Beneficiary bashing?

As predicted, the hordes have jumped on their soapboxes over National's cruelty and heartlessness of beneficiary bashing.

What National is proposing is a punitive stick a one-size-fits-all approach that is lacking any intellectual grit

Not to say that Liarbour already does the same.

However, Labour already punishes those on the unemployment benefit who refuse to look for work or take jobs offered to them.

At least Key is being open about it and extending it to cover the ever expanding unemployment benefit class, the sickness beneficiary.

Punishing beneficiaries would mean their children would suffer the most.

But being on a benefit does children no harm at all? Yeah, bloody right!

What National are proposing is just going to put more strain on beneficiaries, as if it's not stressful enough," Jackson said. "Trying to juggle work and childcare and even just something as simple as transport can be really tough.

Welcome to the real world a non-beneficiary lives in. They have exactly the same issues with raising rugrats, getting them to school, going to work daily and still manage. Get off your arse and find a job.


Meanwhile, Granny Herald looks at every reason why the renewed attack is not worth the effort in its editorial, but fails to see the wood for the trees. That, even though there may be little short term financial gain, the long term social gain of instilling a work ethic for a benefit might be worth reaping.