|
| Comment | Total | Positive | Negative | Name |
| She should feel proud that she has earnt more of the dollars that are putting food on the table, that's $16k that can now be spent somewhere more important. NZs hand out economy is driving down motivation for people to work harder. | 193 | 199 | 6 | A Green Mistral |
| Welcome to the real world, where are the articles about the people that never had subsidies and tax credits? | 170 | 173 | 3 | 69+ob |
When we finally earnt enough to not get WFF, it was bliss! Suddenly we could earn what we liked and not worry about earning too much. WFF is a real life saver when you need it. It kept our family, and many working families I know, alive with food in the cupboard.
When you no longer need it, because you earn more, it is time to spread your wings and fly!
The assistance is only for those who need it.
| 158 | 159 | 1 | RetroGirl1 |
| So she has started working more hours and earning more, but is complaining that its not fair that shes no longer getting the same amount of free money that has been docked from other workers pay?! If she had any self-respect, she would just be happy that she is a step closer to looking after herself and her family through her own efforts, rather than relying on other people to work to support her.
Welfare should never be there to allow people to live a life of comfort and ease; it should be enough to cover the basics and no more. If you want luxuries, earn them yourself. Every dollar of welfare has been deducted from someone elses earnings; Im happy to help contribute towards making sure those in genuine need can afford food and shelter, but Im not all that keen on having to put off taking my own kids on holiday because im having to pay high taxes to send someone elses kids on holiday. | 144 | 147 | 3 | DMart |
| Thats exactly how working for families works. | 129 | 134 | 5 | Chris_H |
Frankly she should be exceedingly grateful that her income was topped up so generously by the taxpayer.
| 127 | 133 | 6 | SpencerArnold |
| Sue, you totally had me until you told us you had sky! Thats a total luxury. Cut that off and save the money for your family holiday! | 117 | 123 | 6 | Katie. |
| Im really sorry Sue, that my taxes cant subsidize a holiday for you and your children. I can totally sympathize given I myself havent been able to afford a holiday or Sky in years. | 103 | 113 | 10 | Mo McClure |
| which proves welfare is paying out to much! if comparing being an active member of the population and working to contribute to society against the other alternative of I want more support and if I work I lose benefits paid for by those out there working and struggling! | 101 | 107 | 6 | Onsite01 |
| So youre $50 better off, and earning more of your own income vs it being handed to you by the Government ... I dont see the problem here? Are you complaining about being able to pay your bills with the money you actually earnt? Be proud that you are more self-sufficient than you were on part time hours. So many out there have it far worse. | 100 | 101 | 1 | ShazRock |
| Good on you for reducing your dependence on our taxes. | 99 | 101 | 2 | Kohelath |
| Wow. Nearly 50% of income shown relies on subsidies and top ups. No wonder the rest of the world wants to live here. Is this possibly a reason why people are saying Kiwis have become lazy, and dont want to work. It appears you are better off not to. | 97 | 98 | 1 | Jed |
| Totally agree with you Dominic, there needs to be a incentive to work, its too easy to just do nothing. | 92 | 102 | 10 | Highlander912 |
| You made the decision to have children. They are your children. It's not up to everyone else to pay you to support them. So sick and tired of parents demanding more from the taxpayer. | 90 | 116 | 26 | Gottawonder |
| or put another way Sue still gets $247 a week from the taxpayer for nothing -- which helps pay for her Sky , Internet, mobile phone and to buy her house for her .... | 89 | 93 | 4 | paullesley |
| Get real, lost me when said that she was only getting $5 per hour for her increase of ten hours per week. What drivel, she recieves $911 per week in the hand for 40hrs that is approx $22.50 per hour after tax. To say that she loses assistance and hence it is not fair, is the wrong mindset. Be proud of not needing that top up from the tax payer, and you are still $2500 per year better off in your hand. I am a believer in social investment, as someone who was an employer and self employed for most of my working life, I do not begrudge people help, but the inference of this, is entitlement to assistance, irrespective of need. | 88 | 96 | 8 | Whats the point |
| Im hearing we have a generous welfare system. | 88 | 92 | 4 | CaptainHindsight |
| So let me see if I've got this right, this woman get a 16k wage increase and still expects to maintain the same level of government benefits.... hell where do I sign up for this | 87 | 89 | 2 | Darryns |
| There should never be a taxpayer subsidy on employers wage costs It is the PAYE content that should be dropped. Why take tax on one hand and make the worker a beneficiary on the other | 80 | 80 | 0 | LeClerc |
answers. need more?
