From the Files of "Dumb and Dumber"

Beyond Credulity

At times peculiar things happen which leave us aghast at the folly of mankind.  Either that, or we find ourselves weakened by laughter.  We are reminded of Mr Bennet's sarcastic riposte: “'For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbours, and laugh at them in our turn?'”  

Finland has entered into a noble experiment.  A select group of unemployed citizens was provided a basic income from the state (that is, from other citizens) to test whether it would have any good or bad effects upon them.  Some very astute gnomes have been arguing that the provision of a basic income would have no effect on the alacrity and diligence with which the recipients would look for jobs.

An experiment where unemployed Finns were given a basic income failed to encourage them to find work, researchers have found.  “The basic income experiment did not increase the employment of participants during the first trial year,” Kela, the Finnish government agency in charge of benefits, said in a statement on the project’s preliminary findings on Friday.

Kela, in conjunction with the Finnish Centre for Economic Research and other partners including the universities of Turku and Helsinki, began a two-year experiment in January 2017 where 2,000 randomly-selected unemployed people were given a monthly basic income of €560 (£490/$634) regardless of any other income they may have or if they were actively seeking employment. (Breitbart News)

You can just imagine the reaction of the 2,000 recipients of "money for jam" experiment.

A Sad Indictment of Us All

Larceny of Mental Incompetence?

As far as the great affairs of mankind go, this story represents a raging storm in Thumbelina's teacup.  In New Zealand, a  Member of Parliament Winston Peters has excelled at playing the electorate with a tawdry collection of truths, half truth, and full blooded lies.  He has done so for years.  Most now treat him with cynical contempt.

In the midst of the present election in New Zealand, Peters has fallen on unexpected hard times.  He has been caught out by a "leak" which confirms over payment of a state benefit.  Peters insists it was a mistake which he has now corrected, with a full refund to the authorities.  Now his ire has turned upon the mysterious leaker.  It is beyond doubt that someone spoke in a "wink, wink, nod, nod" manner to a journalist.  He is a Deep Throat.  The journalist is guarding his source.

What led the government welfare agency to overpay Mr Peters?  It was incorrect information supplied by Mr Peters to the agency.  He either lied (or made a mistake) so as to get more money.

The Turei Defence

The Devil Made Me Do It

We are all familiar with the following justification offered for immoral, unethical or illegal behaviour: "the Devil made me do it."  It's a punchline amongst some grade B comics.  In New Zealand, we have been confronted with the Turei version of the trope: that is, "the System made me do it".  Metiria Turei, leader of the NZ Greens, was speaking, of course, of her deliberate actions to defraud the welfare benefit system when she was in law school, of all things.  

Her gratuitous appeals to self-pity have been somewhat nauseating.  But, nevertheless, her words and actions have proved useful.  Her gloss on the "Devil made me do it" punchline has now become known as the Turei Defence throughout the legal fraternity in cases of benefit fraud.  Turei justifiably stole from the taxpayer because the "benefit system made her do it."

At the same time as Turei's emblazoned defence of her fraud, a specific case hit the headlines.

A Cautionary Tale

Obese on the Taxpayers' Dime

They say that sunlight is the best disinfectant.  Sadly the sunlight is not found too often on the pages and screens of the archaic media.  So, letting the searchlight shine has become a responsibility of the new media.  Here is the latest thrust and parry.

The NZ government has been trying to move the delivery of social services away from bureaucrats and government ministries to the private sector.  The government is attempting to recast its role to be funder and auditor, with the delivery of services contracted out to the private sector.  The rationale behind this change is that historically government bureaucracies have failed systematically and repeatedly to deliver services efficiently.  After all, in this country we have seen  a nationalised train company employing 18,000 people, largely to shuffle paper, not trains.  But more "employees" were being added by the day to help keep the country's unemployed numbers down.  In other words, the train business had become an arm of social welfare services.  [See Richard Prebble's account in I've Been Thinking (Auckland: Seaview Publishing, 1996)]

See No Evil

Easy Passes and Double Standards

Here is the latest mini-scandal in New Zealand.

Labour leader Andrew Little has stood down his welfare spokeswoman Carmel Sepuloni after her mother was accused of benefit fraud.  Little said there was an obvious conflict of interest.  TVNZ said it had broken the news to the Labour MP about the charges her mother faces.

Little said he was temporarily standing her aside from the social development portfolio, but she had done nothing wrong.  "Carmel is an adult and her mother is an adult. Carmel is not responsible for the actions of her mother," he said.  "We have agreed she will step aside ... on a temporary basis while these matters are dealt with. There is a conflict of interest at the present time."

Everyone has rushed to extend sympathy to Sepuloni.  Liberal blogger, David Farrar's contribution is representative of the whole:

One can only have sympathy for Sepuloni. Having a parent charged with an offence would be embarrassing for anyone, let alone when you are an MP. But no one will reasonably think it reflects on her at all.

Not so fast.