Here's the breakdown:
Characteristics of working-age Domestic
Purposes Benefit recipients (aged 18–64 years), at the end of December 2006 and
at the end of December 2011
Percentage of recipients who were:
|
Dec-2006
|
Dec-2011
|
Male
|
10.2
|
12.3
|
Female
|
89.8
|
87.7
|
Māori
|
40.4
|
42.4
|
Pacific people
|
9.5
|
10.1
|
18–19 years
|
3.0
|
2.8
|
20–24 years
|
14.8
|
16.8
|
25–39 years
|
51.1
|
45.9
|
40–54 years
|
26.6
|
28.6
|
55–64 years
|
4.5
|
6.0
|
Declaring earnings
|
20.4
|
16.1
|
Caring for a dependent child aged 6 years or under*
|
60.1
|
62.4
|
Caring for a dependent child aged 7–13 years*
|
30.0
|
27.3
|
Caring for a dependent child aged 14 years or over*
|
9.9
|
10.3
|
Caring for two or more dependent children*
|
51.1
|
47.9
|
Number of working-age Domestic Purposes Benefit recipients (aged 18–64
years)
|
100,309
|
114,230
|
4 comments:
Number of working-age Domestic Purposes Benefit recipients (aged 18–64 years)
114,230
Particularly depressing when a one-line order in council would be enough to set this to zero
I found the percentage of people caring for a child aged 6 years or under interesting because you can get a rough idea of how many people have another child while they are on the benefit. I think the more telling figure would be not how many welfare receipients there are but how many children are being raised by parents on welfare. What is interesting about the 60% under 6s is that the total number of beneficiaries in the last 5 years hasn't increased correspondingly.
Gloria
Who care if bludging doesn't increase?
It needs to stop immediately.
Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Iceland, Ireland, and now Poland have been bankrupted by their welfare systems. Borrowing billions of dollars every day, NZ is quickly following suit.
Time to stop the rot while we still have an economy
Welfare has failed utterly.
Has it slowed the rate of increase?
If it has it's not a win but it is an improvement.
Post a Comment