Nat/act/nzf 2023

[Bjauck]

Definitely, kids can easily have a pie and coke, but even a good old fashioned ham and cheese sandwich on white bread would be great to give kids a good start to the day.

That said, I am against lunches in schools and if parents do not provide their kids with lunch, they are failing in one of their core responsibilities. Maybe CYPS needs to pay them a visit.

If parents who cannot/do not feed their kids just ended up "punishing" their own kids, that would be one issue. Hungry/malnourished kids often end up with behavioural issues, and poor school performance. So other kids are affected and eventually the wider society too.

[blackcap]

If parents who cannot/do not feed their kids just ended up "punishing" their own kids, that would be one issue. Hungry/malnourished kids often end up with behavioural issues, and poor school performance. So other kids are affected and eventually the wider society too.

Correct, so the parents of these malnourised kids should be targeted and told to buck up their ideas.

[Baa_Baa]

Correct, so the parents of these malnourised kids should be targeted and told to buck up their ideas.

What if the parent(s) don't have the money or the means, or jobs to earn the money, to feed their kids? That's the problem 'school lunches' is trying to fix, it's not every school, it's for the deprived schools.

We can't fix the problem of bringing more and more children into deprived families, or improve parenting to 'buck up their ideas' by feeding them at school, all we can fix is that they go to school, are fed and educated, hopefully breaking the cycle of deprivation.

I suggest all the hardliners amongst us who don't have any real sense of the deprivation that exists in NZ, and what it means to family and community, regardless of race, take a roady around the East Cape, carry on to Northland, travel back down the west coast of Northland to Dargaville etc. And open your eyes to reality.

[blackcap]

What if the parent(s) don't have the money or the means, or jobs to earn the money, to feed their kids? That's the problem 'school lunches' is trying to fix, it's not every school, it's for the deprived schools.

We can't fix the problem of bringing more and more children into deprived families, or improve parenting to 'buck up their ideas' by feeding them at school, all we can fix is that they go to school, are fed and educated, hopefully breaking the cycle of deprivation.

I suggest all the hardliners amongst us who don't have any real sense of the deprivation that exists in NZ, and what it means to family and community, regardless of race, take a roady around the East Cape, carry on to Northland, travel back down the west coast of Northland to Dargaville etc. And open your eyes to reality.

For right or wrong most of this so called hardship is self inflicted. It has to do with lifestyle choices etc. Priorities and responsibility. Something that has sadly been lacking for quite a while now. Maybe those things should be taught in our schools rather than some of the other rubbish.

[Aaron]

For right or wrong most of this so called hardship is self inflicted. It has to do with lifestyle choices etc. Priorities and responsibility. Something that has sadly been lacking for quite a while now. Maybe those things should be taught in our schools rather than some of the other rubbish.

Agree with blackcap that you need to take responsibility for yourself and your family first and foremost and that possibly in a lot of cases the hardship might be self inflicted (drugs, lack of a budget etc) but punishing the kids for being born to sh*t bag parents is not the solution.

I agree more with Baa Baa that all we can fix is that they go to school, are fed and educated, hopefully breaking the cycle of deprivation.

I suppose we could bring in a capital gains tax to lower income taxes that way capital owners can contribute to the nation as well as the people trading time for money and the wage slaves keep more to spend on food for their kids.

Perhaps monetary policy that focuses on price stability rather than inflation which as we all know is a regressive tax that helps asset owners while making life harder for the working man should be reconsidered. Get some proof other than a widening gap between rich and poor that trickle down economics works before continuing with failing policy.

And speaking of regressive taxes maybe we should tell the next person to suggest an increase in GST to cut income tax to shut the f*ck up.

[mistaTea]

Agree with blackcap that you need to take responsibility for yourself and your family first and foremost and that possibly in a lot of cases the hardship might be self inflicted (drugs, lack of a budget etc) but punishing the kids for being born to sh*t bag parents is not the solution.

I agree more with Baa Baa that all we can fix is that they go to school, are fed and educated, hopefully breaking the cycle of deprivation.

It is a challenging situation. And both Blackcap and Baa_Baa are right.

For the most part, parents not feeding their kids is due to choices. The parents could feed them, but choose to blow their money on other unecessary bs. In that light, why should the taxpayer be expected to subsidise these 'bad parents' poor choices?

On the other hand, these are young kids we are talking about. It is literally not their fault that their parents are sh1t. Do we not have some sort of collective responsibility to help? The thought of some of these kids at school with no food makes me want to weep. And Baa_Baa is right that it does understandably lead to more behavioural issues, which affects all of the pupils, and also then ensures the cycle is repeated for these kids.

And then there are a smaller minority of families where there is a genuine need.

For me, though I wish we did not live in a society where the taxpayer had to foot the bill for feeding other peoples kids... in the end, if the govt can target the areas in need and do it in a cost effective way...with reasonable choices of food available (not platters of sushi) then let's keep it going and review the results periodically.

[Aaron]

, why should the taxpayer be expected to subsidise these 'bad parents' poor choices?

Because we as a nation are not sh*tbags like these poor kids parents. That would be my best guess.

Also looking at the figures a single parent on minimum wage working 40hours a week earns $47,216 annually less tax $39,933 or $768 a week in the hand. Average rents nationally per google are $530 a week or $27,560 That leaves $12,373 or $238 a week to cover the groceries, power, insurance, vehicle running costs, clothes etc. That is going to be a tight budget.

We should factor in accommodation supplements (this does not seem to engender as much concern as lunches for kids for some reason) and working for families but I need to do some work today.

Some of us have been blessed with parents who loved us and cared for us and have helped and encouraged us to contribute to society, also some of us are blessed with good looks and brains so our position in life is not all down to hard work and personal responsibility, although they are admirable qualities in a person.

If the average house price per google is say $900,000 then a home owner could expect a govt guaranteed gain of at least $18,000 ($900,0000 *2%) tax free a year. Why should the nz taxpayer have to suffer inflation to protect the price of peoples houses and reduce their debts in real terms?

The answer to this one is that homeowners vote more than poor people and MPs own houses.

[Bjauck]

It is a challenging situation. And both Blackcap and Baa_Baa are right.

For the most part, parents not feeding their kids is due to choices. The parents could feed them, but choose to blow their money on other unecessary bs. In that light, why should the taxpayer be expected to subsidise these 'bad parents' poor choices?

On the other hand, these are young kids we are talking about. It is literally not their fault that their parents are sh1t. Do we not have some sort of collective responsibility to help? The thought of some of these kids at school with no food makes me want to weep. And Baa_Baa is right that it does understandably lead to more behavioural issues, which affects all of the pupils, and also then ensures the cycle is repeated for these kids.

And then there are a smaller minority of families where there is a genuine need.

For me, though I wish we did not live in a society where the taxpayer had to foot the bill for feeding other peoples kids... in the end, if the govt can target the areas in need and do it in a cost effective way...with reasonable choices of food available (not platters of sushi) then let's keep it going and review the results periodically.

Are you ok footing the bill through accommodation supplements for their accommodation? Is it the sign of well-functioning country when a substantial proportion of the population, including many in employment, need taxpayer assistance to afford accommodation? Yet many begrudge school lunches provided for children, who have not even had the opportunity to stuff up their lives or country!