Some comments from The Standard yesterday:
The average length of the DPB recipient is just 3 years.
I am sure that the average length of the DPB recipient would best be measured in metres but if he means the average time spent on the DPB, he is wrong.
FACT
Of all sole parents who came on to Domestic Purposes Benefit–Sole Parent or the Emergency Maintenance Allowance in the year to June 1996, just over one-quarter received main benefits for less than three years out of the following 10. One in three received main benefits for eight or more years out of the following 10.
So let's break that down as:
26% under 3 years
41% between 3 and 8 years
33% over 8 years
While I cannot ascertain an average from the data, it isn't three.
Then looking back from December 2005 of the 114,000 on the DPB at that point
just over half had spent at least 80% of the history period [10 years] supported by main benefits
Burt numbers on DPB have sky rocketed under National.FACT
up from 80 odd thousand to 115,00 is hypocritical and another broken promise.
At December 2008 there were 100,000 on the DPB; at March 2012 there were 113,000. Not all are single parents but the large majority are. (My guess is the increase would have been worse under Labour but we are dealing with facts here - not supposition.)
That Māori women feature disproportionately in DPB numbers does not necessarily infer a deliberate choice to be on the benefit. To follow your implication further – while 20-23% of people on the DPB are Māori, 77 – 80% are non-Māori.FACT
43 percent of DPB recipients are Maori (March 2012)
FACT
45 percent of Maori females aged 20-29 rely on welfare (October 2011)
And just because the irony is breathtaking here is a final comment from a defender of the DPB arguing with a "witless" right-winger (not me):
Facts can’t enter this person’s world-view, and when they do they get rejected in favour of the familiar ol’ security blankie of prejudice.
So I put up some facts and got told to "piss off".
2 comments:
Of course Labour doesn't want the story tarnished by simple things like facts. I am pretty sure that time spent on a benefit is reset every time a beneficiary is expired for some non-compliance and reinstated ten minutes later with a phone call. Average time on a benefit is a meaningless statistic. Total time is more relevant.
'Informed debate' is one of those smug phrases used by pseudo academics, students with a smattering of university education who think they are experts, and generally patronising know-it-alls. They typically call for 'informed debates' until the information disproves their position.....SO true!!!
But oh if only relaying logic was easy - as they say arguing with a fool only makes 2......but it is so hard NOT to argue when the fools are just so blindingly foolish!
I never go on the Standard but have seen their ilk on the news websites & Red Alert etc.
What I find amusing and ironic is how it is always the left-wingers that dominate these forums......yet they arent all self-employed or at-home Mums. So that leaves unemployed or students....!
End of the day discussions on DPB statistcs is never something that can be debated - the facts are what they are so the real debate should be reserved for what to do about it.
Problem is the people over at the Standard etc arent interested in discussing that either and my biggest fear is that their absolute ignorance will become contagious (and affect the voting).
Post a Comment