LilBaP
The basics – reading, writing, maths and a work ethic – have to be built early. They are not the full story, just a foundation to build upon. Critical thinking, respect, caring and family all play a part in the overall structure. Creating independence and self-belief are the building blocks.
Working is not only about the money you earn. It is also your contribution to community and family. The gap between those who generate the money and contribute, and those who don’t, needs to remain wide enough to keep the incentive to work real.
Cutting tax rates for workers and companies so they keep more of what they earn would be a practical start. Extra disposable income tends to be spent, which increases the GST take. Some work extra hours, expanding the income-tax base and cutting the benefit bill.
At current rates that does not close the entire static revenue gap. A large cut still leaves a net fiscal hole that has to be financed while the dynamic effects build. Tax reductions therefore need to be measured in increments – for example three to five per cent steps – maybe toward a flat rate of around 25 per cent for both personal and company tax. That will mean serious reform and a serious focus on wasteful and unnecessary spending by government departments and the bureaucrats. Tough decisions would have to be made.
Many middle- to upper-middle earners already feel the balance runs one way. In New Zealand the top 10 per cent of earners begins around $120,000. Commentators regularly tell that group they should pay more tax, yet from their side of the ledger it feels like they are already scratching to make ends meet.
The only way a government can keep paying benefits is if workers are still willing to pay the tax. Those workers need incentives – not lectures.
The labour market shows many employers cannot fill ordinary jobs with locals and turn to migrants.
A sole parent with one child on Jobseeker Support receives about $522 a week after tax, plus about $152 in Family Tax Credit before any Accommodation Supplement. This could potentially range between $750 and $900. Once travel and childcare are added, this aligns with entry-level and some mid-tier wages.
For many jobseekers the financial pull into doing actual work is therefore weak. Add the claim that a solo parent must remain available for a child and many employers move on. That person is not realistically seeking most jobs unless childcare is already arranged. Nearly half the Jobseeker caseload already sits outside realistic full-time work.
Of roughly 220,600 people on the benefit in September 2026, about 99,200 are classified under Health Condition or Disability. Another group is on Supported Living Payment because their capacity has been assessed as ‘limited’.
Employers do not choose people needing frequent absences, restricted hours or substantial caring obligations. Many of these cases are not true jobseekers – so call them what they are: unemployed. Most of the public already sees this for what it is.
That leaves the work-ready portion. For a subset – younger people and others who are physically capable but lacking skills, routine or a finished qualification – a structured residential trade programme three to four days a week makes more sense than open-ended job search with little or no commitment.
Set up a house-style monitored practical polytechnic with a fixed timetable, shared responsibilities, on-site food and accommodation, residents’ cook and clean, plus a living allowance while they complete a recognised trade. At the end they leave for the real world with the basic skills, a work ethic, some discipline and a measure of reliability.
Some people finish training once the day is organised and distractions are removed. They do not when the only requirement is to keep applying for jobs and the list of excuses does not survive contact with an employer. It could start in selective areas, but if someone under 22 has not entered the workforce or a recognised training pathway after a set period, the Jobseeker payment rate could be reduced.
The obvious question is who trains them when the country is already short of qualified technicians. New Zealand used to run trade schools and lengthy block courses for apprentices who already had jobs. The same model can be adapted using people who already exist: experienced tradespeople nearing retirement or willing to teach in blocks, polytechnic tutors, NZDF trade instructors and industry trainers paid to take groups.
Governments are looking at raising the age of superannuation. Do the reverse for this training. Offer experienced people at retirement age an incentive to train the younger generation for a defined period. Do not cut their super. Let them work three days a week and receive super plus a premium for the teaching. There will be experienced retirees who would gladly take that – a win-win without long-term payroll obligations.
Start with the trades that have both a shortage and existing training infrastructure – electrical, carpentry, automotive, plumbing. Measure completion and job outcomes before any expansion. If competent instructors cannot be attracted or retained, the programme fails.
None of it is free. Tax cuts leave a temporary revenue gap, and training only pays if people finish and stay in work. The upfront cost is real, but the longer-term return to productive workers and society is the point.
Alternatively, accept more migrants who are willing to do the jobs many jobseekers will not – but vet them properly for English and the capacity to settle into local conditions. Many employers already choose this route because the migrant arrives ready to work without the same set of excuses. That route also needs stricter monitoring, just as Jobseeker needs tighter rules for those who are not actually seeking work. The jobs employers currently fill with migrants – seasonal horticulture, aged care, hospitality, meat processing – will not all be solved by three or four years of trade training either.
Most people are prepared to pay their share of tax if they see fairness but the current system feels one-sided. You are always being told you need to pay more and all you see is waste and misuse of the tax dollar you have already paid. Where is the incentive?
Spend the money on doctors, nurses, police and the trades we actually need. A benefit level that matches the minimum wage, combined with weak obligations for those who can work, does not produce workers, only the shortages that migrants are then brought in to fill.
Make sure the people who actually generate the money stay incentivised – because without them the recycling stops. The civil servant’s and the beneficiary’s pay cheque comes out of productive workers’ tax – or out of debt that those same workers will eventually have to service. It is not new revenue. It is recycling productive taxpayers’ contributions and calling it something else.
Some politicians, academics and so-called experts might usefully remind themselves of that before simply repeating the ‘pay more tax’ line.
