What are Mothers Worth? (March 1979)
Fences and Ambulances: An Economist Looks at Family Policy (July 1992)
Suffer the Children (November 1993)
Approaching Family Economic Issues: Holistically or Pathologically? (October 1994)
Family Policy: Creative or Destructive? (November 1994)
The External Impact on the Family Firm (March 1996)
Review of Children of the Poor (April 1997)
Household Gods: Whatever Politicians Say, Children Interests Are Ignored (October 1997)
You’re on Your Own: the Nanny State Becomes A Hard Taskmaster (March 1998)
Poor Children (February 2001)
Is This a Healthy Budget for New Zealanders? (May 2002)
Family Policy and Family Support (September 2002)
Notes on a Commission for the Family (September 2002)
Children and their parents are the largest group of the poor (November 2002)
Treat the Kids: Why Michael Cullen Should Blow A Bit of the Budget Surplus (May 2003)
Spending the Public Growth Dividend: Why Was There So Little for Children? (May 2003)
Index of Distributional Economics
Also see the New Zealand Child Poverty Action Group
Footnote for Listener 8 May 1999
DPBs vs MPs
Act leader, Richard Prebble, recently claimed that a sole parent could get a total “package” of up to $38,000 a year, made up as follows (on a weekly basis):
Domestic Purposes Benefit for a parent and two children: $230.24;
Family Support: $79;
Accommodation allowance: $150 (maximum);
Tertiary training incentive allowance: $75 (maximum);
Child care subsidy: $72 (maximum);
Allowable earnings (after tax and abatement) $43.20 (maximum).
However detailed analysis showed that the poor women (and two young children) – with a job, tertiary training, and burdensome housing costs would have only $151.44 a week left for food, clothing, fuel, and other non-accommodation expenses.
Mr Prebble showed extraordinary restraint in his calculations. He ignored contributions from a boarder, unreported wages, investment income, and prostitution earnings, plus subsidies from the Serbian Liberation Front. In total she could have the up to (as the weasel phrase goes) the equivalent of $78,000 a year, or the salary of an MP.
I leave the reader to judge whether the nation is getting better value from its DPBs or some of its MPs.