| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 124626 | 2012-05-07 20:01:00 | Beneficiaries to receive free contraceptives. | tut (12033) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1274178 | 2012-05-08 19:00:00 | It should be compulsory, not optional The dpb is the worst that ever happened to this country. It has reduced our social and moral fibre. |
Digby (677) | ||
| 1274179 | 2012-05-08 19:23:00 | I know of a solo mum on the DPB with 2 under 5 kids went for a holiday to Aussie. Must be paying her too much. Once they get the DPB and all the other allowances that go with it they can be getting about $40,000 a year. :) |
Trev (427) | ||
| 1274180 | 2012-05-08 21:54:00 | How can this be a bad thing? They are getting a choice, it's their decision to make. The government is attempting to help beneficiaries and itself, by breaking families out of a cycle of poverty. Next logical step is giving free long term contraceptives to all. | Nick G (16709) | ||
| 1274181 | 2012-05-08 21:55:00 | This cartoon appears to have been removed from the Heralds website. Just the thumbnail left. | Trev (427) | ||
| 1274182 | 2012-05-08 22:51:00 | How can this be a bad thing? They are getting a choice, it's their decision to make. The government is attempting to help beneficiaries and itself, by breaking families out of a cycle of poverty. Next logical step is giving free long term contraceptives to all. I'm sorry, these people in most cases choose to have kids and choose to live their life style (which is a pretty good one). Holidays to Oz as Trev mentioned (and I know a few that have done it also), several nights a week on the piss, all the mod cons while living in a state house paying bugger all rent is hardly what I would call poverty. Providing contraception is not going to change anything as those people will still choose not to have it. Its the life style they want because they know its a good thing. |
Iantech (16386) | ||
| 1274183 | 2012-05-08 22:56:00 | Great idea. however SWMBO who works for the local DHB say there is so much free contraception out there, that it probably won't make any difference. Reminds me of a young kenj going into a chemist shop, many many years ago to buy some "frenchies" The chemist was very understanding and told me that a pack of three was 2/6 plus tax. Still very embarrassed at this point I replied... "Don't worry about the tacks, I will tie them on with a bit of string! Ken :blush: |
kenj (9738) | ||
| 1274184 | 2012-05-09 00:39:00 | I would say that some are doing pretty well out of the benefit, but not all are doing this. I still think it is a good idea which the government should extend to all. I'm sorry, these people in most cases choose to have kids and choose to live their life style (which is a pretty good one). Holidays to Oz as Trev mentioned (and I know a few that have done it also), several nights a week on the piss, all the mod cons while living in a state house paying bugger all rent is hardly what I would call poverty. Providing contraception is not going to change anything as those people will still choose not to have it. Its the life style they want because they know its a good thing. However, the government should not give the DPB for any kids that have been conceived while the contraceptives are being offered. This way, the bludgers won't make money out of it, while the genuinely poor will get the benefit free contraceptives will bring. |
Nick G (16709) | ||
| 1274185 | 2012-05-09 01:28:00 | Yeah that's an interesting thought, not providing additional benefit support to those already living on the benefit. It begs the moral question: If somebody can't even provide for themselves, should they then be reproducing children which in turn they're also not going to be able to provide for? |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1274186 | 2012-05-09 01:41:00 | It begs the moral question: If somebody can't even provide for themselves, should they then be reproducing children which in turn they're also not going to be able to provide for? The answer to that is obvious to you me and Metla, but not to the likes of 12 V, which remains a mystery to me as to how these people think. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 1274187 | 2012-05-09 02:51:00 | It begs the ethical question: If somebody can't even provide for themselves, should they then be reproducing children which in turn they're also not going to be able to provide for? Change 1 word and it is a different question all together. So what are we saying, people shouldnt be allowed to have sex? You do realise thats how women get pregnant? lol Nick G's idea is solid (no pun intended) EDIT: I was going to say breed ugly woman but thats why they invented beer |
Gobe1 (6290) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | |||||