Two recent events reinforce an overwhelming impression that National despises poor people.
The first is news that the MSD thinks that food is a nice to have and not an essential need.
Yep read that again. This is how much we have descended into this weird alternative universe in the past few years.
And the question has to be asked, if food is a nice to have then what is an essential?
From Henry Oliver at the Spinoff:
The Ministry of Social Development has told thousands of people that food was “not an essential need”, in what it now calls an admin error, 1News reported last night. Documents obtained through the Official Information Act show MSD has routinely used that reasoning to decline Special Needs Grant applications for help with food over the last six years.
MSD has said that this was because staff chose the wrong option when they were selecting which option to choose when they were turning down requests for hardship funding. It seems that when a staff member received a request for money to buy food they should have turned them down using some other pretext.
But we live in an absolute food basket. We produce enough food to feed eight times our population. But we have people going without and when they reach out they are told that food is not an essential need. This suggests that we have a rather cruel way of distributing resources.
The second event was the release of the review of how the Government implemented a law change that managed to accidently reduce the benefits of tens of thousands of elderly kiwis.
From Lauren Crimp at Radio New Zealand:
More than 30,000 benefits and other payments were wrongly suspended with concerns continually raised for three months before being appropriately escalated, a government review has found.
The botch-ups affected more than 2400 main beneficiaries and some were left thousands of dollars out of pocket before they were backpaid, while the total arrears bill reached $2.5 million.
The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) on Thursday released its review into two major problems that surfaced following a law change last year.
The change required many beneficiaries to confirm their circumstances annually to ensure they remained eligible for their payments.
The Winter Energy Payment (WEP) should have been exempt from that process, but it was not, which meant thousands of pensioners missed out on payments they should have received.
Secondly, processing delays caused by a high volume of people confirming their circumstances meant some paperwork was not checked in time, so their benefit payments stopped.
MSD chief executive Debbie Power has formally apologised.
But Upston in particular should take the blame.
Smashing the law change through under urgency created this problem. It was not interrogated or reviewed properly and with the benefit of hindsight this was a very apparent problem and easy to fix. Making it subject to select committee review would no doubt have highlighted the problem.
And cutting back office jobs made the problem much worse not only in terms of analysis of the law change but also processing the increased workload caused by the problem.
The issue was first raised on 30 April by an MSD staffer. It was raised continuously for over three months and Senior leadership claimed they were not told until 13 August.
This is clear evidence of an organisation not functioning properly.
Labour has been scathing about Upston’s response.
The RNZ article contains this quote from Chris Hipkins:
The responsibility for this absolute fiasco rests with the ministers in charge, that’s Louise Upston and Christopher Luxon. It’s time they fronted up and apologised and explained why they were willing to let this happen.”
He said Upston “clearly didn’t even bother to read” the legislation, when as leader of the House it was her job to make sure the government did not make these kinds of mistakes.
Labour social development spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime said they were “hiding behind officials, letting them front for a mess National made”.
“The review is damning. It makes clear the root cause of this disaster was National’s rushed lawmaking and up to 700 jobs cut at MSD.”
Shame on National. Its complete indifference to the plight of poor people is palpable.
Simple answer: because they don't make large (or any) donations to the party – unlike Nick Mowbray, who gave $200,000. That sort of donation gets you a lot of likes!
And, they're most unlikely to vote National.
+1000 a total disgrace to treat New Zealanders this way.
“But we live in an absolute food basket. We produce enough food to feed eight times our population“.
There is no 'we'. This is not a country, it's a private investor-led economic zone.
It is called a market, goods and services are rationed by the ability to pay.
Because it is both ideologically and psychologically necessary for them to do so. If their own life success and relative affluence is to be protected from even moderate levels of taxation by the State, it must be viewed as a deserved product of their personal virtue, skill, self-restraint and hard work – as well as being good for other people through the beneficent magic of trickle down. Ipso factor, people without similar levels of life success must lack these virtues. This is more or less what the "just-world fallacy" is about.
2. the problem is benefit rates are set below the poverty line
3. National always make time worse, but Labour don't fundamentally change the system when they have the power to do so.
There are criteria for getting an SNG for food. You (and your partner) can't have any savings, and there has to have been an urgent, unexpected bill/cost in the week you apply. If you have savings, WINZ expects you do use those. If you didn't have any unexpected urgent bill in that week you apply, WINZ think you are not managing your money well.
This is very very fucked up, but the story is much bigger than National being arseholes. It's systemic and its deeply entrenched ideology in NACTF and Labour and the general public about what beneficiaries deserve.
As an example, the WINZ call centre routinely has hour long waits to get through to someone. Call centres for other aspects of life aren't that great, but imagine any other section of society experiencing that simply in order to access their income.
Totally!
Under Labour it's a bit less harsh than under a National Govt. However this particular species of Govt has been especially mean spirited and the current "Minister " is totally lacking in any empathy towards the folk for whom she is responsible for ensuring their welfare.
Meanwhile she is encouraged by a "finance minister" and "prime minister" who are totally focused on promoting the welfare of the well-to-do.
And if you think National despise poor, I'd like an explanation of why Labour have never raised the benefits of disabled people who cannot work. Someone, please, explain this to me.
The weapon (Natfactackack) don't want to be bothered with losers – who can be easily identified as being poor. I see Marc Ellis being written up re $430 million or something like, on the Sunday Times (wrapped around my groceries, I get all my hard cold news that way!). People like that are scintillating, interesting, people to mix with and the rest of us are dull dogs to be ordered here and there, or moved on if they collect and form a group, called a mess.
The high status people have never learned to think about anyone else and want everything to suit themselves. I see middle class parents indulging their children with anything they might like for presents, and at the table having their tastes catered for, 'All right don't eat your carrots. What would you like to eat dear'. Food banks are cut, and personal egos and wants are fed.
The poor are unglamorous and have unpromising futures – may have use for increase in profits but must think themselves lucky to be given a job. And that will only last for a short time till the person falls sick, or the company is taken over by another, which will immediately boost profitability by sacking a number of people and bringing their wage bill down. Everyone else then of course is overloaded with work but will have to bear that, as there are plenty ready to take their job.
That's it till the curtain goes down folks, unless we find clever, thoughtful, practical ways around. But revolutions go round, the poor end up with having a new leader from their midst, who turns out as bad as the old one; with a lot of blood and grief on the way. It's grim, but it has happened, so shouldn't be ignored, or else we will become turnspit dogs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnspit_dog
Quote from Aldous Huxley relevant, repeated – isn't there a meme that things have to be repeated three times to lodge in memory?)
Reality cannot be ignored except at a price; and the longer the ignorance is persisted in, the higher and more terrible becomes the price that must be paid. Aldous Huxley https://www.azquotes.com/quote/1039988
And he shows his philosophical resigned side here: It is a bit embarrassing to have been concerned with the human problem all one's life and find at the end that one has no more to offer by way of advice than 'try to be a little kinder.'
Aldous Huxley https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/aldous_huxley_392818
I would suggest that the rending of the social fabric by National and birds of a feather, means Labour and their flock are ham strung.
The garage sale of cheap business and private assets has already happened, The sorted are even more sorted while the flotsam die outside Ministers' Offices and in the street, or in a hospital hallway.
Funding has been redirected from Public to Private with long contracts. This is because the ideaology is anyone needing Government funding for Public good is a Bottom Feeder. Where Private profit can be generated by the sorted using that Public money, that is what happens.
Priming the Private funding channel is maintained by donations to the Office holders or their proxies.
The reason the left struggle to change much is the billionaires have a toe tilting the playing field away from work and towards capital.
To say the Left had not 'done much', is not accurate, as CoC have spent all their time undoing what had been done and fast tracking their error laden replacement laws and acts.
Exactly PB. Put plainly it is hard to by-pass but some will always. How to bring the exciting truth to the others and electrify them to bounce up and vote Labour and coalition.?(Using their electorate and party votes appropriately for that.)
I don't know. Perhaps the whole Cost of living is to distract from the main game? GWS.
Personally? At 85 in 2 months, I am giving $100 a week to Labour. I get we are on the back foot. When has it ever been different? Rotorua Candidate vote and Party vote to the Greens seems a choice.
Do I believe Labour and the Greens and Maori want the best for people? Yes!!
We need to change the Government. Step one!!
If the bad things happening are not enough to cause change…..???
I have no magic bullet against 'A curse on all their houses'
I just hope we ditch them in '26, and begin with kindness and truth.
Because they are @#$%&
Oops just noticed mod note sorry
In a National nutshell, because the poor (aka the undeserving) are a handbrake on the economy & economic growth, they weigh down society by their existence, they breed crime & lawlessness, and because they’re a burden on taxpayers with their needs & demands.
From the Spinoff article: "Documents obtained through the Official Information Act show MSD has routinely used that reasoning to decline Special Needs Grant applications for help with food over the last six years."
Hard to blame National for that policy, given that it precedes their term by 3 years. Had they been made aware they could have made an attempt to resolve it. Or maybe they were made aware and did nothing about it.
It looks to me like it is an "operational" issue within MSD, helping them meet their budget.
You didn’t click on the 1News link, obviously. Otherwise, it would be extremely hard to explain your wilful ignorance.
If you had read the article that is the subject of this thread (hint: scroll to the top of the page) you will see the quote I pasted.
I have no idea which 1News link you are referring to, or how it is relevant to the article from Spinoff. Perhaps you meant the RNZ link.
You are a very sad little man. I don't care that you are "a big man" on this blog and will no doubt come back at me with one of your cutting incisive comments, but it seems you only ever indulge in putting people down. The only ignorance shown is your own.
Sigh – why do some people react so pathetically when challenged?
You’ve confirmed my suspicion that you hadn’t clicked on that link, which explains your ignorance.
Anyway, this link, in The Spinoff article: https://thespinoff.acemlna.com/lt.php?x=4lZy~GE2U6HP65z9zN1FURNw3HIjuNYjle00jnPJInPN6aF~yEy7xOFt3Xyp-RVfjDZo3HHIIXbs5HF5yexHYOVt2H6k from this part of the sentence:
Parts of that link are mentioned/covered in The Spinoff article and I now doubt that you’ve actually read that too.
Is this too cutting or do you prefer a blunter reply?
The media also hates poor people, its not just the Nats. Dont believe me? Look at the media on any given day and you will find negative stories about poor people (usually brown), with the occasional rags to riches blurb to convince you that you too can achieve the status of the rich and live in the leafy suburbs.
Once you see it, its obvious
Once you believe [it], you’ll see it everywhere, don’t you?
Did you know that there are people who vote for National in the full knowledge of the party’s attitudes towards their poor fellow New Zealanders?
2. I was brought up to vote conservative because what's good for business is good for the economy and finds it's way to people at the bottom after it's done it's work to help the economy. That worked for me until I saw the difference between right and left no longer being rich versus poor, but rather global versus local. Global interests don't care whether the kids in Cannons Creek have enough to eat, they want a government that spends as little as possible, taxes as little as possible so their profits go up ready to repatriate to their home country. So, again, they don't despise the poor, but the poor are an unnecessary expense.
The wealthy think differently. If someone hasn't already said that they should have. Like locusts some of us change into voracious self-serving things after a certain change in our metabolism.
I used to think people who had been poor would feel concern for similar others, and be thoughtful of them when their fortunes changed. Sometimes but not often. That is something we have to work to change if we get a chance at a new approach in society, thinking as humans and living as practical and kindly humans.
But it doesn't mean sharing everything as in the Communist idea, as practised. (Marx said he wasn't a Marxist!) In the meantime we should keep reading widely, including fiction, (not just looking at screens) and exercising the brain till it bulges like a weightlifters chest muscles!
Here is some vocabulary for the 'going' person. https://fluentslang.com/slang-for-prepared/ And some wise words: If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. John F. Kennedy https://www.azquotes.com/quotes/topics/wealth.html
The cynic says: John F. Kennedy was murdered. What's a free society then? We must quietly build it being aware of hole-boring insects possibly eating into its frame. Remember the French agents who infiltrated NZ Greenpeace before blowing up The Rainbow Warrior. This is not a film; we're part of a documentary in which we are collaborating!
The National Party is the modern NZ equivalent of the old land owning aristocracy of the English political system and as such they have always despised the poor.
No matter what they say in election campaigns, this inherent attitude of superiority and entitlement is at the core of their beliefs.
MtL
Reckon right.