If National wins ...

[craic]

But the bottom line is that the so called poor now are richer than the middle classes were a few years ago. They have health, welfare, housing - with insulation - cars, television and a heap of other things that I and my family never had when we were poor. Apart from that, we didn't know we were poor. We had simple food and shelter and felt sorry for the "poor" and gave the odd penny here and there to help the less fortunate. Probably in a few years if you don't have three cars and bach in Queensland, you will be part of the next 'new poor' Even in NZ when my income was what I could earn as a timber mill labourer with three yong children in a State Unit, we didn't acknowledge poverty. I could cycle to work and walk to the supermarket and the doctors. We had a childs lined copybook with a page for each month and a list of the bills including food rent electricity etc. Each pay was used on the current bill/s first, food and clothing and leisure last. They were happy days and affluence hasn't really changed much.

[Cuzzie]

Yep, the rich get richer and the poor get the picture, lets hope the poor's take on that picture is time to pull your socks up for yourselves. NZ is a land of opportunity some take it - most don't. Don't blame or punish those who have taken up opportunities, blame those who have not. The rich are too busy to make money for those with their heads in the sand, but if they just pull their heads out and seek out help in the form of helping themselves as they bloody well ought too, there would not be a problem. Simple as don't feed the ducks, because if you do, every time you go for a walk in that park the ducks will demand a feed from you.

[slimwin]

Can do if you want gents. Don't really see the need though. You could make your gentlemans bet. The loser can send a copy of the bank transaction when completed.
Surely you can pick a charity, not a cause, that you both wouldn't mind seeing money go to. Child cancer,RSA,SPCA, etc..

[blackcap]

But the bottom line is that the so called poor now are richer than the middle classes were a few years ago. They have health, welfare, housing - with insulation - cars, television and a heap of other things that I and my family never had when we were poor. Apart from that, we didn't know we were poor. We had simple food and shelter and felt sorry for the "poor" and gave the odd penny here and there to help the less fortunate. Probably in a few years if you don't have three cars and bach in Queensland, you will be part of the next 'new poor' Even in NZ when my income was what I could earn as a timber mill labourer with three yong children in a State Unit, we didn't acknowledge poverty. I could cycle to work and walk to the supermarket and the doctors. We had a childs lined copybook with a page for each month and a list of the bills including food rent electricity etc. Each pay was used on the current bill/s first, food and clothing and leisure last. They were happy days and affluence hasn't really changed much.

Thank you for expressing the above a lot better than I could. We were poor when I was a child but we just got on with it and had a good time none the less. Cycled everywhere, no luxuries, no holidays but life was good. One car and a 15 year old one at that, no tv, (thus no sky bill) and mum and dad did not drink. The definition of poverty is what needs changing.

[blackcap]

Did both your parents work? Blackcap?

I think you know the answer.. but no, dad did work in paid employment, mum was too busy at home looking after us and also making sure the vegetables in the garden were growing well, making butter from milk which we bought from the local farmer, and cooking cleaning etc.

[fungus pudding]

But the bottom line is that the so called poor now are richer than the middle classes were a few years ago. They have health, welfare, housing - with insulation - cars, television and a heap of other things that I and my family never had when we were poor. Apart from that, we didn't know we were poor. We had simple food and shelter and felt sorry for the "poor" and gave the odd penny here and there to help the less fortunate. Probably in a few years if you don't have three cars and bach in Queensland, you will be part of the next 'new poor' Even in NZ when my income was what I could earn as a timber mill labourer with three yong children in a State Unit, we didn't acknowledge poverty. I could cycle to work and walk to the supermarket and the doctors. We had a childs lined copybook with a page for each month and a list of the bills including food rent electricity etc. Each pay was used on the current bill/s first, food and clothing and leisure last. They were happy days and affluence hasn't really changed much.

That is absolutely right. Any intervention a govt. can make can certainly close the gap, but it would make everyone poorer; not just the wealthy. Psychologists seem to agree that poor people are happy as long as everyone is in the same boat. That's sad and silly, and also shows the difference in philosophy between National and Labour. Labour want to redistribute the wealth from the top end to close the gap. National wants to close the gap by letting everyone become wealthy.

[elZorro]

That is absolutely right. Any intervention a govt. can make can certainly close the gap, but it would make everyone poorer; not just the wealthy. Psychologists seem to agree that poor people are happy as long as everyone is in the same boat. That's sad and silly, and also shows the difference in philosophy between National and Labour. Labour want to redistribute the wealth from the top end to close the gap. National wants to close the gap by letting everyone become wealthy.

If the difference between the parties is so simple, FP, why is there a strong trend for unemployment to increase when National is in, and it decreases when Labour is in? Which is the tightest party when it comes to increasing the minimum wage? Which party always takes the option of increasing GST and reducing the top income level of tax the most?

Which party is intent on letting the market decide which way NZ goes, with the result being less jobs, less opportunities in general for graduates and school leavers? National's policies tend to widen the inequality gap, and it is also an academic truth that the 'trickle down' concept doesn't work. Which leaves National spouting rubbish, while they work on the underlying policy of moving more wealth into the hands of those who already have businesses/land/status/assets. The quickest way to do that when they start their new terms, is to clamp/sack govt paid jobs, which lead to growing unemployment and reduced wage expectations.

[craic]

EL. read this mornings paper - on here, you don't have to buy one - lowest unemployment in years. Net migration, many more coming in than leaving. Cutting the public service means unproductive staff MAY find productive work elsewhere and free employers form the flocks interfering with industry for the sake of it because they have to look busy to justify their existence. I worked for the Govt. from 68 to 2002 and it always annoyed me that as a bottom-of-the-pile field worker, I did the Job as dictated by those at the top but in the middle there were several levels of individuals who seemed to have no purpose in life other than to bother me, poking around or thinking up "ideas" to pass up to convince their superiors that they had some purpose.

[Sgt Pepper]

Craic
to be fair availability of jobs is not evenly distributed around the country I was bought up in state housing area in the 1960s, but everyone, and I mean everyone,was in paid employment. One of my school acquaintances works a a cleaner for a contractor at the organisation I work for. He works 29 hours per week and is desperate to work more, but no other hours are available and the same for other contractors. His wife is a PA and recently applied for a receptionist position for which there were 140 applicants.
I was interested in your comments about poverty. My Mother, was a part of a very large Catholic family who emigrated to NZ in the 1920s. During the depression before she walked to school her mother insisted she
have a large bowl of porridge, an apple off their tree and a glass of milk. Better diet than many have now, they all lived to their late 8os, one sister still living who is 93

[bottlerboy]

Which party is intent on letting the market decide which way NZ goes, with the result being less jobs, less opportunities in general for graduates and school leavers?

Less jobs and opportunities? Sorry EZ here's the latest PMI report from the BNZ http://www.businessnz.org.nz/__data/...March-2014.pdf

In summary.
The BNZ - BusinessNZ Performance of Manufacturing Index is a monthly survey of the manufacturing sector providing an early indicator of activity levels.
A PMI reading above 50 points indicates manufacturing activity is expanding; below 50 indicates it is contracting. The main PMI and sub-index results are seasonally adjusted.

HIGHLIGHTS
Seasonally-adjusted PMI marches onwards with a very healthy result for March.
All five main indices were in expansion, with production and new orders jointly leading the way.
Unadjusted regional activity was expansionary in all four regions.