What does it mean to be in "severe hardship" in New Zealand?
Severe hardship constitutes the lowest standard of living of seven levels.
The following table shows the constraints on children's consumption.
Here we can see that while only 37 percent went without a play station or X-box (or participation in these items) 65 percent said their children wore poorly fitting clothes or shoes.
Many poor people have topsy turvy priorities. This is why they are poor and why they stay poor.
4 comments:
I just remembered from the report that just because 36% say they went without something does not mean 64% have it.
If the family did not want that item, then they are excluded from "going without", if they don't have it.
I don't think the study records the breakdown of the 64% into "have it" and "do not have it as don't want it"
A Xbox would be a shared resource (i.e. one per family) while shoes would be a personal item hence I am not sure you can draw any conclusion from comparing the two figures
SB
Hmm, ironic didn't Helen Clarke say following the Kahui case that only a very small percentage of people where entrenched on the DPB, yet the Brownlee is saying 'many families' are experiencing hardship. What is it guys, are the number of single parent families on benefits a problem or not?
Once your a solo mother, you have twice the battle being a Mum, Dad and a provider. Even though I have compassion for many people who are on the DPB, I believe children should be raised by both their parents. Raising children on a benefit should be seen as something to be avoided at all costs.
Reducing hardship for families on the DPB may sound compassionate but it is providing incentives to stay on the benefit and creating a future where more children will be raised in single parent families.
Regarding your main point about families experiencing hardship only because they don't manage their money properly, I agree up to a point, but even if you manage your money, unless you are working under your table, the DPB only covers the bare essentials.
Gloria
Gloria, if all one was getting is the basic DPB (no job under the table, no undeclared boarder, no undeclared partner) then it is tough. I agree. My position is living standards are less about the level of income than how the money is managed, BUT the level of income is still an important factor. From talking to people who provide budgeting advice to low income families a major problem is the debt they get into and have to service. Getting out of debt requires enormous self-restraint which is the one thing they lack. It's often what got them onto a benefit in the first place.
You know Theodore Dalrymple writes alot about a growing trend towards self-destructive behaviours - frequent casual sex, alcohol and drug abuse, use of violence to solve problems - which run across all levels of society. These behaviours aren't confined to the poor. But their results hit the poor hardest.
Post a Comment