Beneficiary bashing an easy political game to play
JOSHUA DRUMMOND
Relevant offers
OPINION: With the general election fast approaching, it is a good time to start indulging in New Zealand's other favourite sport. No, not Ultimate Frisbee. I'm talking about a good old-fashioned round of beneficiary bashing.
With jobs scarce and another economic crisis looming, beneficiary bashing is going to be very important to the election results, so get good at it. It's easy to play. Warm up by getting hot under the collar when reading the news of how some beneficiary rorted the system to the tune of $200, 000 over 10 years or so. Stretch your bigotry muscles by becoming irritated at a speech given by someone in the National Government about how beneficiaries are costing this great nation ever so much money.
The next bit is the fun part. You get to go to blogs and comment on them, or phone talkback radio and voice your opinion, or complain to friends over drinks. Make sure you include a few key points, like how solo mums are crippling our resources, how beneficiaries are just people who can't be bothered to get a job, and how the sickness benefit is a scam to prop up the lazy. For a bonus point, darkly infer that left-wing governments buy votes by propping up useless beneficiaries who'd otherwise be forced to work, which encourages them to breed for more handouts, and so on.
A quick glossary of terms to use: bludgers, leeches, parasites, breeders, mongrels. I'm sure you can think of a few more. Whatever you do, don't think about why people might be on a benefit – that they might have been sacked unfairly, or been made redundant from a company that failed. This might provoke empathy, which isn't conducive to how the game is played. I'm going to spoil the party a bit by pointing out that I was a beneficiary a bit over a year ago. It was quite possibly the worst experience of my life. It is dehumanising. Every detail of your life is micro-managed by a small army of petty bureaucrats, and you don't have enough money to live on.
This, in case I haven't spelt it out enough, is not fun. No-one, unless they're a masochist, would choose to live this way. The fact is the vast majority of people on benefits in the country are not on them by choice, and they would give anything for decent paid employment. But too often the system screws them there as well, because Work and Income will push them to take the first thing that comes along, no matter how suitable or far away it is. Travel time and expenses eat into the horrifically low minimum wage that they are paid, often to the extent that working is barely worth the soul sale it requires. The solution is not as simple as the "You're lazy – get a job" mantra so often spouted by fortunate idiots, because, especially right now, the jobs are not always there.
The misery suffered by beneficiaries, and the many traps that keep them in an unfair and inhumane system, are documented in myriad other places. Of course, the system is unfair, often to taxpayers, as much as those who rely on benefits. I'm not arguing that fewer people should be on benefits. I'm suggesting we should all be on them.
Let me explain quickly before you phone the police to warn them about this dangerous communist columnist. I don't swing that way. North Korea looks as if it would be quite boring, unless you were in one of those fun re-education camps. I'm all for ethical business. The "benefits for all" idea, known as a universal basic income (UBI) is based on the idea that we all deserve a level playing field, and the aim of taxation is to redistribute income to create a fairer society. People would still work, but under a UBI, people who work mostly in a voluntary or, heaven save us, artistic capacity would have a means for eating.
It means our self-worth as individuals isn't just derived from our job, or as a nation, from gross domestic product. This idea is currently being flogged in New Zealand by no less a capitalist than fund manager, economist and early Trade Me investor Gareth Morgan, under the name "The Big Kahuna". Search it online. Obviously, not all the answers are there, but at least the seeds of a proper discussion are.
Joshua Drummond is a Hamilton freelance writer who was so keen to get off the benefit he turned his CV into a comic book. It worked.
- © Fairfax NZ News
Sponsored links
Its easy to generalise people into groups and stack a few more generalisations onto them until the first few are forgotten and then bag the people as if the initial points were true. Its a crude and effective form of manipulation that people do all the time without even knowing it, its also called lying.
The fact is that sometimes people cant get a job for whatever reason whether it be that they are useless or perhaps they're simply aren't any jobs... I was a student for 4 years and unemployed for 2.
Now, I alone pay enough tax to keep a few beneficiaries alive. (this is where i bring us back to a point rather than rant/lie). But thats the point - they are alive. Has anyone stopped to think about that at all or are we all to tied up in our rants about "they shouldn't buy cigarettes or alcohol on government money" or "why give them so much". The alternative to social welfare is enforced mass-starvation.
Come on people.
I have a few comments about the original article. I was on the unemployment benefit while looking for work. I could afford to go to town, get junk food, buy a tv and pay rent. If you know how to use and save money the benefit is easy to live off and I know heaps of people that do. I deal with people on the benefit all day for work, and some you can tell are trying, they make it obvious. But some you can easily see are just taking and taking and not even planning to find work. And the cycle continues with their children. We need to give out food stamps and cards that work at certain stores. I don't want people using my tax money to get drunk in town as I KNOW they do.
Nimrod, if you're not sexist, then why refer to women employed by WINZ as "housewives"? They're not housewives, they have full-time jobs. Assuming women only like hot WINZ employees? Insinuating that guys can't handle getting helped by a middle-aged lady?
For someone who reckons they're not sexist, you do an ace job of hiding it!
Interesting that you assume I'm a woman. Where did I say I was? Or are only women allowed to call out sexism when they see it?
Seriously, did you not read what you wrote? You are being sexist - you assume that women would only like a male WINZ staff member if he looked like Brad Pitt. No, mine was actually incompetent - he didn't care about people, he was rude and patronising when I couldn't accept a physical job due to a back injury, and he couldn't even arrange the correct weekly payments, and it took the female staff member to fix his mistakes.
Nice try, though. I'm sorry you can't see the glaring sexism in your statements, but that's your own issue to deal with.
Honestly, keep that attitude up and you'll be hanging around the WINZ office for a long time yet. Who'd hire someone spouting such antiquated nonsense when there's loads of perfectly capable men and women in need of fulltime work?
@LA
No I'm not sexist I am sure there are some great female staff. But IMO the more male staff present in Winz the better, lets face it the unemployed are mainly men & the solo parents are mostly woman with a few of us dads taking on the role. Female staff for the solo parents, Male staff for the unemployed. Yeah that sounds really sexist.
If you were a single mum would you rather a male Winz officer tell you how to bring up your child or a female? Maybe if he was a Brad Pitt look alike you would, but seriously you would prefer a woman, your not sexist at all just you would relate better with another female.
You just said it in your post the male staff member you got was useless but was he really useless? Think about it. ;-)
The unemployed male would relate better and probably actually take his advice seriously than a mid age housewife employed by Winz.
Just my opinion of course.
Nimrod, what are you talking about? Perhaps there's mostly women at your local WINZ, but the ones in my town are pretty evenly split between men and women. Employing more men won't fix the fact that WINZ is inept.
Not every unemployed man is sexist enough to require a male to help them find a job. My first WINZ person when I was briefly unemployed was a man and he was incredibly unhelpful. When my payments were short he did nothing to fix it, but then I was moved to a woman who solved my issues and helped me land a job only 3 weeks later.
You forgot Michael Law's favourite, "ferals".
Anyone one bashed the Warner Bros beneficiaries yet? What about SCF? Worst bludgers going yet seem to get missed by National on most bash-ups.
Why knock a man down when hes already hit rock bottom. Benefit bashing is like a scratched record time to change it. Winz has been around for what 20 odd years now. Is Winz doing their job? And why are their not more males working for Winz, going into winz is like entering the kitchen at a bowling club - mid age housewives who's hubbies no doubt all have permanent jobs. They themselves have probably never experience being on the dole so have no idea what its like. They are robots what ever the masters in government tell them to do they do it with an iron hand.
Lets face it these are down and out men they need men to take lead and show them the way.
Last time i went into Winz I counted 12 unemployed people there waiting for their appointments, all of them were males. I looked at the Winz staff and all of them are females except the security guard who was overweight and looked in his late 50's. lol. Some security he would be if one of the unemployed lost their marbles. The winz staff ranged in age from what I could see in mid 30s to hitting 60 something. I was there not more than 15-20min all I felt was a feeling of dread & hopelessness, and the strange silence. Not one person was smiling even the staff looked depressed. Saddest thing Ive ever experience in my entire life!
The employment of more male staff would lift the mainly male dominated beneficiary. Also if you had a room full of male staff Winz would not need to hire security guards. That there would save some $$$ from the government piggy bank right?
Editorial: Tackling seafaring slavery
Editorial - Government steps lightly
There's no perfect day to celebrate NZ's nationhood
The Greeks are no strangers to hardship
Seafarers guided by obsessive reverence
Why a cycling centre is a perfect fit for our region
Editorial - A little too late, Mr Comer
Editorial - Fay and co do us a favour
Editorial - Electoral law politics
Editorial - Football bid the way to go
Do you think the High Court was right in overturning the government's plan to sell the Crafar farms to a Chinese buyer?
Related story: (See story)
Newest First
Oldest First
This is so true. Those who are lucky enough to have not been involved with WINZ would perhaps not realize how restrictive the system can be. Beneficiaries are monitored like criminals.
These days it's 'who you know' not 'what you know'. I'm a university graduate with a masters degree and I could not find a job. I am now fortunate enough to have cut all ties with WINZ, although they made it as difficult as they could!
I think people forget that many beneficiaries do work. It just goes to show how uneducated some people can be.
I commend this reporter on his informative and well written story, thank you.