Monday, 12 May 2008

Worse off? Good!

I just have three things to say about Ruth Dysons little hissy fit today:

1) Good bloody job - about time. The difference between lowest wage earner and the beneficiary should be pegged at 30%. Of course under a Libertarian government that rate would be set by your insurer, should you take out insurance, or by your local charity.

2) Of course beneficiaries are worse off - we are all worse off - we are all going down the toilet together - you'd think that would make the politicians happy, they've always wanted equality above all else. Equality = Poverty.

3) It is the productive citizens of this country that raise the standard of living for everyone - blugger or not. The producers have had decade, after decade, after decade of heavy taxes, red tape, hatred and the life generally sucked out of them. Many of the productive have raised one finger on both hands, turned to face Wellington and then left on the next non-Air NZ plane available. Others have struggled on, frustrated that if they were left alone they could create business empires and as a by-product, employ more people, both able and disable. I remember when I was young, there was often one member of staff that was mentally disable that would make the morning tea (or some such occupation). Now the minimum wage doesn't make this viable - to name just one impediment to their employment.

The Communists/Socialists of this country (Labour, National, Greens, NZ First and now it appears ACT) need the productive to steal from - why they want to stop production is just simply baffling.

Q: Why do you think Prebble loved capitalism so much?
A: It gave him access to a larger pile of money to steal from.


Anonymous said...

Annie, employers' ignorant attitudes about disability are the problem, not the minimum wage. Disabled employees are productive and not just good for making tea or pushing supermarket trolleys. Not that I'm defending do-nothing Dyson, who as Minister of Labour, Employment and Disaiblity Issues for years could have done something about that if she got off her fat chuff.

Annie Fox! said...

Entirely agree with you that disabled employees are productive, some for just making tea, some for much, much more.

Most employers I know are far from ignorant of this fact. I think you will find that employers do not go out on the limb and employ the disabled because it is so difficult to fire them should it not work out. You'll be pleased to know that this doesn't just apply to the disabled, but the abled employees as well - particularly the young or unemployed.

But I get the anti-employer vibe from your comment, so I'm sure you support these employment policies. A classic case of actions have consequences. Like all socialist policies it hurts the poor.