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
1274198	2012-05-09 08:16:00	FTFY. Anyone under 18 should still be eligible for student allowance/loan ;)I thought student allowance was income tested on parents income till you were 24? Loans are different kettle of fish	plod (107)
1274199	2012-05-09 08:53:00	I thought student allowance was income tested on parents income till you were 24? Loans are different kettle of fish Correct. Even when my wife and I were married for ~12 months, and had been 100% independent from the time we got married, they still required proof of both my income, my parents income, her parents income, all just to get the student allowance for her.	Chilling_Silence (9)
1274200	2012-05-09 08:55:00	FTFY. Anyone under 18 should still be eligible for student allowance/loan ;) I was under the impression you had to be over 18 to receive either of those	gary67 (56)
1274201	2012-05-09 09:02:00	I was under the impression you had to be over 18 to receive either of those 17 year olds can get it if they're at university I thought student allowance was income tested on parents income till you were 24? Loans are different kettle of fish Yep, it is	pcuser42 (130)
1274202	2012-05-09 10:28:00	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. You left me out in the obvious bit Cicero.:crying:crying	mikebartnz (21)
1274203	2012-05-09 10:29:00	How about this? We offer an increase of $5/week for all beneficaries aged from 16 to 50 who go ahead and have the 100% optional, reversible contraception. It could be paid as a lump sum which would then act as quite a carrot to get the shiftless proportion of them to make the move. This would be paid upon receipt of a report from their GP detailing placement of the devicde, and its working lifespan. I would happily contribute more to beneficiaries who can demonstrate sufficient personal responsibility to get themselves 'fixed'. It would still be a hell of a lot cheaper than paying for more and more kids, simply coz they are too useless to take care of it themselves. Interesting thoughts, and I think you're on the right track. The problem is that it's more cost-effective for some beneficiaries to just have another kid. Also, the hard part is there are legitimate circumstances where a mother or something has been widowed for whatever reason and needs the Govt to take care of her. You could argue more people should have insurance, but still... That's the catch 22. How do fix those who just breed to stay on the benefit and earn more from it vs those who have a legitimate need for it?	Chilling_Silence (9)
1274204	2012-05-09 10:29:00	What a sad indication of the IT world. The numbers of people they are targetting is so minutely small but the flailing and chest beating by the brain dead myopic is like they are in plague proportions. National is a party who "do not want to control the private personal lives of New Zealanders". Bolsch. this and other policies discriminating against a minority show that they are more dangerous than Communists. If the young today had jobs to go to, instead of the Government leading the way in job decreation, then things would be different. New Zealand to the Nationals is Auckland, wellington and Christchurch. Everyone outside these areas are ignored and slandered. let's hope you people are better with dealing with compuiters than real lives or thinking for yourself. What a prat.	mikebartnz (21)
1274205	2012-05-09 10:30:00	Why just females, Quite easy they are the ones that drop the sprog.	mikebartnz (21)
1274206	2012-05-09 10:57:00	Quite easy they are the ones that drop the sprog. And probably snotty nosed ones at that!:crying	Cicero (40)
1274207	2012-05-09 11:05:00	And probably snotty nosed ones at that!:crying :yuck:	QW. (15883)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7