NationStates Jolt Archive

A young mother was convicted after using the internet to declare a relationship she was concealing from welfare authorities.

Mt Maunganui's Lauren Kaney, 22, had told Work and Income New Zealand that she was single, picking up $480 a week in benefits as a solo mum.

But investigators who scrutinised her Bebo and Facebook pages found the truth: she was living in a relationship with the father of her 2-year-old son, entitling her to only $140 a week.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10564092
hmmmm.....wonder what gave her away to SocWel:
http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/kaney.jpg
I'm thinking it was the hat...

Hah! Good!

Pwned by her own stupidity. :p

"It's not fair that they looked me up like that" -- holy shitballs is she stupid.

Mt Maunganui's Lauren Kaney, 22, had told Work and Income New Zealand that she was single, picking up $480 a week in benefits as a solo mum.
Whoa! $480/week, that's 25 grand a year, to a welfare leech. No surprise she isn't looking for a job. Surprise you don't have like 20% unemployment with such welfare.

"It's not fair that they looked me up like that" -- holy shitballs is she stupid.

Well it just goes to show the stupidity of society these days...never accept responsibility for your own actions, always do what you can to shift the blame to someone else.

Haha serves her right.

"It's not fair that they looked me up like that" -- holy shitballs is she stupid.

What? Do you really have to ask? Of course she's stupid.

Well it just goes to show the stupidity of society these days...never accept responsibility for your own actions, always do what you can to shift the blame to someone else.

If I was caught up to something like that I suspect i'd start passing the blame as fast as possible. I'd like to think i'd do it a little more cleverly though

Giving away details of your private life on Facebook? "Stupidity" cannot cover the bases here...

Whoa! $480/week, that's 25 grand a year, to a welfare leech. No surprise she isn't looking for a job. Surprise you don't have like 20% unemployment with such welfare.

Bear in mind that 25,000 NZD is only around 14,000 USD.

What? Do you really have to ask? Of course she's stupid.

He wasn't asking, he was exclaiming. ...unless you knew that and were kidding. Damn the internet and lack of inflection!

Bear in mind that 25,000 NZD is only around 14,000 USD.

True, but as I don't think NZ has the kind of inflation problems that some nations have, $25,000 NZD probably goes as far in NZ as $25,000 USD goes in the US. And while not quite 'good', I would rate that as 'comfortable'.

Well it just goes to show the stupidity of society these days...never accept responsibility for your own actions, always do what you can to shift the blame to someone else.

Im not really seeing an attempt to shift blame. Especially because in the very next sentence she admits what she did was wrong. But hey, poor people have no personal responsibility, right?

Bear in mind that 25,000 NZD is only around 14,000 USD.

Shhh. When you point that out, it makes it a bit harder for him to demonize the welfare system.

Anyway, I am consitantly amused by people getting busted for crimes because they put evidence on their facebook. Its epic lulz. Only problem here is I raise my eyebrow at the sentence, because all that time shes on home arrest is time shes not spending looking for a job, and thus enabling herself to get off the system. Seems a bit counter productive to me.

True, but as I don't think NZ has the kind of inflation problems that some nations have, $25,000 NZD probably goes as far in NZ as $25,000 USD goes in the US. And while not quite 'good', I would rate that as 'comfortable'.

$14k USD is around £9.7k. That's less than the average Scottish student gets from the government for their studies - and she has a kid to support. Let's say we used the cost of living calc at http://www.emigratenz.org/cost-of-living-in-new-zealand.HTML - with all frugal options checked, and not taking rent into account, average weekly expenditure (for one person, not for a family) is around 600 NZD. New Zealand isn't a cheap place to live.

But that said, I really have nothing to contribute to this other than numbers. She's an idiot for getting caught, that's all.

Bear in mind that 25,000 NZD is only around 14,000 USD.
NZ also has a much lower GDP and median income. Median household income in US and NZ in units of local currency is approximately the same.

And far from everyone in US gets his hands on a $25,000 job.

Basically, you're paying people leeching on welfare the same as a quite fair job pays. And I presume welfare isn't taxed.
This system has to rely on people having a desire to work for nothing.

Basically, you're paying people leeching on welfare the same as a quite fair job pays. And I presume welfare isn't taxed.

Of course, in the US we've thankfully added provisions that force them to find jobs as part of the requirements for continuing benefits. Nobody capable of working should be allowed to be unemployed if they are receiving government benefits.

Only problem here is I raise my eyebrow at the sentence, because all that time shes on home arrest is time shes not spending looking for a job, and thus enabling herself to get off the system. Seems a bit counter productive to me.
She is not required or expected to look for work, and she seems happy enough to live on the "public purse", beyond what she is entitled to, so I doubt being sentenced to home detention will make any difference to her "job search" activities (or probable lack thereof).


And I presume welfare isn't taxed.
Your presumption is not correct in this instance.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10564092
hmmmm.....wonder what gave her away to SocWel:
http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/image/jpg/kaney.jpg
I'm thinking it was the hat...

nah, it was the background. That area of town is for the rich snobby people. :p

This post made me think of The Cheat from homestarrunner.com. I am not sure why. I think I just like h*r.

I say good for her even if she was caught. If the government is going to make us all rely on them, we might as well do our best to leech in the hope of toppling them.

She was still stupid for being caught though; that there's no denying.

If the government is going to make us all rely on them

Fail.

How is a government that is funded, by definition, by taking a percentage of everyone's income, supposed to make ALL of us rely on it?

Fail.

How is a government that is funded, by definition, by taking a percentage of everyone's income, supposed to make ALL of us rely on it?

You assume that the private sector in the western world is this magic, immune bubble of government anti-thema.

You assume that the private sector in the western world is this magic, immune bubble of government anti-thema.

you know what I'm seeing? You not answering the question.

you know what I'm seeing? You not answering the question.

You know what I saw in the first-place? A non-question. Your definition was warped. Thus, I didn't need to answer it; I just needed to debunk your fantasies of American supreme-hallucinatory grandiosity.

You know what I saw in the first-place? A non-question. Your definition was warped. Thus, I didn't need to answer it; I just needed to debunk your fantasies of American supreme-hallucinatory grandiosity.

oh, I see. "Your question was stupid!" That what passes for argument in your little fantasy land? Then why don't you show me up? Prove that mighty, mighty intellect of yours. Show me for what a fool I am.

Little tip, kiddo. One of these days you'll learn, being long on words doesn't make up for being short on substance. Or, to put it another way, you impress me not.

Or, if I could be such a bold and crass American...back your shit up.

oh, I see. "Your question was stupid!" That what passes for argument in your little fantasy land? Then why don't you show me up? Prove that mighty, mighty intellect of yours. Show me for what a fool I am.

Little tip, kiddo. One of these days you'll learn, being long on words doesn't make up for being short on substance.

Don't use age arguments or over-simplify both my or your arguments. Being short and simple on words doesn't mean being huge on substance.

That being said, you only understand how government funds itself from the western perspective; a capital-reliant system that sub-ordinates the supposed 'intellectually stupid' with the temptation of their knowing they never have to support themselves.

On the other hand, the taxless state of North Korea needs no funding.

This must be old-people pre-revolutionary-braincell-sickness. Pol Pot had the right idea...

This must be old-people pre-revolutionary-braincell-sickness. Pol Pot had the right idea...

Oh, oh oh....this could be the one! The one we've been waiting for! The one who doesn't storm on with gun smileys and bad spelling and worse grammar...the one who doesn't flame so much he gets banned after 20 posts...could it be? I scarcely dare hope...

On the other hand, the taxless state of North Korea needs no funding.

Oh, I dunno. I'd consider the blood, sweat and tears of the oppressed masses to be a form of funding.

Although I don't really know how an enforced system of redistribution and complete control over all life supplies makes us LESS reliant on the government for survival. But that's ok, I'm pretty certain you don't either.

Oh, oh oh....this could be the one! The one we've been waiting for! The one who doesn't storm on with gun smileys and bad spelling and worse grammar...the one who doesn't flame so much he gets banned after 20 posts...could it be? I scarcely dare hope...

No, because there was an agist attack direct towards me. If that isn't bellicose attempt at flaimbaiting, I don't know what is.

Oh, I dunno. I'd consider the blood, sweat and tears of the oppressed masses to be a form of funding.

Although I don't really know how an enforced system of redistribution and complete control over all life supplies makes us LESS reliant on the government for survival. But that's ok, I'm pretty certain you don't either.

I would tell you about the Juche method. Your skull would spontaneously combust though.

I would tell you about the Juche method. Your skull would spontaneously combust though.

Fucking humour us, oh great one.

Fucking humour us, oh great one.

Tell me about you first. Do you have a remote understanding about how your America truly works?

I would tell you about the Juche method. Your skull would spontaneously combust though.

well, consider I managed to make it through my Asian studies class, while I was getting a degree in International Politics, I think I will manage to muddle through with only a faint whiff of smoke. So, somewhere in there, with my brain smoldering, I managed to hear just a bit about Kim's supposed emphasis on "self reliance" schtick.

I also know that it's a lie.

Tell me about you first. Do you have a remote understanding about how your America truly works?


Pssst, don't lay it on too thick. I want you to have longevity.

Pssst, don't lay it on too thick. I want you to have longevity.

too late, this one is already regulated to the dust bin of failed trolls. Only a matter of time.

well, consider I managed to make it through my Asian studies class, while I was getting a degree in International Politics, I think I will manage to muddle through with only a faint whiff of smoke. So, somewhere in there, with my brain smoldering, I managed to hear just a bit about Kim's supposed emphasis on "self reliance" schtick.

I also know that it's a lie.

So tell me, as a reasonably well-aged woman who has embarked a life-time of pointless formal academic chasing and game-playery; please debunk the great Kim beyond your useless adjectives describing him as a re-incarnation of Satan, or the over-battered cliche of describing his policies in a similiar, yet non-truthful none-the-less, contempt?

Because if you won't, I have no basis to reply to you.

Tell me about you first. Do you have a remote understanding about how your America truly works?

I do. Now explain the Juche method without being an arrogant troll.

too late, this one is already regulated to the dust bin of failed trolls. Only a matter of time.

You do mean 'delegated'?

Again, you failed to approach my opinion with more than contemptious slanders; what do you expect?

So tell me, as a reasonably well-aged woman who has embarked a life-time of pointless formal academic chasing and game-playery; please debunk the great Kim beyond your useless adjectives describing him as a re-incarnation of Satan, or the over-battered cliche of describing his policies in a similiar, yet non-truthful none-the-less, contempt?

Because if you won't, I have no basis to reply to you.

Well, ignoring the obvious flame and the poor attempt at guessing my gender, I will point out that any political philosophy that enact that, at the time of your death, leaves your country severely isolated from the world, while at the same time neither producing enough food to feed your people, nor having the industrial capacity to house them, tends to be a failed policy.

Because that's exactly what he did. His policies simultaneously destroyed its agricultural system, ensuring that they couldn't feed their own people, while isolating North Korea from the rest of the world. They could neither grow enough food, nor get it from anyone else.

Kim Il-sung's greatest legacy to North Korea was famine, and mass homelessness.

And if that's not a casebook example of failure, I don't know what is.

Sniping and insults and ignoring the topic, oh my!

Taboksol and Neo Art, cut it out.

The rest, please stand well back.

Again, you failed to approach my opinion with more than contemptuous slanders; what do you expect?

I think you mean "contemptuous", if you really want to play that game. And I'm sorry, my default presumption is contempt. You have to earn anything more than that.

You've been failing. As I said, any policy of governance that leads to mass famine is not worth anything but contempt. Kim Il-sung's juche philosophy failed.

Sniping and insults and ignoring the topic, oh my!

While it may not relate directly to the topic, discussion of the Juche method and its benefits and negatives is an interesting area of discussion, which I have been discussing. Is that OK to continue or no?

While it may not relate directly to the topic, discussion of the Juche method and its benefits and negatives is an interesting area of discussion, which I have been discussing. Is that OK to continue or no?

No, because you haven't been contributing to a discussion; you've been spouting bellicose and insulting propaganda in the hopes that I would retaliate in yet another huge flame, just like your other flaim-baiting attempts before it. I would suggest that we kill this so-called 'debate'; more a linguo-arobatic excersize for you than anything.

While it may not relate directly to the topic, discussion of the Juche method and its benefits and negatives is an interesting area of discussion, which I have been discussing. Is that OK to continue or no?

To avoid a thread hijack, perhaps you could pursue it in a new thread. :)

No, because you haven't been contributing to a discussion; you've been spouting bellicose and insulting propaganda in the hopes that I would retaliate in yet another huge flame, just like your other flaim-baiting attempts before it. I would suggest that we kill this so-called 'debate'; more a linguo-arobatic excersize for you than anything.

You may want to reconsider your current attitude, which is sorely in need of adjustment; that is, if you wish to experience longevity here. You're liable to trample on the toes of those who have made this their Hotel California, from which the only way to leave is to unceremoniously be cast out like an uncouth louse staying past last call.

but one thing's important here.....am I supposedly a middle aged woman? I'm very confused.

but one thing's important here.....am I supposedly a middle aged woman? I'm very confused.

That would be so creepy...

but one thing's important here.....am I supposedly a middle aged woman? I'm very confused.

You mean you're not? :eek2:

.....I have this note....

No, because you haven't been contributing to a discussion; you've been spouting bellicose and insulting propaganda in the hopes that I would retaliate in yet another huge flame, just like your other flaim-baiting attempts before it. I would suggest that we kill this so-called 'debate'; more a linguo-arobatic excersize for you than anything.

... it's like Andaras, only with a slight repainting in Juche tones. You could almost finger this one for a KPA officer.

but one thing's important here.....am I supposedly a middle aged woman? I'm very confused.

When did you have the sex change?

Or where you always a woman pretending to be a man on these forums so as to lure in the women of these forums so you can engage in some sort of lesbian orgy with them. :p

Fail.

How is a government that is funded, by definition, by taking a percentage of everyone's income, supposed to make ALL of us rely on it?

Gordon Brown. He's a wizard, don'cha know.


This must be old-people pre-revolutionary-braincell-sickness. Pol Pot had the right idea...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McAeQiLmEYU

but one thing's important here.....am I supposedly a middle aged woman? I'm very confused.

You mean you aren't a middle aged women. Damn.

but one thing's important here.....am I supposedly a middle aged woman? I'm very confused.

I always pictured you looking like this (http://img.atpictures.com/images2/topher/TopherGrace_J__McCart_13821222.jpg).

I always pictured you looking like this (http://img.atpictures.com/images2/topher/TopherGrace_J__McCart_13821222.jpg).

it's not all that close, but not TOTALLY far off either.

it's not all that close, but not TOTALLY far off either.
Close (http://www.lightsabre.co.uk/Interviews/crumbsalacious.jpg).

:P

Close (http://www.lightsabre.co.uk/Interviews/crumbsalacious.jpg).

:P

And I always pictured you looking just like your avatar, albeit with color. :p

And I always pictured you looking just like your avatar, albeit with color. :p

Nah. This is Chumbly. Just less cheery.

http://www.speakers.co.uk/csaWeb/media/pix/h250/BRUFOR_h250.jpg

Nah. This is Chumbly. Just less cheery.

Actually, http://files.list.co.uk/images/2007/08/09/frankie.boyle.jpg is more accurate.