Bankrolled by Dotcom

Jafuh's like me don't have time to sit and ponder the intricacies of the Local Electoral Act.
When it comes to splitting hairs, I rely on the usual posters at Kiwiblog to dance on the head of a pin.
 Using Housewife Logic, the obvious conclusions can be drawn:

1. You don't get to be a badass rich businessman without knowing where your money is going. You pay bills by rote, but extraordinary expenditure has its purpose, or it is dead money.  I believe Dotcom's account of the 2007 mayoral campaign fund donations over Bank's account as the recipient.

2. Recipients of donations know exactly where the money is coming from. New Zealand is not so big that there are so many donors to political parties that you might overlook a piffling $25,000.
In-between elections, political individuals go to sleep of an evening, "counting the numbers". If you aren't concerning yourself with this formally, you have a "Sheriff Mackay" watching your back. You count - who's for you, who's agin and who might be influenced either way.

3. Just before an election or a membership drive, the focus switches and much time is spent poring over financial statements. Winning an election requires funds to pay for advertising and drive a party's message home. This is why donations are made to campaigns. An individual donates because they expect their business or personal future to be affected by the incoming government. This is politics and it isn't inherently a dirty business because money changes hands. It is much better that elections are influenced by money than force and the drivers of our economy are successful business people. Their concerns and opinions needs must be considered.
However to avoid undue influence, the process needs to be transparent and the 1993 Electoral Act and the Local Electoral Act protect the public from political corruption.

Conclusion: At the least, Banksie knows roughly what happened over the exchange of the $25,000 donations; Bank's best hope is escaping censure both legal and political by a highly technical argument.

He will remain guilty in the public eye. As any able housewife or businessman knows- if money appears in your account, you investigate why and who put it there. A board or campaign manager would provide the necessary information breakdown in the absence of direct hands-on involvement.
If Banks is oblivious to the basics then we might expect him to be shit at running the country.
With a failure to publicly censure Banks by Key, the public perception is of a cosy relationship between Banks and Key. Though failure to disclose knowledge of a donor is a crime, political friendship is not a crime. We are talking about a 2007 mayoral race return which doesn't impact on actions by the current government. Neither party is guilty of boiling bunnies.

However you could expect Key to come out with a public, "Maaaate. That was shoddy bookkeeping".

   WP will be out the gates running by the time the dust settles

Cunners Front and Centre

David Cunliffe imparts a message about Labour's lack of appeal at the last election, in a speech to the New Lynn women's branch of the Labour party yesterday. His message differentiates himself from fellow labourites, Labour leader David Shearer and  deputy Grant  Robertson. The speech is reported on in The Dominion Post here:
The message is that Labour's policies were too similar to Nationals to offer a credible alternative.


"The major reason that voters didn't vote for Labour, and sometimes didn't vote at all, is simply that Labour failed to inspire voters that it was a credible alternative to National," he said.

This is not news.
What is striking is the tone of the message.And the honesty.


"When the right-wing party says that it's going to cut your leg off, voters want the left-wing party to say that it's not going to cut your leg off. Voters don't want to be told that the left-wing party is also going to cut your leg off, but cut it off a bit lower down and give you some anesthetic,' he said.

This blogger snorted her tea while reading this genuinely humorous passage. Hopefully it cures the sinus blockage. What an effective way of saying to the left:
"We promise to differentiate ourselves from the right wing in the future".
And simple honesty has a way of appealing to swing voters.
Opposition parties can promise the moon to gain a shot at the benches of power.  This works against Labour in a recession. The public knows that Labour is less inclined to follow austerity measures in times of economic trouble. We are skeptical of promises of spending being the solution to economic ills.
With the above passage, Cunliffe has taken massive strides in moving away from the "promise the moon and go negative", image, to one of tipping the hat to the left while leaving the door open to the right.
The truth of politics is that certain policy measures and budget undertakings are eventually taken up in policy by both sides of the political spectrum.  For example: pigs will fly before Labour scraps National Standards despite all the noise and fireworks over the introduction of the controversial educational policy. Likewise, and again reading into the education line of the financial report, you won't see Labour increasing subsidies to early Childhood Education Institutes to  allow funding for 100% qualified teaching staff. They may suggest that the opposite will happen to the unions, but it will not happen,
Crinkly-eyes Cunliffe may be the Kryptonite to Nationals Superman John Key. This is the message you will see forwarded if Cunliffe becomes more prominent in the public eye:
"National was unwilling to confront the downsides of unregulated markets".


The suggestion here is that Labour will regain it's role as the "people's champion", regulating the cowboys while it's business as usual for the rest of us.
It may be a very successful message.

Diary of a Housewife. Matters of State.

Today I spent time fishing these:

From this:

I was able to remind myself that I was experiencing problems of the First World variety. That experiencing abject frustration doesn't mean I am experiencing disaster and that people in parts of the Third World have a set of problems in an entirely different class. At the end of the day I relaxed with a couple of glasses:

And thank God for those women now in full bloom who have had a strong influence on issues affecting women around the world over the past two decades. The world would be a very different place without their actions. On my reading list is Madeleine Albright's book "Prague Winter".The book details her family's survival story though the seismic upheavals that splintered Eastern Europe over the last century.
It was announced this week that Madeleine Albright will receive the United States highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. She served as the first female United States Secretary of State under President Bill Clinton. Previously as American ambassador to the United Nations, Albright was instrumental in the UN Human Rights Commission passing a resolution defining rape as a war crime. This was in reaction to the horrors occurring in Bosnia. A salute to all the roses in full bloom who continue to break through glass ceilings all around the world. Including New Zealand's very own Helen Clark, of course.

And see an insightful interview with Madeleine Albright from 2010 here:
http://www.ted.com/talks/madeleine_albright_on_being_a_woman_and_a_diplomat.html

The scent of a rose always lingers. Former ACT MP Deborah Coddington lost her Mother Patricia Marie Coddington who died this week. Patricia Coddington was a NZAF Woman's Air Leader in WWII. A salute to all those women of generations past who served in wars. Condolences to the Coddington family.

Leadership Speculation continues over Phil Shearer

Effectively Phil Goff has replaced Phil Goff as leader of the Labour party. This is why speculation is rife about Shearer's Leadership.

Shearer beds in in his role as the new Phil Goff.

 

Come on David. Everyone knows that the unassuming, anti-theatrical, measured approach does not meet the public's insatiable thirst for drama and charisma. 

Mind you, if you just want to retain your job until the next election, David, it might very well be the way to go. It worked for Phil. 

I "felt" for David over the last week. There was a lot of nasty speculation around the traps about his chances of retaining the Labour leadership. What a shame. He seems like such a "nice" man. If given half a chance he may turn the fortunes of New Zealand around. Those nasty right wing bloggers Whaleoil and Farrar fueling the speculation that he is about to suffer an Ed Stark style decapitation. 

And he will. 

Politics is as much about massaging public perception as it is about having the "right" policies. One of the important perceptions that the public needs to have about a politician is that they are a "battler". We want to know that they will go into bat for us if the chips are down and in return we will swear them our fealty. 

We know that David Shearer is a battler, we need only to examine his track record as a United Nations co-ordinator and his stint in the conflict stricken areas of the world. However, we need to see the blood and guts being spilt on the debating chamber floor to have confidence. Clark and Cullen retained their grip on power through the inerring ability to bloody their opponents noses first. Key is a master of witty reprisals that dull the edge delivered by the opposition.

Even the nastiest most vitriolic utterance by Labour's Fenton and Curran can't match these sophisticated deliveries. 

We need to know that our political leaders "care" but the last quality that we appreciate in them is that they are "nice".

Time is up for Shearer and I can't say I am sorry. His veneer of reasonableness hides an insidious socialist agenda that scores votes by jeering at the rich and tapping the moderately wealthy to shore up the country's finances. This is evident in this speech.  

As for the Labour party Leadership. The question is now, who and when. The options are blindingly obvious. They both have a top chance. My pick would be the preppy Cunliffe who has the oratory skills to drag John Key around the debating chamber in a very entertaining fashion. He'd be good at spilling blood and it would make for great theatresport. 

The Robertson-Ardern ticket would be a winner. Robertson is very gentlemanly in a manner that invokes memories of Jim Bolger. Leaving behind the obvious lack of depth in Adern, installing her as a deputy would give her a top chancing of dragging home the seat of Auckland central. Once Auckland Central returned to Labour it would not be easily wrested from it's grip.
Ardern would be a safe deputy, not being leadership material due to the short length of her tenure. On the hustings, they would resonate with the younger generation and be Babyboomer "pets". As a small nation we like to show the world how progressive we are. Robertson being gay is almost an advantage. 

That he has never hidden this facet of his life is one demonstration of leadership ability. "Like me, don't like me, it matters not", is the confident projection of Robertson.
Either way, the public has rejected the "nice and reasonable" politician and we want some spice in our sausage. Metaphorically speaking.     

Diary of a housewife

Today I spent turning this:

Into this:

For them:

NZ teens death rate one of the highest in the world. From the Dominion Post:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6807590/Kiwi-teens-death-rate-second-highest-study


Of course it is. NZ drivers go onto the roads with Weetbix licenses. There should be mandatory driving lessons for all new drivers.  A certain proportion of drivers can fluke a test but that doesn't mean they are a good driver. It does't mean they have had messages of impulse control rammed home to them.

"A league table of road deaths – the single-biggest killer of young people worldwide – showed only the US had more young women die on the road, and road deaths among young men in New Zealand were the fourth highest behind the US, Greece and Portugal".

I would say that these league tables do not reflect the reality of the roads in the states vs New Zealand. If I come back to New Zealand, I will avoid driving as much as I can. New Zealand roads are a death trap. United States roads are a wonder to behold. If anything the economies of scale may effect the figures. You are less likely to die on the roads but more people will die if an accident happens. Recently in San Francisco a five car pile up closed the Golden Gate Bridge in both directions when the driver of a car north bound swathed lanes into the path of an oncoming car. It caused a series of chain reaction collisions that left three people hospitalized with severe injuries.

I always snigger when reading about the California Highway Patrol. I was an avid fan of C.H.I.P.S when younger and I still point and smile when I see them.

The freeways in the States are arterial and cars pour over the hills in either direction. But I would put my money on it being safer overall to drive in the U.S.

The elephant in the middle of the room phenomenon:
We condone our young people drinking from a young age. This message was well and truly reinforced with lowering the drinking age. Everybody's experience with drinking is their own business and for some their own struggle. The brain is not mature until 25yrs plus and before that every new drinker is a potential problem drinker. Every generation there seems to be more young problem drinkers. They're all hanging out in Courtenay Place on the weekends and the other NZ town centers.  You don't see as many groups of drunks in the town centers of the States.

We're so big on the rights of individuals in New Zealand and personal liberty that our laws don't work sensibly. We need to stop pandering to groups whether they be liquor barons or groups of 18 yr olds and pass laws that engender the best possible quality of life for the community.

I had friends commit suicide growing up. Disease of no hope. Caused by a combination of bullying, addiction and a lack of perceived future employment prospects I would say. I wonder if there is a correlation with how socialist a country is to how high the suicide rate among youths.

Rose of the Day.

What is she really packing? And real males eat yoghurt.

A clothing company has produced a line of pants designed for crying a concealed weapon:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/24/us/fashion-statement-is-clear-the-gun-isnt.html


And giving the term "eating for two a whole new meaning:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=real-males-eat-yogurthttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=real-males-eat-yogurt

JAFUH-Just Another Frantic Unpaid Heroine

In a previous post I noted my discomfort at arriving at a juncture in my life where my predominant occupation is at home as the mainstay and lynchpin of the life of our family of seven. I used the acronym JJAFAH -(based on the well-known NZ moniker JAFA) in a lighthearted but disparaging way.

It seems society has set many women up for this sense of disquiet. We feel that others question our decision to work or to stay at home. That same feeling of judgement surrounds many of the major parenting landmarks. Breast vs Bottle, cosleeping etc etc. The "Mommmy Wars" were most recently highlighted when PR hack Hilary Rosen stated that potential FLOTUS Ann Romney, had never worked a day in her life.

I am looking forward to the release in the US of Elizabeth Badinter's book:
 "The Conflict: How Modern Motherhood Undermines the Status of Women.

The New York Times blog "Motherlode" on Badinter's book:

http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/13/has-motherhood-replaced-sexism/


I find this debate engrossing. Do we modern women really make our own decisions or does society make them for us? Personally, I believe society has a strong influence on our decisions from abortion and breastfeeding through to when we return to the workforce.
I think that both SAHM and working mums work hard and solo parents work the hardest of all. I do believe that those go out to work get something in return. Politicians refer to this as the "Dignity of Work".

Mitt Romney looked liked a hypocrite effectively saying that Mums alone would be given assistance  so they could work. After all his potential First Lady "chose" to stay at home.
NZ PM John Key has forwarded a similar agenda around incentivising women out to work.

But something the working Mum gets that the SAHM struggles with is people contact. The feeling that ones actions are influencing society at large. We miss out on networking. Workmates. Buddies. And our partners may be wonderful but a lot of the meaningful stuff is lost in the minutiae.
My husband said to me the other night in the kitchen:" That's the nicest thing you've said to me all day".
I startled.
" I'm sorry, what did I say"? I had a bad feeling. I asked, " Did I just say fuck you"?
He laughed. " You just asked if you could wash the pot for me".
Just That. Constant conversation snippets and banter between us. Nothing substantial or life changing. Not even a notable quantity of words exchanged
 He is the Yang to my Yin, the Downward to my Dog, but no-how and no-way am I going to extract from him the amount of words that I crave in a day.
And that is one reason work beckons attractively.  More opportunities for conversation are presented, and if people want to converse with you it imparts a feeling of worth. What is that word again, ah yes, "dignity".
Who's to say Ann Romney actually made the "choice" to stay at home. what I do know is the more at home that I am, the more I have to do, and that is why I will now refer to myself as a JAFUH. Or:
Just Another Frantic Unpaid Heroine.

 Rose of the day. These beauties are now a table centerpiece.

Plant Life

Time this welcoming shrub was trimmed and had some further staking.

These two photos are of the part of the garden I call Redwood City. While I was taking these photos a hummingbird was busy humming above.

Code 4/20

Yesterday was the traditional day for pot smokers to gather and puff and stuff at locations around the US.  This from Boulder, Colorado. 

And here it would appear that Oaksterdam, a university specializing in the arcane teachings of medical marijuana cannot count on federal gents ignoring commercial sidelines that may have sprung up like many a good cultivar.  

Plant Life

Another angle on our garden, I am currently attempting to catalogue.

I have inherited a lovely couple of flowering azaleas. From initial appearances they are not uncommon varieties.

In the space of half an hour, hubby found three of these wee beasties.

What's a JAFUH to do?

I have accepted my lot as a housewife. IE, non-renumerated and often covered in crap, on permanent shift work albeit with perks. I am employed as Mummy (Mom) in a San Francisco East Bay neighborhood. The father of my loin fruit got a good deal with a short sale on a house, complete with a garden rather larger than I am used to:


My first job is to go through and catalogue the plants so I can converse intelligently with our gardener. Goody.

I don't mean to be snide, ungrateful or dismissive of that most maligned but worthy of professions. Housewife, that is.
I was born with a strong streak of Virginia Woolf and find it hard to accept that any inclinations towards full-time work must needs be curtailed. Until this point I have always bought in a wage or volunteered extensively.
As a mother of five in a new country, I'll have plenty to do for the foreseeable future and have to park ambition for now.

An Arrogant Profession. Sometimes.

I am shocked at the following story but not surprised. A doctor prematurely signs off the decision to turn off life support on a fifteen month old baby fighting for his life.

"Carol Povey, told the Herald on Sunday their 15-month-old son Paikea - one of twins - was taken to Starship Hospital in a critical condition and put on life support where they watched him fight for his life.

She said family members sat beside Paikea 24 hours a day holding on to hope at every sign of improvement including active bowels and breathing on his own after three days.

But eight days after the accident, Carol was shocked at a decision to turn off his oxygen."

The medical profession in NZ is very competent and have been wonderful in most of my dealings with them. I certainly don't believe the Dr in question would ever have taken the drastic step off stopping the oxygen without certainty that the boy would never have recovered - but you CAN NEVER KNOW. The Mother should have been absolutely comfortable with the decision and the way that this story presents, it's a certainty this Doctor  lives in a more rarefied atmosphere and does not deign to deal with mere mortals. It's unfortunate. The family could have had a couple of weeks extra with the boy and separated at a time where they wouldn't have felt the decision was taken out of their hands. 

Now they will never know if the miracle that might have bought there boy back to them might have occurred had they delayed. 

I had a stroke in 2006. Whilst experiencing immense pain and prior to going into a coma I told my husband: " I think I am dying". 

Turns out I was right. By the time the ambulance reached the hospital I was measuring 3 on the GCS scale, Glasgow Coma scale used to diagnose traumatic Brain Injury. I would have been dead without the required equipment. My brain stem had come under such immense pressure it 'coned' (been forced down into the stem.) This is usually fatal.
 I believe a similar stroke killed Anita Roddick of the Body Shop.
My husband was told to say goodbye to me and his unborn child, by some very compassionate professionals, working hard to put the globby bits back in the right place while the machines went PING.

Eight hours later I woke up completely physically disabled, and started asking for the morphine. My husband was most relieved that he still had a mother for our eighteen month old baby. The only casualty was my book-keeping business. Three months later I was able to work with the aid of a stick. My baby was born big and healthy four months later under the following scenario:

From Monty Python's "The Meaning of Life", 1983
Hospital Administrator: And what are you doing this morning? 
Obstetrician: It's a birth. 
Hospital Administrator: Ah. And what sort of thing is that? 
Dr. Spenser: Well, that's where we take a new baby out of a lady's tummy. 
Hospital Administrator: Wonderful what we can do nowadays.

Personally I don't believe we yet understand everything that "can be done". Some doctors are better than others in reflecting the parameters of medical knowledge back to patients and parents, and allowing for a margin of error in judgement. And parents are always the best judges of their children's condition.

It goes without saying the dad was a dickwad for driving while tired, but there but for the grace of God go we all.

Boo Hoo Hoodly Hoo

By the time I read to the end of this story my feelings about this employment incident had done a u-turn.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6783219/Lack-of-sacking-a-double-standard

The JAFUH take on the incident:

Katrina Bach is the Department of Building and Housing Chief. Last May she swore at some useless tit of a junior and followed it up by holding the girl's head and asking, "what is going on in that head of yours"?

Cue the big fat outcry. Public Services Association National Secretary Brenda Pilott called the findings, "a shameful double standard". This will be because Ms Bach pulls in a salary that the union regards as indecent. They obviously don't believe in the mantra: "if you pay peanuts you get monkeys".

It used to be that the Boss Guy was someone who protected you from the heartless senior execs. In return you didn't begrudge the toney car or the bigger pay packet. You probably aspired to be in their position of employment one day. In these days of Reality Media, if you push the right buttons you get to pull the Boss Lady down a rung or two.

As for the abuse, what a sooky bunch if a bit of swearing is enough to call for dismissal. In one of my first jobs as a student, I overheard the supervisor saying, "that fuckin Monique had better get her act together".
I pulled my fucking act together and that was one of the most enjoyable workplaces I ever worked in. I ended up friends with the supervisor and had a lot of laughs on the job.

The swearing will be the tip of the iceberg of a power struggle. One of them will be bullying the other. Overtly and with a bad case of Entitliitis if it is the Boss Lady. It will be interesting to see if other reports of bullying by Bach come to light.  However, the junior may very well have been passive aggressive and trying to pull in some cohorts to back her.

The Arab Spring and the South Pacific

Fareed Zakaria on Harvard professor Eric Chaney's paper on the democracy deficit in the Arab World in, "A region At War With It's history".


 One year after it captured the world's imagination, the Arab Spring is looking less appealing by the week,
"The promise of a new birth of freedom in the Middle East has been followed by a much messier reality".
Why does it seen that democracy has such a hard time taking root in the Arab world?

A Harvard economics professor, Eric Chaney, recently presented a rigorous paper that helps unravel that knot.

Chaney asks why there is a "democracy deficit" in the Arab world and systematically tests various hypotheses against the data

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2111248,00.html#ixzz1s5ZRCx7c 

"The real problem in a country like Egypt is that the military continues to keep power concentrated, undivided and unchecked. It maintains the central role in the economy. Even when it has liberalized control of the economy, it has done so to benefit a handful of cronies and friends. The chief challenge in the Arab world remains to create a vibrant civil society, which means political parties and also a strong, self-sustaining private sector. The term civil society was coined during the Scottish Enlightenment to describe the activities of private businesses, an independent force that existed between the government and the family. The Middle East today has strong families and strong governments, but everything in between is underdeveloped.

This is very similar to the situation in Fiji. Fiji with it's history of military coups since 1987 is as removed from democracy as those middle eastern countries that have yet to move on from the strangleholds of their militaries. Fifi's longstanding military anchored instabilities would indicate that the Arab Spring has yet to experience consecutive coups.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2111248,00.html#ixzz1s5YeL84k

A load of misogynist twattle.

Good to know New Zealand's finest males are championing the causes of today's Mothers and Babies.

1.Step right up: Carl Davidson of the Families Commission:

Carl Davidson (Chief Commissioner) Carl Davidson is one of New Zealand’s most experienced market and social researchers. He brings to the Commission a range of skills acquired from works as a Social Scientist with the DSIR, an academic with Massey University and a market researcher with a range of companies. Carl is chief commissioner at the Families Commission. He has never breastfed. He knows naught about the challenges facing women with families returning to work. He has been recently employed to advocate on behalf of families but has thrown the whole of the female workforce under the bus by saying extending paid parental leave to six months is too expensive: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10798723

"I mean, wouldn't it be great if none of us had to go to work and we could just stay at home and raise our kids and get paid for it"?

What a nong employing that kind of condescending tone. I don't feel confident this man is fit to advocate on behalf of families. And that, don't forget is what he is employed to do. Not feign concern about the countries finances as a whole.


2. Step right up Uncle Scrooge, aka Bill English:

Bill is a family guy. Bill and Mary have six children.  Bill says paid parental leave is too expensive for the country:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/103091/govt-to-veto-paid-parental-leave-bill

That's right. Despite having eyeballed plenty of lactating breast in his time, he is putting his foot down, no discussion on PPL, end of story.
It is worth pointing out here, here has always been lots of dough on hand to bailout financial institutions despite the economic climate: Top three bailouts by National governments that Bill has been a part of:

1.  1990.  43rd National Govt. BNZ bailout to the tune of $380 million.
2.   2010.   South Canterbury Finance bailout to the tune of 1.7 billion
3.   2011. AMI Insurance. Cost exceeding 1.5 billion.

Plenty of money on the books to prevent the financial markets from crapping themselves but none for PPL. And it is not money that is ever recouped.
Essentially we pay for overseas companies to take our loan books, add value and make a shite load of money upon the eventual sale. A notorious private company advised on the bailout of BNZ then scooped up over 30% of the company at rock bottom prices. AMI Insurance now belongs to the Aussies just like our banks.


3. Paul Holmes has now put his oar in, demeaning women all around New Zealand:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10798700

Paul Paul Paul.  If you had ever actuated you might have a different perspective.

These are the people influencing policies through government and the media that effect the families of today. Not a leaky tit among them.

2nd Favorite Tweet of the Day: U.S Politics

Thes

God ‏ @TheTweetOfGod

• Close

The attack on Ann Romney was completely unfair. She is without question Mitt's best wife.

These tweets are all about the slur by democratic advisor Hilary Rosen who said about GOP candidate wife Ann Romney (her and Mitt have 5 children), "she hasn't worked a day in her life".

Tweet of the day

David Burge ‏ @iowahawkblog

•  Reply 
•  Retweet 
•  Favorite 
• · Open

If Ann Romney was as good at mothering as Hilary Rosen is at PR, she'd be Casey Anthony.

Wimmin. Still havin' children after all this time.

Loose, loose women. Daring to have children in this age and day of equal rights. How on earth do we still want to? And surely, if we do we want to, we should be able to save up along with our fellow begetter to support the aforesaid women and child through the period of infancy so as not to impose an indecent burden upon fellow tax payers. A hue and cry has met Sue Moroney's Paid Parental Leave (PPL) bill that was pulled from the ballot this week.  The bill aims to extend PPL from three to six months.

Surely having a child is a "nice to have"? We should be able to suppress those wet feminine urges and not procreate unless we are bankrolled to the nth by a man. Thanks a lot: Cactus Kate: Paid Parental Madness

I say this,  having ended up precisely what I always swore never to be: A "Jafuh". Or: Just. Another. Fucking. Unpaid. Housewife. In California, actually, after having moved here for my husband's work.
Needs must, and though I retain tenuous links to financial independence, via a struggling residential property investment vehicle, I am now knee deep in Crappy Nappy City. I worked self-employed full-time for the first two years of having a family, then part time after I suffered a disabling stroke. I was also an active volunteer, chairing up to four committees while living in suburban Wellington. It is only recently that I became a JAFUH. My experience is that you do spend periods not working, but most women will be turning their hands to some kind of volunteer or paid work at most times while raising a family. And this is not the result of some right wing plot to force women into the work place. It's also not the result of some left wing Clark era plot to force women to participate in the work place. Women are usually nurturers and are good multi taskers. It is in our natures to reproduce and work concurrently. However for the short time that they are joined by the boobs to their offspring they should be supported by both society and their partner if that is the best financial arrangement. This is usually as short as four or five months. This is the length of time Paid Parental Leave should be set for. Not the socialist utopia of a year and even a period of six months is debatable.  I do however believe the primary caregiver should also be recognized with Income Splitting policy.
I work damn hard caring for my family as well as still seeking independence in retirement via my property business, and am annoyed that society doesn't recognize the valuable role that housewives play.
Communities need a reasonable turnover of infants, to eventually grow and among other professions, to care for the unwell elderly. If society runs short, life will be parsimonious and intolerable both for the anti PPL curmudgeonly and the more delicate of geriatric temperament. Communities are replenished and work well only when sufficient citizens are born and motivated to stay rather than seek new lands; where all the roles in Village Life are turned over regularly instead of being made redundant due to shrinking populations.  I disagree with the attitude that kids are produced solely because of parents desires to create a walking legacy and therefore no subsidies should be provided courtesy of the taxpayer.
For my husband and I, procreating was the next obvious adventure in life. Once we left the excitement of our inner Wellington Warehouse flat: ("nice to know you, 13+ flatties and dossers", nappy valley beckoned more than the lure of an OE. The OE would have had a better impact on our finances.
Child-rearing is an adventure that should benefit the taxpayer monetarily far more than the gullible parents-to-be. If children are nurtured well, they gain the wherewithal to become net taxpayers. If children are accorded value to society their parents able able to access networks and supports that bind the layers of society and glue families to local shores.
Inasmuch as it is a couples responsibility to ensure the have the financial where-withal to raise a child, it is also society's responsibility to ensure that educated women, who take on the bulk of the childbearing burden are not penalized to the point that reproducing is unattractive.
If reproducing is unattractive to these women, aging generations are not sufficiently supported by the upcoming broods. Indeed, this is already happening with the Baby boomer generation. Those with money and nous are leaving New Zealand. We are the first generations to easily numb any perceived call to stay and be part of the home scene.  The exciting tales of far off lands and more than adequate salaries provide the pull and once assured we will find our standing within a community, upon landing on overseas shores, there is no real reason to call New Zealand home for both the childless and families alike. Those aging and elderly left behind will struggle to be supported in the style they became accustomed to in the rich post war years. Removing reasons for potential parents not to have kids means that future families are more likely to call far off lands, "holiday destinations", rather than "home".  The fact that one quarter of New Zealanders call  overseas home is testimony to this. Of ten of us at Otago University in the mid 90's, all have travelled and only one couple has returned permanently to New Zealand to raise their family.

The period of infancy is short. For the first six months to two years, a child can be handled by many but must have a strong bond with the Mother or another key adult if they are to become a well adjusted future citizen. Personally I have found children look for outside adventures from the age of two and are not disadvantaged if socialized through daycare earlier.
As far as PPL leave needing to to be concurrent with six months breastfeeding: None of my kids were solely breastfed through to six months. The argument to do so seems extremist rubbish to me. My third son was helping himself to the family fish and chips at the age of four months. They were all eating by 5 and a half months at the latest. Numbers four and five (premature twins) were hoeing it back at three and a half months. All of which would have horrified me as a new Mum.
Disclaimer: I love my kids. I enjoy raising them. I just don't want to define myself by them. For women the debate highlights  the same old shitty story; always being defined as Mothers or Others.

Selfish drivin families

Brian Rudman takes a crack at the conversion of the dedicated Remuera Rd bus lane to a T3 lane where cars with three or more occupants can use the lane.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10797563
I take exception to the following paragraph:
"Instead of having to live with a nasty bus lane, Remuera will be graced with a T3 lane instead, an exclusive lane for Mummy to rush her two kids back and forth to school in the Remuera tractor, which ".buses will also be allowed to share".
What that paragraph says to me, is that the female who uses public transport to go to work, who lives in a less salubrious suburb is morally superior than that that procreates and dares to live in a household that can afford a decent gas guzzling, dinosaur displacing SUV to move her dependent Armani clad loin-fruit . 
"Fuck that", I say. All offspring are people too. why shouldn't Mom scoot ahead of adjacent traffic-clogged lanes to meet all the weighty commitments demanded of her? Hopefully she gets time for a facial appointment to boot. 
HOV lanes or High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes are common in the U.S. 
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/paffairs/faq/faq79.htm   
They appear to be lightly but effectively policed and complement the effective public transport system. In the East Bay of san Francisco where I live the (BART) or Bay Area Rapid Transit moves people rapidly from  the East Bay from adjacent counties and Oakland/Richmond, across land and under water to the city of SF. 
But such effective far reaching pubic transport is not going to met the needs of all. Just as cities and their surrounds are a mix of people and circumstances, so are the needs of those households. A dynamic city recognizes the needs of all these households.