Dear Editor
Chris Goldsbury (Letters, DomPost, August 28) says childless people are selfish. Childless people should, he says, "cover shifts and take the awful holiday slots" for their work colleagues who are parents.
That's OK if people are willing to do so. But why does Goldsbury demand it as of right? It could only be that he does not believe people own their own lives and are therefore free to choose how they use them. This lack of belief is at the heart of many political problems.
If people decide not to become parents, or are unable to become parents, that is their business. It is not their job, in lieu, to subsidise with their time or money, those who do.
I don't know what has happened to New Zealander's legendary 'rugged individualism'. It seems to have been drowned in a constant clamour (satiated by government) for certain people to subjugate their freedom and choice to others.
The net result is not a gain to society. It is division and resentment.
9 comments:
I'm almost too furious to answer this.
When I married my wife her two children had already left home, and I have to say one of the attractions of the relationship for me (and only one, there was of course love also) was no children, as having children has never interested me and I am not paternal at all: thus, note, it is better I do not have children, as I would make a lousy father.
But god am I fed up with this insane attitude that couples who breed (and it's not rocket science is it), which is nothing more or less than an individual life choice, somehow then have some sort of moral hold over my wallet. I pay over $80,000 income tax every year to support a political philosophy I find anathema, and to doled out to greedy idiots like Goldsbury because they've chosen to have children.
And the more I look at our out of control and thus increasingly violent, welfare society, the more I'm beginning to see that the central evil of this regime is it pays people to have children, thus, the wrong people are breeding generation after generation of poor sod children into hopeless and violent circumstances, who are themselves then paid to breed, and continue the process all over.
But, Goldsbury, you thieving shite, all I want to do is use the money that 'I' have earned how I see fit. I have had no input into how you bring your children up, nor whether you are even a fit parent, yet you think you have a right to my money, no questions asked. Whose greedy mate?
Repeat: having children is just a life choice, YOU be responsible for it! That's how a fair society works, and that's a society in which children will be born of love, not because it's a career option.
I'd happily buy this thieving, rotten pillock a plane fare out of the country on the condition they promised to not come back, because I've had an utter gutsful of people like this.
Mark
If I have to pay for children of other people, the least I expect is that the little bastards come over and do chores for me.
Collective responsibility seems to only cut one way with morons like this.
Plenty of people actually physically CANNOT have children. Breeders of course take it for granted they can pop sprogs at random for some kind of collective good for us all.
If they were so worried about collective good they would not have their own kids and go adopt orphans in Africa.
In my career I have always covered for parents during school holidays, fortunately they realise this and have all shown natural courtesy when I go on holiday to do likewise for me.
I actually don't mind as they are pinged exorbitant airfares during those school holidays and the last thing I want to do is travel and have a holiday surrounded by brats. And I am not talking here about their kids.
Lindsay you stole my thunder. I was also preparing a letter to the paper to refute this person's fallacious arguments.
I do hope The Dom Post publishes your letter.
Manolo, please don't let my submission deter you. The more the better.
Mark, perhaps best stay away from the News tonight. The Families Commission calling for 13 months paid maternity leave might just do for you.
Kate, As I said. Fine if people want to voluntarily cooperate.
Yes, I saw it Lindsay, now I'm back at my desk, after tea, trying to pay for the extra nine and a half months.
Most probably, Goldsbury is at the pub drinking my money while the babysitter does a cashy for a bit of extra dosh.
Oh yeah, the great socialist fair society. Gotta love it. Or cry.
Mark
that article sounds quite ironic to me - maybe the author is not even being serious here. If he/she is, however, he/she is only delusional but also an awful writer.
amoebe
I totally agree and am angry as hell. As someone who has chosen to be childless why should I have to pay for someone else's?
Tax should benefit the taxpayer is some way - call me old fashioned but how is getting money from me to pay people to have a 12 month holiday going to benefit me in any way? What about all the money I'm reluctantly paying for to have generational beneficiaries to breed with no responsibility?
These people don't care about the kids - they are a gravy train and then I end up paying for hospitalisation of abused kids, legal fees for total scumbags, then potentially prison. I've bloody well had it with this shit.
User pays just looks better and better every day here in Clarkistan...
Well said Mark. Somehow there’s this twisted perception among some parents that the childfree enjoy some kind of undeserved benefit and by forcing the childless to make sacrifices in their own lives – whether through increased taxes or picking up the slack in the workplace – is the best means to address this imagined inequity.
-Sandra-
Post a Comment