Some maths

Sosefina Masoe – cleaner at Parliament. Apparently earns minimum wage, and  has eight children in her care.

Phil Goff reckons she deserves more so is pushing for $15 per hour minimum wage.  Labour is spinning she can’t afford to take care of her family. No matter about the personal responsibility involved in continuing to breed long after she lost the ability to provide for them. Let’s just ignore that for now.

Some simple calculations reveal something:

She earns the current minimum wage, $13.50, and says that’s about $453.34 in the hand a week.

Her take home is $453 per week. Her WFF Credits are worth at least $677 per week if the article claims of eight children (four teens) are correct.  That equates to a salary of about $70,000 per annum. She is clearly recieving more in tax credits than she pays in tax.

Labour therefore is campaigning for people earning the equivalent of $70k per annum as needy.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Anonymous

    And yet, someone who has a job that makes them 70,000 a year is a rich prick devil.

  • Looks like another own goal.  Doubt the MSM will say a peep.

  • In Vino Veritas

    Why is anyone surprised with this? This is just another example of Labour telling small bits of the story, bits that suit their political stance. I’m sure it was whale that pumblished the table showing 50% of households in NZ are net beneficiaries. (thanks for that whale, useful info when debunking “fair share” raising of taxes)

  • jem

    Don’t forget to add the fact that she would have received up to $1,200 PER child at each birth from the tax payer.

  • tas

    Minimum wage is $13.00 per hour. Given that, I view all other numbers in the article with suspicion.

    • Cadwallader

      ..well the sums evidently came from Goof!

      • jem

        In-fact this is taken straight from Labours website.
        Headline reads;
        “Labour supports minimum wage for Parliamentary cleaners”

        text reads;P
        “hil Goff will meet with Parliamentary cleaners this afternoon to hear about how difficult it is to live on a pay cheque of just $13.50 an hour ”

        Phil cant get it right either it would appear.

  • Rhodzrunner

    I obviously need to ditch my $60,000 job go minimum wage. good on ya Goof for backing the wrong cause… again!!

  • michaels

    By the time she pays $250 in rent, $90 for power and $70 for petrol
    to get to and from work, Masoe has about $43 left to pay for groceries.

    That usually consists of budget canned spaghetti and baked beans, cheap bread, oats, noodles and margarine.

    Well first off with $43 I would go to the green grocer, spend $20 on veges, that would do 5 nights of dinners, while their, get some good NZ Pork and enough change for a bottle of wine at the superpmarket.
    In other words she doesn’t really need WFF or a pay rise.

  • Pdubyha

    Im astounded so often that MP’s are so ill informed and educated about subjects they just read about on twitter or in the DimPost. It beggers belief that we’re all happy about representation in the house by as many people as possible, sadly it’s begining to look like a nut house.

  • pidge

    for those on Facebook, comment on the article.  It might get their attention.

  • tas

    A full-time minimum wage job amounts to about 27k. The average student gets by on half that.

    If they moan about having to feed children, then the govt should offer family planning or adoption. If you can’t afford children, then you shouldn’t have them.

  • Scott

    What a joke. I bet u tho the simple folk will say that doesn’t add up 2 $70000. Ya better put out step by step calculations for these people hahaha

  • Anonymous

    8 children, that should be illegal, if not illegal, a permit should need to be obtained to see if in fact you can afford to have 8 children…. You would be broke with 8 children even if you earned 100K per annum…

    Labour are great at maths, maths to Labour means borrow more and screw the hard working people whom contribute… Very odd way to define Maths to me ;)

  • Spam

    $90 a week for power?  and $70 for petrol?  Find cheaper transport.

  • Brian Marshall

    Sorry Cam, but I just can’t get past the 8 kids. FFS it’s not her pay that is causing her hardships.

  • Sooty

    With all the union organisers in Labour’s MP’s I am sure someone will be able to help the poor lady out and all her colleges. After all they had nine years to do it.

  • bringyourgrogalong

    You forgot to add into your calculations an accommodation allowance. A minimum wage person that I know of has had a child and decided to leave her job and that the taxpayer can support her and her defacto in a life style that we all would like to be accustomed to. She lives in a 4 bed house in a good suburb, rent $550 – $650 all new furniture, TV etc and can afford to do so because they are able to claim WFF and an accommodation allowance. Friends of mine earning over $100k have a much more subdued standard of accommodation, get up and go to work each day, pay their mortgage, tax rates  etc. Bless the glorious socialist republic of aoetearoa. 

  • thor42

    Labour don’t have a ***f**king clue.*** Never mind that this woman is a breeding machine – Labour say “let’s rob the taxpayer and give her even MORE money.”
    This is also a GREAT example of why Bludging for Families should be axed. WHY are we paying people to breed? The people who have the most children are those who are LEAST able to afford to care for them, so (of course) the taxpayers (we) do it for them. For fuck’s sake, Bill English, “get with the program” and axe BFF.     

  • phronesis

    Please don’t use the word earning for how this women gets her money.

    “Labour therefore is campaigning for people earning the equivalent of $70k per annum as needy.”

    • thor42

      Agreed.  I would add that a large part of it is not “her money” but OUR money, given that it is from the “Bludging for Families” tax-theft program brought in by Michael “I’ll sabotage the economy” Cullen.  

      • By “our” money I assume you fall into the top 13% of high earners that pay nearly 80% of the taxes collected & benefits & assistance paid out? I know I do….

  • Pingback: The Fairfacts Media Show » Blog Archive » Key’s cleaner half-story reveals Liarbour-Union dirty tricks()

  • Pingback: The full story | Kiwiblog()


    Diablos has been very quiet about this one…

    • diabolos

      Nope mate … i had forgotten about it .. here’s my contribution…

      I think Cam is fair enough in his assertions.  I thought that when i first read them and then saw the news bulletins etc.

      With my Kids – i never had the benefit of Working For Families until much later on at the latter end of their tenure with me.  It didnt make me rich – but i didnt go around whining about my income either.  I was over a certain income threshhold etc etc etc (forgive my dimming memory here).

      What do i think – you choose to have lots of kids – you pay the price and not the taxpayer.  If you cant plug the gap with spakfilla – dont come running to the state.  That goes for all the excessively breeding groups – including certain immigrant groups as well.

      One thing i would like to see – is confirmation of her income – if she is protesting then the public have a right to know what she is actually hauling in.  I saw that as Cams major point and agree with him.

      YNEFM – i am leftist – but im not in favour of misrepresentation of the truth.  I also dont believe you can deal with anything in the delicate mechanism of the economy in isolation  – its an ecosystem.  You cant ask businesses to pay an increased wage and everything magically comes right.  SME’s are the engine of our economy – they also represent a lot of technically middle class people – as owners and stakeholders and employees – you meddle at your peril.

      Too much isolated tinkering fucketh the mechanism up – so sayeth the leftist.

      The right fuck things up – and so do the Left.  No argument from me.  Challenge is to repair the fuckups without losing the plot.

  • diabolos

    Frankly – the issue is not people like this woman who have a job.  Its about people who DONT have a job.  And while we are at it … she didnt get 8 kids on her own by immaculate conception … what does the Father earn and where does it go.

    Life is all about who pays … unalterable law of nature … who pays.  If everyone is to be now paid $15 an hour someone has to pay – and its the employer.  Doesnt affect Parliaments Cleaners because taxpayers ultimately pay for that.  But its all the SME’s – suffering out there who are going to have to find the cashflow to fund that extra payroll.  

    Instead of a Fat Tax – I suggest we have a “Fuck Tax”  – install meters on all citizens who are prolific breeders.  The monitors would not only record the number of unprotected child-causing naughties but they would be “pay as you go” … so they have to buy credits directed to the consolidated fund everytime they create a child.  That’ll keep them out of the pubs and clubs.

    A fee of at least $10K per child-causing naughty might be a deterrent.  Or follow Chinas lead and penalise people for having more than one or two children.  But i guess that would be nanny state for some people.  

    Lets get Jobs for people – NOW – and make it clear that the number of kids you choose to have is ultimately your responsibility or go back to wherever you originally came from.

    Or something like that anyway.

    • “Frankly – the issue is not people like this woman who have a job.  Its about people who DONT have a job”

      Sorry I disagree – those that have jobs – white middle class NZ included – & multiple kids are the bane of our existence & our economy. WFF is a scam & has created a generation of bludgers who have a sense of entitlement that we cannot afford.

      But yes the unemployed are certainly an equal, if not bigger, issue when you have 30% of NZ kids being born into low-income households.

      As for “Lets get Jobs for people – NOW” – jobs aren’t created out of thin air or by govts as Labour would have you believe, they are created by hard working New Zealanders. Only profitable businesses employ people – high taxes, red tape & an economy struggling because most of the working population are not paying their own way all mean less jobs not more.

      If people want to be able to afford to have more kids later then real wages have to rise. In order for this to happen our taxes should be NOT be going into welfare and instead be going into R & D & supporting companies who are most likely to create jobs through lower taxes (remember we pay Imputation Tax Credits here – unlike most countries) & less red tape. 

      If people like the cleaner want 8 kids then she should have chosen to do something other than dust, vacuum & polish floors – anyone can do anything in this country if they want to. Especially now that we have interest free student loans!!!