RNZ's headline reads:
"Jobseeker: Parents earning more than $65k must support 18-19yo children"
Firstly, don't be distracted by Nicola Willis telling you about middle class parents with kids they can't get off the couch because of easily available benefits.
Inter-generational welfare dependence is the thing. A big thing.
The government knows this and wants to stop it. Just not overtly.
Kids raised on welfare, go onto welfare. As fast as they can - often egged on by their parents wanting to grow household income.
So the government is saying, parents should continue to support 18 and 19 year-olds rather than they go on a benefit.
This isn't a policy for mainstream parents. The test threshold for parents deemed able to continue to maintain their young person is $65,529. It's set at the income of parents receiving the Supported Living Payment (previously Invalid Benefit) - the highest benefit income.
As policies go, it's a plus, but barely positive and would rate a 1 out of 10 in the overall need for real welfare reform.
I could finish there but want to draw attention to the contrasting comments between the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister in announcing this new policy.
Chris Luxon:
"Look, we are saying we care about you, we love you, but we really want you to realise all that potential that you've got," he said. "We're here to help and support as much as we can, but you also have to take responsibility for that and actually just consigning you to a life of welfare for 18 years is unacceptable.
"We're not doing our job, if we're letting that happen."
David Seymour:
"The best way to get teenagers working is to stop paying them not to," he said. "If an 18-year-old is capable of working, they should be out earning, learning and building their future - not relying on the taxpayer."
I know which I prefer.
No comments:
Post a Comment