Remember when during the election John Key told NZ that we were on the cusp of something special?
Remember when National promised a brighter future?
We now have 305 000 NZ children living in poverty.
How special and bright is that?
“Today’s Household Incomes Report shows an increase in children living below 60 per cent of the median income poverty line from 260,000 in 2013 to 305,000 in 2014 after housing costs – an increase of 45,000 at a time when Government has said that solving poverty is a priority,” said Deborah Morris-Travers, National Advocacy Manager at UNICEF NZ.
There are many questions to ask over some of the numbers here which scrutiny suggests could mean the poverty level is actually a lot worse than the official figures…
The Ministry of Social Development’s annual household incomes reportshows that the numbers below a European standard measure of absolute hardship, based on measures such as not having a warm home or two pairs of shoes, fell from 165,000 in 2013 to 145,000 (8 per cent of all children) last year, the lowest number since 2007.
Children in benefit-dependent families also dwindled from a recent peak of 235,000 (22 per cent) in 2011, and 202,000 (19 per cent) in 2013, to just 180,000 (17 per cent) last year – the lowest proportion of children living on benefits since the late 1980s.
…absolute hardship and those on benefits have supposedly dropped, BUT, this Government have done all they can to find ways to disqualify people on benefits and are throwing thousands of people off welfare every month. The drop in absolute hardship and children in benefit-dependent families would have far more to do with National’s draconian welfare reforms than any real decrease for those impacted most harshly by poverty.
One thing the Government can’t hide however is that the total number of children living in poverty now totals 305 000. The rich have gotten richer, the poor have gone no where.
The genius of this Government is in pretending to be moderate. Most pundits are middle class and because Key hasn’t touched their middle class tax breaks (WFF, no real capital gains, interest free student loans, gold card, never ending superannuation) they perceive the Government as moderate and spin the line that they are. A case in point was the supposed $25 increase for beneficiaries announced in the last budget, turns out when you read the fine print most beneficiaries will be worse off…
Concerns over proposed changes to welfare payments
A $25 increase in welfare payments will be cancelled out by new obligations for parents to return to work sooner and for longer hours, advocacy groups say.The benefit changes are the centrepiece of National’s Budget, and are being considered by a Parliamentary committee.
If passed, the legislation would require beneficiaries to return to work once their youngest child turned three, instead of five.
Part-time work would be redefined as 20 hours a week, up from 15 hours a week, for parents who were required to work.
National Council of Women spokeswoman Judy Whitcombe said members had expressed concerns about the availability of suitable jobs for beneficiary parents and early childhood options for three-to-five year-olds.
National’s do nothing approach (other than to disqualify anyone from getting a benefit) is similar to its do nothing approach to the economy. This hands-off-let-the-market-decide mentality has been a screaming failure, unfortunately NZers are as much into poverty denial as we are into climate change denial.
305 000 children in poverty is an obscenity for a country that once prided itself on egalitarianism.
Let’s ask Paula Bennett again what the true figures are on poverty is this country. Then she can giggle dismissively just like she did last time, and state “There is no government measure for poverty! Gosh!” *snigger, snigger*
New Zealand has not been an egalitarian country for many years now Martyn.
The stats speak for themselves, eh?
Y’all proud to be part of the American dream yet?
I mourn the passing of compassion and unity…
Tumbling Down the Rabbit Hole Toward a Second Great Dying? World Ocean Shows Signs of Coming Extinction. http://Www.robertscribbler.com
(You mentioned the words climate change, trigger words for me.)
“This hands-off-let-the-market-decide mentality has been a screaming failure, unfortunately NZers are as much into poverty denial as we are into climate change denial.”
That is sad testimony Martyn and well summed up as we go to the wall, JPK is just flying off to see his rich mates again and seal our fate to become another Greece.
JPK must hate NZ and what we stood for as na beacon to the world with our shard wealth as I a forth Generation Kiwi grew up with as a warm egalitarian society that he has systematically wrecked as he is only a first generation Kiwi and would not remember the days of the 1950’s when I at 10yrs old remember that we were touted at our peak of wealth as a world leader as best country to live in alongside Sweden then.
JPK not being born then has been singly responsible now for dragging our wealth distribution down.
He has done the evil job he was paid to do and now has passed all our wealth and assets instead to his rich & greedy mates.
He is a traitor of all of us.
You are right. these figures are obscene. I think you are mistaken though, if you think no one among the general population notices.
However far more people change their vote – or even turn out – motivated by anger+hope than will do so motivated by anger alone.
It is true that complacency has ruled for much of the past six or seven years. But even if people can be brought to believe these figures, which is possible, that still leaves open the question of whether a change of government is seen as likely to improve the situation for the needy without unduly hurting the “economy”: (for economy, read: the better off), faced with the assertion likely from the Nats: “that we are doing everything possible; that this is as good as it can get under the present situation; that the Left will make it worse”.
A little psychology might make a big difference in persuading the population that there is the chance of creating a better environment. After all, the fewer kids go without, the better off we will all be in ten and twenty years time. And we will maybe also feel a bit less guilty.
Of course it is necessary to have a coherent plan to move the country forward, (I can’t find any examples of austerity creating anything but misery, while State intervention, no matter how well meant, without engaging the recipient in the eventual improvement of their situation is also no more than a band-aid solution), but a plan without a seductive context and $3.00 still won’t get you a coffee any more.
“The drop in absolute hardship and children in benefit-dependent families would have far more to do with National’s draconian welfare reforms than any real decrease for those impacted most harshly by poverty.”
Ummm… not sure how you can justify that claim. If you agree with the Relative poverty statistics then you also have to accept the absolute poverty ones as well. There is no use cheery picking data to suit your political agenda.
Oh I don’t know Gossy – you do it all the time!
HI Gosman,
It always pays to read a bit more detail in the actual reports. From the MSD key findings document (there’s a link to the key findings summary on the page linked to in the quote from the Ministry in the post):
“35 For the more severe hardship measure the rate has tracked at around 5% through the whole period that we can measure, with only a slight rise through the GFC. For the standard hardship measure, the impacts of the GFC and the recovery are very clear, with the rate first rising then falling from 13% to 8% over the last three surveys. The general state of the economy (wages and employment especially) has a rapid and noticeable impact on those in lesser hardship and those just getting by. For those in deeper hardship, these impacts are less noticeable – most are working-age beneficiaries or low-income workers whose incomes are steady but low, and for some of these and others, there are non-income factors that lead to deeper hardship.”
In simple terms, the standard hardship threshold basically includes those pushed below it during the GFC and who have now gone back above it as the economy ticks up. The more severe measure has basically stayed constant at around 5% of the population.
The comment in the post that you quote, remember, references, “those impacted most harshly by poverty. That is, those who would be captured by the severe hardship measure, not the standard one. So the poster is quite correct in that assertion.
So there is a reason to be – if not sceptical then, at least – more cautious about properly interpreting the MSD claims about absolute hardship levels (i.e., it basically comes down to them choosing the hardship measure that shows an improvement over the last few years and not highlighting the – more severe – one that shows little to no change).
And, of course, your claim that if one accepts the relative poverty trends one can’t reject the absolute poverty trends is a non sequitur. They are different measures so it is perfectly possible to accept one while rejecting the other.
No, they are collected by the same agency. If you are stating the agency is being influenced to reduce absolute poverty numbers (the inference made in the Blog post) then it seems odd that you trumpet the validity of the figures for relative poverty from THE VERY SAME AGENCY.
The article in the Herald:
“The Ministry of Social Development’s annual household incomes report shows that the numbers below a European standard measure of absolute hardship, based on measures such as not having a warm home or two pairs of shoes, fell from 165,000 in 2013 to 145,000 (8 per cent of all children) last year, the lowest number since 2007.
Children in benefit-dependent families also dwindled from a recent peak of 235,000 (22 per cent) in 2011, and 202,000 (19 per cent) in 2013, to just 180,000 (17 per cent) last year – the lowest proportion of children living on benefits since the late 1980s.”
So despite the disingenuous headline, things are actually improving.
Indeed. The 60% of median wage stat is a joke, and most thinking people know that. There are families in need in NZ, and the left’s continuing exaggeration of the problem is actually making it more difficult to get people to take the issue seriously.
Quoting the Herald”
“The Ministry of Social Development’s annual household incomes report shows that the numbers below a European standard measure of absolute hardship, based on measures such as not having a warm home or two pairs of shoes, fell from 165,000 in 2013 to 145,000 (8 per cent of all children) last year, the lowest number since 2007.
Children in benefit-dependent families also dwindled from a recent peak of 235,000 (22 per cent) in 2011, and 202,000 (19 per cent) in 2013, to just 180,000 (17 per cent) last year – the lowest proportion of children living on benefits since the late 1980s.”
So things are steadily improving
Quoting the Herald:
“The Ministry of Social Development’s annual household incomes report shows that the numbers below a European standard measure of absolute hardship, based on measures such as not having a warm home or two pairs of shoes, fell from 165,000 in 2013 to 145,000 (8 per cent of all children) last year, the lowest number since 2007.
Children in benefit-dependent families also dwindled from a recent peak of 235,000 (22 per cent) in 2011, and 202,000 (19 per cent) in 2013, to just 180,000 (17 per cent) last year – the lowest proportion of children living on benefits since the late 1980s.”
So things are steadily improving
I rather think jonkey’s cusp was the roll-out of the New World Order.
New Zealand is a registered US SEC Corporation.
https://mistymountain.info/content/new-zealand-corporation
The duty of the Officers of this Corporation is to protect the shareholders and obey the instructions of the Corporation Head as shown in the SEC entry.
https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/current-membership-list-of-the-illuminati-committee-of-300/
What the Officers of this Corporation are not instructed to do is cater for the “useles eaters” (the documented term used by The Club for those who do not contribute to the economy).
HOWEVER … This is now all beginning to change!! The ball is rolling down hill and I am happy to say we will be watching from the top.
I wonder if MSM here will cover what is about to happen. Probably not. 😀
Have I been moderated off, Scarlet Mod? Nope. Bugger, hate it when that happens.
I don’t know why my comments disappear without trace. You publish Gosman’s, ffs.
Talleys might have a few spare Fish Fingers for them . That’d shut the hungry little annoyances up. Serves them right for being born to poor parents anyway. They should’ve chosen rich parents to be incubated by so serves them right. They had their chance. Poor people shouldn’t breed anyway . That’ll learn ’em.
Here’s an obvious secret. ( This is selfishly for my benefit. Because I love irony and I’m mad enough to enjoy inflicting sarcasm on myself. Yea, I know ! Mad ! )
The Rich need the Poor . No, really. The rich NEED the poor. That’s how the rich get rich. Dig it ? They take the money, resources and amenities from other people , thus poverty is created and from that poverty, opportunities are born. And sadly hungry kids. But that’s ok because some get rich from that. And that is good . Greed, is in fact , good.
Based upon that unsettling fact, one can then assume that it’d be in the interests of the Rich to manufacture Poor people. Which they do, otherwise there’d be no ‘ this’ . If you get my drift?
But guess what ?
The poor , already poor , don’t need the rich . At all. Those , in poverty , do not NEED the rich. Because the rich are rich because they just made Trillions off the …. ? You guessed it . The poor . The poor the rich built. Done . More wine darling ?
Do I make sense ? I sometimes wonder, I really do .
Thank doG for the Daily Blog xxxx
John Key is basically a new immigrant with no real ties to NZ, he is a puppet to the Business Round Table and the New World Order out of the USA & Europe.
@ JACK RAMAKA I think you’re right. I thought The Bilderberg then up a rung to The Club of Rome – Committee of 300 was the end. Turns out the pyramid goes up another rung to Masonic Committee of 33, then up another rung to Masonic Committee of 13. Then comes the capstone. Oh my goodness, jonkey … d you really think you’ll make it?
I say, no.
@ JACK RAMAKA I think you’re right. I thought The Bilderberg then up a rung to The Club of Rome – Committee of 300 was the end. Turns out the pyramid goes up another rung to Masonic Committee of 33, then up another rung to Masonic Committee of 13. Then comes the capstone. Oh my goodness, jonkey … do you really think you’ll make it?
I say, no.
Climate change denial, child poverty denial, commodity prices in freefall, currencies losing value, asset bubbles, all heralding a new and potent recession – all neatly wrapped in a do-nothing approach – is a prescription for disaster on a scale most are unable to even contemplate. Yes, I’m all doom and gloom, because to suggest anything else will come out of the oven using this recipe isn’t even wishful thinking … it’s flat out denial.
Putting food on the table for poor people is not on John Key and Paula Bennetts priority list.
shonkey will go straight into bullshit mode (no no waffle waffle wrong figures blame labour abuse the questioner or report claim victory)
news reported today student debt rising fast on uncontrolled accommodation costs
We are angry about the conditions for our children, but I hope you will sign this petition to also help children who are kept as slaves in Mauritania. Thank you so much.
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/mauritania_anti_slavery_biram_loc_dn/?bdUCFjb&v=63468
Brighter Future is a marketing slogan made up by National and its PR Company Crosby Texter.
Key & Co are taking us back to the Victorian Era with slave labour and child poverty.
Soon we will be shipped off to China to work as labourers on their million herd Dairy Farms.
Comments are closed.