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1583222 30-Jun-2016 10:46

Yes, govt should step in - kids shouldn't be hungry

But there should be a corresponding decrease in welfare payments or tax rebates (eg WFF) to the parents

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1583224 30-Jun-2016 10:51

shk292:

Yes, govt should step in - kids shouldn't be hungry

But there should be a corresponding decrease in welfare payments or tax rebates (eg WFF) to the parents

Great thinking. Save them from hunger, but give the parents less with which to provide the other necessities of life.

Inphinity

2780 posts

Uber Geek

#1583239 30-Jun-2016 11:19

Yes, government should step in. Kids should be removed from the so-called-parents care, as they clearly are not capable of providing basic necessities (assuming we are talking those who consistently and on an ongoing basis fail to provide food for their children).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1583242 30-Jun-2016 11:31

And it starts...

The usual rants suggesting that the way to address the impacts from poverty and disadvantage is to save money and discriminate.

Shame.

I'd pray for misfortune to shine darkness on those who suggest such things, but that would make me evil too.

vexxxboy

4244 posts

Uber Geek

#1583260 30-Jun-2016 11:59

how about not having kids if you cant afford to raise them for 18 or so years.

Common sense is not as common as you think.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1583269 30-Jun-2016 12:16

vexxxboy:
how about not having kids if you cant afford to raise them for 18 or so years.

Circumstances change. When we were expecting our first child we had two incomes our own home etc etc. Six months after our child was born the disease I have hit me, two months later no jobs, and we were forced through circumstance to sell our home car etc. Some would say we shouldn't have kids. Fast forward a few years i went into remission and able to work, by a home and general luxuries, that lasted 25 years. But again I flared in a wheel chair and unable to work so I took medical retirement. Again some would say that was our fault.

Luckily my wife has a very good job and we don't need an income from me yet I still get attitudes about that.

So let's not generalise and make judgements unless one knows all the circumstances.

nakedmolerat

4629 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1583273 30-Jun-2016 12:24

vexxxboy:

how about not having kids if you cant afford to raise them for 18 or so years.

... and do you have the crystal ball to see the future?

People lose jobs for whatever reasons beyond their control most of the time.

To those who are currently lucky, they should get off their high horse. It is perfectly fine not to help as this is a voluntary act, but one should not be disrespectful to those who are unlucky.

Ultimately, the government has to do something about it but it does not stop me to offer help whenever I can. Who knows what will happen to me in the future.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

lurker

831 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1583277 30-Jun-2016 12:29

The help needs to be given no matter what the circumstance.

Would be great to solve the root cause but in the meantime we have to deal with the reality and help these kids.

The assistance needs to be there without question, the government can work on reducing the need for the assistance by addressing the cause rather than looking at reducing the assistance given.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1583298 30-Jun-2016 12:51

The welfare system in general needs a shake up. I agree that the government should take the responsibility, however the parents need to be educate around budgeting etc. too.

Maybe cash is not the answer to welfare, there is too much discretion on how to spend it, I have always liked the idea of the government paying the rent, power etc. then providing a food stamp/ food only debit card, then maybe a smaller amount of discretionary money for things that cannot be predicted for. The welfare system (benefit rather than sickness benefit) needs to not be seen as a lifestyle choice, it is not a pay cheque and should not be seen as one.

What I have said above would not disadvantage genuine recipients as their needs are met while they are looking for work.

There are always plenty of jobs out there for those that are willing to get down and dirty and swallow their pride.

I know as I have done them in order to stay off the dole.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1583307 30-Jun-2016 13:05

dickytim:

The ~~welfare~~ system in general needs a shake up.

Fixed that for you.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1583310 30-Jun-2016 13:10

Rikkitic:

I think this is a fantastic gesture and I think it just reaffirms what a decent, down to earth person she is. But it again raises the question of just whose responsibility it is to make sure kids don't go hungry in the first place. Before all the Tories start howling about bad parents who just want to spend their money on dope and alcohol, I do agree that the parents should be responsible for this in the first instance. My question is where the responsibly lies if the parents cannot or will not live up to this. Should the government step in? Should public money be spent on this? Is it the duty of a humane society to make sure children are fed regardless of whose fault it is? And if it is, why are there hungry children in this country at all? Seems to me like someone isn't doing their job.

You have to be pretty careful. Otherwise you simply make us all liable for costs that properly belong to the parents. I for one am not interested in accepting those costs.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1583311 30-Jun-2016 13:11

Inphinity:

Yes, government should step in. Kids should be removed from the so-called-parents care, as they clearly are not capable of providing basic necessities (assuming we are talking those who consistently and on an ongoing basis fail to provide food for their children).

This would only make sense if you can stop them from simply having more..!

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1583314 30-Jun-2016 13:13

dickytim:

The welfare system in general needs a shake up. I agree that the government should take the responsibility, however the parents need to be educate around budgeting etc. too.

Maybe cash is not the answer to welfare, there is too much discretion on how to spend it, I have always liked the idea of the government paying the rent, power etc. then providing a food stamp/ food only debit card, then maybe a smaller amount of discretionary money for things that cannot be predicted for. The welfare system (benefit rather than sickness benefit) needs to not be seen as a lifestyle choice, it is not a pay cheque and should not be seen as one.

What I have said above would not disadvantage genuine recipients as their needs are met while they are looking for work.

There are always plenty of jobs out there for those that are willing to get down and dirty and swallow their pride.

I know as I have done them in order to stay off the dole.

How does paying the rent, power etc directly and handing alms to give them a bit cash on hand teach budgeting?

And of course everyone on a benefit is there by choice and does not want to work.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1583316 30-Jun-2016 13:16

Geektastic:

Rikkitic:

I think this is a fantastic gesture and I think it just reaffirms what a decent, down to earth person she is. But it again raises the question of just whose responsibility it is to make sure kids don't go hungry in the first place. Before all the Tories start howling about bad parents who just want to spend their money on dope and alcohol, I do agree that the parents should be responsible for this in the first instance. My question is where the responsibly lies if the parents cannot or will not live up to this. Should the government step in? Should public money be spent on this? Is it the duty of a humane society to make sure children are fed regardless of whose fault it is? And if it is, why are there hungry children in this country at all? Seems to me like someone isn't doing their job.

You have to be pretty careful. Otherwise you simply make us all liable for costs that properly belong to the parents. I for one am not interested in accepting those costs.

But I'm sure you're 100% keen on reaping the benefits of living in a safe well-functioning society.

Perhaps not.

Jaxson

8042 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1583320 30-Jun-2016 13:35

As others have said, this is the endless argument, of which contributors beliefs and personalities will see them fall somewhere along the scale of the government should provide everything through to complete outright user pays. The extremes are just that, so the answer will most likely fall somewhere in the middle.

We are a pretty cruisey country though, in that the likes of ACC will cover your injuries from genuine accidents through to teh results of complete and utter stupidity. I suspect the solution is not to ignore the immediate issue of hungry children, but to also have a parallel plan to break the cycle to improve the situation in the long run. The same approach could be applied to offending and prison sentences, where punishing illegal behaviour alone does nothing to break the cycle of families raising children who invariably end in prison themselves and think it's just normal.

Good on Lorde, it at least puts the spot light back on the situation. I just hope the focus doesn't get lost in the political waffle.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 9