PDA

View Full Version : Child Poverty



minimoke
05-09-2017, 06:10 AM
Seems to be a main election plank for the major parties. Well I'm tired of it. Throwing money here and there but not one word about dealing to the parents who continue to make poor decisions.

artemis
05-09-2017, 06:30 AM
May not be one word, but there is a quiet revolution happening under the radar, driven by the current government's social investment approach.

I would be concerned if a Labour led government dropped this or watered it down in favour of chucking more money.

For example the Young Parent scheme aimed at teenage parents seems to be working well. The number of teen parents has halved since 2008, and this has a major ongoing impact. The social investment approach has indicated these young parents tend to stay on welfare a very long time. The scheme provides a wraparound service, micromanagement of most benefit income and a system of rewards for good parenting (eg budgeting, enrolment in ECE).

I would like to see the scheme extended to benefit households which are not managing, especially financially.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 06:39 AM
For example the Young Parent scheme aimed at teenage parents seems to be working well. The number of teen parents has halved since 2008, and this has a major ongoing impact. The social investment approach has indicated these young parents tend to stay on welfare a very long timey.

Thats the kind of action on policy i like to see

(Im still disappponted no one has taken up my idea of imprisoning parents of fat kids - i suppose good things take time)

iceman
05-09-2017, 07:37 AM
May not be one word, but there is a quiet revolution happening under the radar, driven by the current government's social investment approach.

I would be concerned if a Labour led government dropped this or watered it down in favour of chucking more money.

For example the Young Parent scheme aimed at teenage parents seems to be working well. The number of teen parents has halved since 2008, and this has a major ongoing impact. The social investment approach has indicated these young parents tend to stay on welfare a very long time. The scheme provides a wraparound service, micromanagement of most benefit income and a system of rewards for good parenting (eg budgeting, enrolment in ECE).

I would like to see the scheme extended to benefit households which are not managing, especially financially.

Thats exactly right artemis and Bill did get fired up in the debate last night when talking about this. It is his vision and passion driving this. The Government has been working hard on identifying those most at risk (not an easy task) and then doing something about it by dealing one on one directly with the families. I know of one young man that had been on the wrong side of the law for several years and would not listen until agencies found an old auntie that he listened to and respected, enlisted her to help and the young man is now working and staying out of trouble.

Joshuatree
05-09-2017, 08:21 AM
Bills passion is only to get reelected. This was transparently revealed when he was asked what he would march in the streets for, himself ;). Jacindas answer 'homelessness". Another tactic far too late to be worthy to attempt to steal Jacindas plank and it looked to me like that 2nd 50,000 was thrown out off the top of his head right then.

Jacinda wasn't convincing to me when she said she would resign if the super age went up from 65 , her body english suggested she resented saying that.She maybe felt pressured (and was )to do so and did. More experience will deal to that in the future.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 10:06 AM
Bills passion is only to get reelected. This was transparently revealed when he was asked what he would march in the streets for, himself ;). Jacindas answer 'homelessness".
"What they would march for" what a nauseating inane question.

I want a leader of a team of doers. Not a windbag on some protest March that will achieve nothing.

fungus pudding
05-09-2017, 10:34 AM
"What they would march for" what a nauseating inane question.

I want a leader of a team of doers. Not a windbag on some protest March that will achieve nothing.

It was an inane question. I thought English's answer was tongue in cheek, and quite appropriate. I can't visualise English as a banner carrying street marching member of the mob.

Bjauck
05-09-2017, 11:04 AM
It was an inane question. I thought English's answer was tongue in cheek, and quite appropriate. I can't visualise English as a banner carrying street marching member of the mob.
LOL Were these people (half the town) a mob?
West Coasters march as they protest a proposed new Buller health centre
https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/west-coast/96186122/west-coasters-march-as-they-protest-a-proposed-new-buller-health-centre

fungus pudding
05-09-2017, 11:29 AM
LOL Were these people (half the town) a mob?
West Coasters march as they protest a proposed new Buller health centre
https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/west-coast/96186122/west-coasters-march-as-they-protest-a-proposed-new-buller-health-centre

Half the town could hardly be less than a mob.

Pipi
05-09-2017, 12:06 PM
Seems to be a main election plank for the major parties. Well I'm tired of it. Throwing money here and there but not one word about dealing to the parents who continue to make poor decisions.

Definitely, up here in the Far North the local iwi has been given millions over the years to help fix this. There latest is to buy up the state houses from Auckland, move them up here and do them up. I know one of the tradies working on these houses, they all end up with solo mum's in them. One, he said has 9 kids (this is not unusual). It gets the kids into a nice home, so the idea is to lift them out of poverty. But is it deterring her from having more? Or others from having heaps of kids? They can't keep up with demand up here.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 12:13 PM
LOL Were these people (half the town) a mob?
West Coasters march as they protest a proposed new Buller health centre
https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/west-coast/96186122/west-coasters-march-as-they-protest-a-proposed-new-buller-health-centre

4000 people in the town and they want a hospital?

Bjauck
05-09-2017, 02:24 PM
4000 people in the town and they want a hospital? Whether or not you agree with their cause is relevant in determining whether they are a "mob?"

fungus pudding
05-09-2017, 02:56 PM
Whether or not you agree with their cause is relevant in determining whether they are a "mob?"

What do you call an informal group of people other than a mob?

minimoke
05-09-2017, 02:59 PM
Whether or not you agree with their cause is relevant in determining whether they are a "mob?"
Of course they are a mob. Like sheep - a group of like minded people that run together for the same cause.

Bjauck
05-09-2017, 03:32 PM
Of course they are a mob. Like sheep - a group of like minded people that run together for the same cause. But when applied to people it has a negative connotation that they are prone to violence?

However I accept that calling all demonstrators a mob, whether peaceful or not, tars their cause with the same brush.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 03:47 PM
But when applied to people it has a negative connotation that they are prone to violence?

However I accept that calling all demonstrators a mob, whether peaceful or not, tars their cause with the same brush.
Maybe a mob of wethers

fungus pudding
05-09-2017, 04:02 PM
But when applied to people it has a negative connotation that they are prone to violence?



Perhaps in your mind, but it has a much wider meaning.

Bjauck
05-09-2017, 04:43 PM
Perhaps in your mind, but it has a much wider meaning. In the context of a group of NZers demonstrating their support for a cause, how should we interpret "mob"?

fungus pudding
05-09-2017, 04:48 PM
In the context of a peaceful group of NZers demonstrating their support for a cause, how should we interpret "mob"?


As an appropriate name .

tim23
05-09-2017, 06:08 PM
Do you ever make bad decisions with your money?
Seems to be a main election plank for the major parties. Well I'm tired of it. Throwing money here and there but not one word about dealing to the parents who continue to make poor decisions.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 06:18 PM
Do you ever make bad decisions with your money?
Sure do. Got a good list of them. Glad its my money to make the decisions with rather than someone elses. And I don't think I have made the same wrong decision twice.

tim23
05-09-2017, 06:24 PM
Okay if only it were that simple for some of the disadvantaged in our communities.
Sure do. Got a good list of them. Glad its my money to make the decisions with rather than someone elses. And I don't think I have made the same wrong decision twice.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 06:40 PM
Okay if only it were that simple for some of the disadvantaged in our communities.It sure isn't. But I'm not talking about the disadvantaged. I'm talking about those that make bad decisions and continue to do so.

Baa_Baa
05-09-2017, 07:31 PM
Thats the kind of action on policy i like to see

(Im still disappponted no one has taken up my idea of imprisoning parents of fat kids - i suppose good things take time)

For all the insightful and at times painful (feeling for you) posts you make, sometimes your rhetoric is irritating and frankly extreme. Maybe you should look at using the emoji, to express an emotion with your views (others here could consider the same).

For example, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" :t_up:
or, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" ;)
or, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" :confused:
or, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" :(

Etc.

As it stands, good grief what were you thinking when you posted that? Is it a random thought or maybe a joke, or something you genuinely believe should happen?

Just wondering. The internet when hiding behind a pseudo anonymous nom de plume is a convenient hideaway for people who wouldn't normally say boo to a goose in public or face to face, but sometimes choose to use it to make outrageous statements that they probably don't believe in and know perfectly well that it is completely and utterly unsympathetic, ruthless even, implausible, unimplementable and plainly ridiculous.

I expect a glib throw away line in reply, but hope for more depth and reason.

minimoke
05-09-2017, 08:26 PM
For all the insightful and at times painful (feeling for you) posts you make, sometimes your rhetoric is irritating and frankly extreme. Maybe you should look at using the emoji, to express an emotion with your views (others here could consider the same).

For example, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" :t_up:
or, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" ;)
or, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" :confused:
or, "Imprisoning parents of fat kids" :(

Etc. Cant be bothered with that stuff. People can take my posts as they read them. I ought not need to add pictures


As it stands, good grief what were you thinking when you posted that? Is it a random thought or maybe a joke, or something you genuinely believe should happen? .
We are entitled to our opinions. I happen to feel one of the worst forms of child abuse we are currently seeing is the fattening of our future generations. Fat kids are purely a product of the parents decision making and if that's the best they can do then they should be punished, and punished harshly for the current and future harm they are causing. Its an issue that speaks directly to child poverty - and that is the poverty in parents who make poor decisions for their children


Just wondering. The internet when hiding behind a pseudo anonymous nom de plume is a convenient hideaway for people who wouldn't normally say boo to a goose in public or face to face, but sometimes choose to use it to make outrageous statements that they probably don't believe in and know perfectly well that it is completely and utterly unsympathetic, ruthless even, implausible, unimplementable and plainly ridiculous.

I expect a glib throw away line in reply, but hope for more depth and reason.
Damn - you've called me out!

minimoke
05-09-2017, 09:03 PM
Hers one just for you baa baa. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37034619
edit: and here's another: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/parents-arrested-letting-child-overweight-article-1.1820725

minimoke
06-09-2017, 06:23 PM
I expect a glib throw away line in reply, but hope for more depth and reason.
C'mon Baa BAa, Where is your deep and reasoned response?

Once you accept I am not totally nuts and apologise for insinuating I am a bit psycho I do accept Red Wine as currency by way of atonement.

Baa_Baa
06-09-2017, 07:47 PM
C'mon Baa BAa, Where is your deep and reasoned response?

Once you accept I am not totally nuts and apologise for insinuating I am a bit psycho I do accept Red Wine as currency by way of atonement.

Sorry, I can't say whether you're nuts or not so no apology, but no offence intended either, but I think locking up parents for their children being obese is a bit nutty, and completely impractical with no links to sustainable outcomes of reducing child poverty.

Unfortunately I can't spend the whole day monitoring and responding to Sharetrader posts either, so pardon my tardy reply. But now that I can and bothered to check your links, I am taken aback that you would advocate for incarcerating parents because they tolerated or enabled their children's obesity, not withstanding some wacky judgement in the UK. What link has this to child poverty?

I'm not sure whether I have a fully reasoned response either, but off the cuff I tend to think it would be a silly and poorly thought out 'policy' which is maybe why no party would advocate for it. Or are they? I won't vote for them on principle, it had better not be National wanting to lock up parents of obese children in the name of reducing child poverty?

Imagine how full our prisons would be if this became law and how totally ineffective it would be to preventing obesity in children and the tenuous or absent links to reducing child poverty? You might think child smacking laws reduced child smacking, and all the child smackers are now locked up? Think again. Same goes for making child obesity illegal and locking up the offending parents. Quite the ridiculous notion, especially linking it to reducing child poverty.

Remember, the child is not directly impoverished, especially if they have enough food to be obese, they are the progeny of a family or parents that are impoverished, and ergo the child is impoverished as well. So locking up the parents is the answer? You would advocate to send a child's parents to prison? Just because that child was fat? Who would you be punishing?

I guess you'd be happy as a taxpayer to fund this as well? Maybe we could run some numbers and see how much larger our prison population would be, multiplied by the cost per incarcerated parent, divided by the gains in reducing child poverty .. if there is any link at all.

Minimoke, I think it's a red herring and their is no plausible link between child poverty and child obesity (how did they pay for the food?), let alone a link to locking the parents up.

We may have to agree to disagree, but I'm interested in your reasoned reply, albeit I won't get to it until tomorrow night at the earliest.

minimoke
06-09-2017, 08:57 PM
Minimoke, I think it's a red herring and their is no plausible link between child poverty and child obesity (how did they pay for the food?), let alone a link to locking the parents up.
.
It is essentially shifting our thinking away from Child Poverty - because there ought to be none with Working For Families and all. So its not about the traditional measure (money) flowing into the household because we know that money is flowing in.

So it must come down to what is happening to the money. And so much of where it isn't going is down to poor parental decisions. So the real poverty is in the ability to make good decisions. This obviously leads to different forms of child abuse: not sending your kid to school, depriving them of the ability to give and receive a gift and feeding them the wrong food.

So if we accept it is child abuse then why should this go unpunished - we don't tolerate smacking - and there was scant evidence that smacking caused harm (Beatings obviously did - but lets not go back down that road). But we tolerate fat kids which has immeasurable harm. Doesn't make sense to me, So throw a few parents in the klink and society know its not acceptable and use these people as a deterrent and motivators to have others change their ways.

The English see it as child abuse and so do the Italians. Why do NZérs blindly accept plumpers waddling into our schools.

But back to the core topic. You know that by Jacindas measure "Child Poverty" will never be overcome. By Bills measure it can be reduced. Either way as a tax payer I can see my hard earned loot disappearing to Visons and ideals that sound good on the surface, but don't deal with the underlying problem of decision making. So yes I would be happy to see some of my taxes funding a few of these inept parents in jail if it helped send a message to the other abusive parents.

Heres an article that might articulate the issue better than I can http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/11985974/If-your-child-is-fat-then-you-are-a-bad-parent.html

End of the day we need policy and plans to get parents to make better decisions - or their should be some consequence, especially if they are on tax payer dime. Which thanks to successive governments most are.

Bjauck
07-09-2017, 08:40 AM
It is essentially shifting our thinking away from Child Poverty - because there ought to be none with Working For Families and all. So its not about the traditional measure (money) flowing into the household because we know that money is flowing in.

So it must come down to what is happening to the money. And so much of where it isn't going is down to poor parental decisions. So the real poverty is in the ability to make good decisions. This obviously leads to different forms of child abuse: not sending your kid to school, depriving them of the ability to give and receive a gift and feeding them the wrong food....
I agree with your point about its often being poor parental decisions that lead to a child's deprivation. A rich successful parent if forced to live on the amount of money given to a poor parent may well have the skills to enable their kids not to live in deprivation. So a deprived child will often have a parent with poor decision making abilities. Often the parent will have come from a poor and/or deprived background as well.

So perhaps we need to approach this issue from two angles. Immediate help should be provided to ensure necessities are provided for the child - In addition to life-skills coaching for the parent.

minimoke
07-09-2017, 06:15 PM
Unfortunately I can't spend the whole day monitoring and responding to Sharetrader posts either, so pardon my tardy reply. But now that I can and bothered to check your links, I am taken aback that you would advocate for incarcerating parents because they tolerated or enabled their children's obesity, not withstanding some wacky judgement in the UK. What link has this to child poverty?
You may have missed it the other night but Jacinda was very clear - she is going to make poverty against the law. Obviously this means there will be an offender. Also obviously when you have laws you have penalties - like imprisonment.

So follow the logic. Who is the cause of the poverty that can be prosecuted. Wont be a government department, wont be the local council. Who else. Really only leaves the parents.

So therefore the leader of the Labour party, and potential Prime Minster of this country is advocating the incarceration of bad parents.