Thursday, July 02, 2020

Support for Greens wealth grab contorted

From this morning's DomPost, here's the manager of the Auckland's Women's Centre supporting the Greens 'wealth reduction to increase welfare' policy:

If the Government is trying to break up relationships and keep us single, isolated and lonely, it could hardly have designed a more effective social security system than the current one.
If you lose your job and have a partner in paid full-time work, your Jobseeker entitlement is kore, zero, zilch, zip. Nothing. You and your partner are both supposed to be able to live on one wage, even if it’s the minimum wage.
The income support available for people in relationships is even worse than the dire levels the Government imposes on single people. If you have kids, you may get family tax credits, and if you’re “lucky” (i.e. without savings but still paying high rent), you may get some help with housing costs, but only if you meet strict criteria.
At the end of May there were 344,000 accommodation supplements being paid. Traditionally about 80% go to beneficiaries. Contrary to the writer's implication, most people on benefits get help with housing costs.

Here at Auckland Women’s Centre, we know of couples who can’t afford to keep living together so separate. Thus in one fell swoop, the Government causes heartbreak and worsens the housing crisis.Meanwhile, many sole parents (mostly women) are forced to forego the potential loving support of a partner, or risk not meeting their children’s basic needs...
 It is time to scrap this unfair policy that was designed over 80 years ago. The Greens' new income support policy would do that, and I hope we’ll see other parties also addressing this important issue in their announcements to come.
The Greens new policy will increase support for a sole parent by $110 a week and substantially increase child tax credits. That will incentivise couples to split up and single parents to stay single.
The right to individual entitlement is about women’s right to be financially independent. 
Reliance on the taxpayer is not financial independence.

There's a lot more bollocks about the "patriarchal society where economic scales are already tipped in favour of men", "the law doesn’t know anything about feminism", and "systems beyond the control of individuals: colonisation, structural racism and migrant worker exploitation."

Still it's not really her fault. You can't get through a degree in social work or social policy without being brain-numbed by this bullshit.


Sam said...

I often wonder if people like this manager care about nothing less than being able to perpetuate anything that maintains their income. The last thing any of the people in the industries designed to help women would want is proper stable married families. To increase family break downs is a simple way to ensure they can keep that sweet govt money coming in.

There's an interesting video from PragerU from which I quote, "Our generous welfare system allows women, in effect, to marry the government." It seems to me that when they talk about women being financial independent, they mean simply mean from a male partner.

Mark Wahlberg said...

Parkinson's Law. " The bureaucracy expands to fill the space necessary to ensure its own survival."