It's OK to henpeck and ridicule men

I just watched a SUBWAY TV advertisement for some new healthy product which is "girlfriend approved". For chrissakes. I immediately said to my daughter, do you want to be  the gatekeeper of what your boyfriend eats?

Men have always been hen-pecked but why make it standard operating procedure? Oh, but I forget.

A major newspaper recently crowed over  women now being smarter than men.

I can't help but notice that when IQ differences between ethnicities are suggested, all hell breaks loose. But claim a difference between genders, ie men are 'dumber', and that's fine and dandy. Imagine an equivalent headline to the linked story, "Sorry Whites, Blacks are smarter."

Why are sensitivities about ethnicity - fizzing amongst feminists especially -  absent  for gender?

I don't really care if Subway want to advertise "plus salad in case the missus is looking". It must work for them. It just bugs me that political correctness is applied so selectively. Look at the fuss from the feminists over  the Tui TV ads that have, they say, a "very corrosive effect on women's self-worth". Are they going to get upset about TV ads that make men look incapable of thinking for themselves?

Lazy All Black NZ

I thought NZ women were amongst the most promiscuous in the world. Doesn't sex count as physical activity?


Chart source.

Battles won Banks - not wars

The Social Security (blah, blah, blah) Bill passed yesterday. John Banks spoke (I was going to say on behalf of the ACT Party but not sure if there is one any more).

After summarising ACT's long crusade against welfare (nothing to do with me and everything to do with Muriel Newman)  his closing sentence had my eyes rolling backwards.

This bill is the arrival of that long march, and I am glad to be supporting it as Leader of the ACT Party.

Get off the grass John. This legislation represents some new attempts for New Zealand. It's a date on what will be a very long time-line.

More big beneficiary families needed!

Here's a silly letter if ever I read one:

Where to start (in 200 words or less).

Dear Editor

According to Allan Kirk (Letters, July 19) New Zealand needs more children, so large families born and raised on a benefit isn't a problem. He thinks the Social Development Minister's concern should be the well-being of the beneficiary and her children, not their dependent status. Presumably that means directing rather more resources at families on welfare.  This requires either higher taxes (perhaps from parents limiting their family size to one they can afford)  or less spending elsewhere. As the government is already fighting to stave off a credit down-rating and  disastrous loss of borrowing capacity, it can hardly find millions - or billions - more to meet Mr Kirk's urging.

As it stands children who are raised long-term on welfare, often those in large families, experience inter-generational dependence, particularly  females who go on to repeat their mother's life story. It is welfare dependence that keeps people out of the labour force, non-productive and unable to make a contribution to the upkeep of an ageing population.

It is arguable anyway whether the country needs a higher birth rate to meet future demand. More immigration has got to be a better option than paying people to have children.

DPB income versus working income

I've blogged the second and third graphs for a reader who wants to compare the NZ situation with the US. (Specific data can be found at Work and Income. Basic DPB rate here Accommodation Supplement here and a plethora of extra help here. Then I suppose you will have to get tax rates and WFF tax credit rates from the IRD website.)

The first graph is from the American Enterprise Institute. Two and three are from MSD, NZ. They aren't directly comparable but illustrate the same problem.

 

Welfare reform questions in Parliament yesterday

There were two Parliamentary questions yesterday relating to welfare reform. The first was from a government MP about the youth reforms. Turns out they are seeking to defer the implementation date of legislation. But only slightly. I'm not surprised given the breakneck speed welfare reform legislation has been going through the various processes. Here's a reminder about what the youth reforms do:

Hon PAULA BENNETT (Minister for Social Development): The bill makes changes to put in place total wraparound support for young people—those who are on benefit and those who are not on benefit—including young teen parents. Currently, we just pay these young people who are on a benefit and leave them to it, with very little follow-up and very little support around them. We are putting a youth provider alongside each young person to support them, manage their benefit, and provide parenting and budgeting assistance, as well as ensuring they are in education, training, or work-based learning.

The second was a cost-quibbling question From Labour. Bennett got a bit stroppy with Ardern:

Jacinda Ardern: Does she have any capacity to fund phase two of her welfare reforms, given Budget documents show that the Ministry for Social Development struggled to fill a $700 million budget shortfall this year, and stated that “the estimated costs of phase two are [even] more uncertain than phase one.”?
Hon PAULA BENNETT: I am delighted that the member is waking up to the fact that these are tough times. Yes, the department has struggled to find $700 million in projected costs from within the department, but we did—but we did—and that has been hard work. We will find the savings that are needed for bill No. 2, because we fundamentally believe that they will make a difference for New Zealanders and their lives and their outcomes. That is what we are working towards.

Meanwhile out of Parliament an accommodation provider is getting stroppy with Bennett:

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett has been told to "get off her fat arse" and visit a caravan park she complained was unfairly hiking rents for "substandard" accommodation. The Waitakere MP yesterday singled out a caravan park in her electorate - Western Park Village - as "very expensive for what I'm sure most New Zealanders would see as quite substandard living". But the park owner, Darryll Heaven, said they did everything they could for many tenants that were forced upon them by Work and Income. "That is absolute bulls . . . That really annoys me because she won't get off her fat arse - she's only 500 metres away - to come down and see us. We've got a dozen staff and we're working 24 hours a day to control the place. She doesn't understand that and if she thinks we're ripping her off, come and have a look at our bottom line any time she likes."

The man has a preoccupation with bottoms.

To a point the accommodation supplement does act as a subsidy to landlords, but WFF 'top-ups' act as a subsidy to employers. So it is ironic that it is Labour driving a campaign against the AS from this standpoint. Correct me if I am wrong but isn't it the left that believe state redistribution is at the heart of a 'just and fair' society? The trouble is they have never been able to figure out how to stop confiscated monies flowing back to source.

US welfare reform loopholes

From The Washington Post and tagged "Big Government" (wouldn't it be great if we had a mainstream newspaper tagging stuff similarly?)


 [The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families bill] incentivized states to create welfare-to-work programs, trying to transition Americans from government dependency to financial solvency.

But states quickly acted to poke holes in that legislation, calling the following activities “work” for purposes of the statute: bed rest, personal care activities, massage, exercise, journaling, motivational reading, smoking cessation, weight loss promotion, participation in parent-teacher meetings, or helping friends or family with household tasks and errands.

This was idiotic. So in 2005, Congress closed the loophole, over the objections of then-Senator Obama.

Now, Obama has walked back the 2005 legislation, using his Department of Health and Human Services to unilaterally waive those work requirements.

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/obama-admin-motivational-reading-journaling-qualify-for-welfare#ixzz20r8QUYay

Judge no dope

The Taranaki Herald had a report that made me laugh out loud. Thought you might enjoy it too.

A Waitara cannabis dealer told a judge he had turned his life around.
Benjamin Teika, 27, spoke directly to the judge yesterday in New Plymouth District Court, saying he was deeply ashamed of his offending, and had taken himself out of Waitara and had been drug-free for 22 days.
"I'm bummed out that I've done this," Teika said.
"You're bummed out that you got caught," Judge Allan Roberts countered, telling him to "cut the waffle".

Success!

Thanks so much everyone for supporting Sam!

She has just found out she is in the Top 4 and will be flying to Christchurch next week for the final judging. One of her designs will be made and modelled and the winner then gets to attend NZ Fashion Week.

It'll be live on the Erin Simpson Show TV2, 4-30pm Tuesday July 24.

Quite an adventure for a 13 year-old who last went on a commercial flight aged three.

Truth Column July 5

My July 5 Truth column is now on-line.

The issue of false rape allegations is a nasty business. FBI data reveals one in four primary suspects is excluded by forensic DNA testing. These cases are circumstantially clear-cut. But what of alleged ‘rapes’ where the act isn’t disputed but consent is? 

More 

More Truth columns here

Great principle - poor application

Great quote from Paula Bennett in the Herald on Sunday about people having large families on welfare :

"There's two words we don't use often enough in this country and that's self-responsibility," Bennett told the Herald on Sunday. "The size of someone's family is their business, so long as they don't expect someone else to pay for it."

Just one problem there. Spot it?

Noble men sacrificing their jobs?

A Hamilton mother of three was jailed yesterday for "mistreating" her 6 month-old through using P while breastfeeding. The article doesn't stipulate how much of the jail sentence was for this count  and how much for possession and dealing.

What caught my eye however was this line:

Her father has had to quit his job to look after them until she is released.

That's a typical modern-day response and generally it requires going on a benefit (so that's the assumption I will make.) This is part of the reason the number of males on the DPB is growing. Absent mothers.

In the past however the view would have been her  father needs to stay in work as he is the only one capable of meeting the financial needs of his grandchildren. He'd be the one charged with putting bread and butter on the table. Not the state.

And the baby is one and the other two are at school for goodness sake. Have they heard of daycare?

(This has triggered a further thought. I have already raised a couple of loopholes regarding new work-testing regimes. Here's another. A mother who's added a child to her benefit has to take a job when that child turns one. In steps the father. He can now start on a caregiver's benefit free from work-testing until the child is 5. It'll happen.)

Last chance!

I blogged earlier about daughter Sam being in the Next Fashion Icon final 25. She's one of the youngest designers at 13. She had a phone call earlier this week from the producers of the show saying she was polling in the top 8 and checking her availability for a Christchurch trip if she makes the top four. The winner gets to see one of her designs made and modelled. The voting closes today so I'm having a last ditch push for her. Shameless, I know.

You can view her video and vote here (mouse over the second screen and use the arrows to find Sam.)

The market well-explained

The market economy is the social system of the division of labor under private ownership of the means of production. Everybody acts on his own behalf; but everybody’s actions aim at the satisfaction of other people's needs as well as at the satisfaction of his own. Everybody in acting serves his fellow citizens. Everybody, on the other hand, is served by his fellow citizens. Everybody is both a means and an end in himself; an ultimate end for himself and a means to other people in their endeavors to attain their own needs.

— Ludwig von Mises, Human Action [1949]

(Hat-tip Future Freedom Foundation)

Another child murder displaying predictable risk factors

Another child murder with all the predictable risk factors:

1/ Child living with 'stepfather'
2/ CYF pre-involved
3/ Inter-generational family disruption
4/ Lives in South Auckland
5/ Living in a state house

And I am guessing

6/ Born onto a benefit
7/ Maori ethnicity involved

There are numerous 'Martins' with gang affiliations and Maori blood. Check out Sensible Sentencing's violent database. Here's one with coincidentally the same Christian name as well.

Waikato police are hunting a man in regards to a sexual assault. A warrant for the arrest of Michael Martin, 33, was issued by the Te Kuiti District Court on May 23, but has not been found. Police believe he had friends who are assisting him avoid arrest. "Anyone found to have aided Martin can expect to face charges," says Det Paul Galletta of Te Awamutu police. Martin is described as Maori, 169cm tall, of medium build, and a gang member.

In which case add another possibility

8/ Gang links

 And here is the innocent victim of this atrocious taxpayer-funded  and enabled lifestyle:

Unenforceable laws and political pretence

The USA Today reports on laws that various states are implementing to restrict what welfare cash benefits can be spent on. They are politically expedient but apparently difficult to enforce.

More states are enacting or considering laws that prohibit people who get welfare cash from spending it on liquor, cigarettes, strip clubs, gambling and guns -- laws that even supporters say are difficult to enforce.

Ten states have passed such laws, and at least 14 are considering them, the National Conference of State Legislatures says.

Under a new federal law, all states must prevent the use of cash benefits in liquor stores, gambling establishments and adult entertainment businesses by 2014. States that fail to establish policies face cuts in federal support.

Welfare recipients use debit cards to buy things or get cash at ATMs. A report by the House Ways and Means committee cited news reports in eight states about people with welfare debit cards withdrawing thousands of dollars from ATMs in casinos, liquor stores and strip clubs.

The Federal government provides the majority share of welfare cash benefits and individual states add to that money. So federal law has to be implemented if states wants to keep receiving funding. But it seems fatuous to make rules that can't be enforced.

So what to do? Well we get back to the whole problem with state welfare on a vast scale. The system becomes so large and the players in it so anonymous the room for misuse is enormous.

Localised, personal assistance through charities etc allow the giver to know recipient. Envisage the Wellington City Mission. They know the people they are helping and no doubt can decide if and when to withdraw that help. They also know when help (cash for instance) is only hindering or exacerbating a problem.

Anyway, that's the ideal world. Back in the real world NZ will probably go down this path in the near future. Oh. I forget. We already are with the new youth benefit which restricts how much cash and where it can be spent for 16 and 17 year-olds, plus 18 year-old sole parents. And in lieu of better I'd have to support this move. But I am saying 'yes' and shaking my head all at once. Politically popular legislation but highly problematic in its execution.

Contrasting views on unemployment and inequality

An OECD report about international unemployment released yesterday isn't overly optimistic

“The recent deterioriation in the economic outlook is very bad news for the labour market,” said OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría, presenting the report in Paris. “It is imperative that governments use every possible means at their disposal to help jobseekers, especially young people, by removing barriers to job creation and investing in their education and skills. The young are at most risk of long-term damage to their careers and livelihoods. Targeting the most cost-effective policies is essential.”

I can't agree with much of the rest of their prescription - far too much weight on what governments should do. Calling for job subsidies, subsidised training investment, etc ignores the opportunity cost. That is every dollar the government spends can't be spent privately. (Actually for every dollar government spends probably $2 can't be spent privately.) But I can agree that it is paramount the young are not allowed to become permanently detached from the labour market. This then caught my eye:

The OECD also calls for action to tackle other labour market challenges such as rising inequality. The labour share of national income has fallen, often sharply, in most OECD countries in recent decades. This trend is closely related to the overall increase in inequality and is being driven, among other factors, by technological change and greater international economic integration. Enhanced investment in education and skills and better targeted tax and transfer programmes can help to ensure that the fruits of economic growth are more broadly shared, says the OECD.

Just a couple of days back I was reading a review which claimed inequality neither caused nor is aggravating the recession.

The Inequality Fetish

According to liberals, either the 2008 financial crisis and its attendant recession, or the sluggish recovery -- and maybe both -- can be attributed in large part to the high level of economic inequality in the United States. In this view, inequality is an economic malady on its own, even in times of prosperity, says Patrick Brennan, a William F. Buckley Fellow at the National Review Institute. This narrative has been latched onto by many in the field of economics, who then attach their names to the legitimacy of the narrative. The problem, however, is simply this: there is no real evidence that a nation's income inequality either dampens economic growth or worsens financial crises.

Now if you go back to the projection chart above you see that the US - regarded as a rich but unequal society - looks more promising than Europe.

Back to the OECD statists who seem superficially sensible but are actually at the core of the problem.

Individuals operate best under the condition of freedom. Communities and larger societies are only collections of individuals. The freer they are, the more productive and happy they will be.  Government does not represent or embody freedom. It can protect freedom to a degree but it can't create it. Just like it can't create jobs without destroying greater numbers of potential private sector jobs. Similarly government can't create equality without damaging a lot more in the process. Frankly, I don't know why they keep peddling this stuff.

Govt says benefit numbers rise slightly

Interesting that the Minister's  press release about June benefit numbers is titled, "Benefit numbers rise slightly in June."

The June numbers are being compared to May.

I would have compared them by quarter - June to March. That's how the Ministry releases them to the public.

So I did.

Over the past six years, if the March and June quarters are compared there is a pattern. I've marked the ones that featured a rise.

2006 
2007
2008 ^
2009 ^
2010 ^
2011
2012

So the positive pattern continues.

But 320,041 working-age people on a benefit is still very high at around one in eight dependent.

That's what the opposition should be highlighting - not a month to month rise.  Let's see what Jacinda says. As usual she's slow to respond but I don't think she'll be able to resist a dig, given the title of the release.

A novel idea to get business reducing the need for government

Here's a novel idea for getting the private sector and therefore, voluntarism back into sorting social problems. If the below example is successful,  required input from both private and public sources should diminish over time. Though I'd like to know what One Service actually does. The investor may be able to assist the ex-prisoner directly through employment for instance.

(A cut and paste from the Maxim newsletter.)

Social Impact Bonds By Jane Silloway Smith, 26 June 2012

back to top

A recent post on the New York Times website highlights the UK's experiment with social impact bonds — a new, innovative way of thinking about the financing of social projects and programs. In a nutshell, a group called Social Finance has created a financial product that helps connect investors with social service providers. The investors buy social impact bonds that fund a social service provider's project or programme that is designed to achieve particular measureable outcomes in a set amount of time. If the provider achieves their set outcomes, the UK government will repay the investors a portion of the savings they have made from the success of the project or program. The first trial of these social impact bonds is currently taking place in Peterborough. An organisation called One Service has made it their mission to cut down on the recidivism rates of men released from short-term sentences in Peterborough Prison. Social Finance has helped them to find 17 investors to fund their programme via social impact bonds. The better One Service does in lowering recividism rates, the more the government will pay out to these investors from the money the government will save. The idea of social impact bonds is an intriguing one for tackling difficult social issues. It will be interesting to see how the Peterborough trial goes.

Truth Column for Friday June 28

My Truth column for Friday June 28 is now on-line:

Pacific Islanders often get a raw deal, not just because manual work is underpaid in this country, as highlighted in a recent Queen St march, but because poor social statistics relating to Maori are often wrongly attributed to Pacific Island people. For example, welfare dependence, over-representation in child abuse and neglect statistics, and high crime rates. 

 More

Other columns here