tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post8778558252285328470..comments2024-03-04T16:39:30.609+13:00Comments on Lindsay Mitchell: You could spin it either wayLindsay Mitchellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04437693272797130833noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-49490547384007944452013-12-23T16:33:51.417+13:002013-12-23T16:33:51.417+13:00There would be a very good case for stopping *all*...<i> There would be a very good case for stopping *all* benefit support</i><br /><br />The massive fiscal drain, intergenerational equity, and moral hazard are three excellent examples for immediately stopping every benefit. Including the Super.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-45362873096091990382013-12-23T16:32:47.495+13:002013-12-23T16:32:47.495+13:00Every ninth New Zealander is still dependent on th...<i>Every ninth New Zealander is still dependent on the state.</i><br /><br />And you're being very selective here: not counting WFF, Accommodation "benefit", State employees like teachers etc, bludgers on Super, and the biggest categories of all: State school users, state hospital users, ACC claimants.<br /><br /><i>Go into some neighbourhoods and it'll be every second or third. </i><br /><br />Hell even in Epsom every third person will be dependent on the state - either they or their kids going to the Epsom Normal, EGGS & Grammar. <br /><br /><b>NZ - Land of Bludgers</b>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-12280794423692386412013-12-23T16:28:34.134+13:002013-12-23T16:28:34.134+13:00On the one hand, numbers did not soar in spite of ...<i>On the one hand, numbers did not soar in spite of a deep (and ongoing IMO) recession.</i><br /><br />That's because National is still resisting real economic reforms and "rebalancing" that would greatly increase the welfare rolls. With NZ's economy now more state-dependent than 1991, with KiwiBank and KIwiRail and god knows what else inefficient businesses all state dependent, and vast amounts propped up by WFF and a lax tax system - any real reforms would lead to mass unemployment .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19962237.post-22998156397690195442013-12-23T11:08:09.278+13:002013-12-23T11:08:09.278+13:00A long way to go yet, but it's promising.
I...A long way to go yet, but it's promising. <br /><br />I want the Nats to bring in a law similar to what the UK is considering - only the first 2 children in a family would get benefit support. After that, it'll be "you breed 'em, you feed 'em." That's an *excellent* law. <br /><br />There would be a very good case for stopping *all* benefit support (even for the first two children) but a step like this would be a good first step and would be *very widely supported* - no doubt about that. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com