Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
oztony

Something is really wrong with the thinking or lack thereof

Recommended Posts

smokey
Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, maximian said:

It has nothing to do with you being a foreigner. When the social pension program was implemented it was only intended for those who are  frail, sickly or with disability; without any pension from other government agencies; and without a permanent source of income or source of financial assistance/compensation to support their basic needs. There are many seniors who are not included in the program and they are entitled to make a complaint if they feel they have been unfairly excluded. 

Tell that to the old lady who bought 6 burgers to go or the 20%off 3 dozen dunkin donuts.   So the program was.aimed at seinors making less 60.000 peso a year yet i see lots of these cards used at VIKING 

Edited by smokey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PlanB

They “should” look at the root cause of why the social system is so abysmal that these issues even come up. Plus it is very arbitrary here. One rumor is enough to withhold. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oztony
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, to_dave007 said:

I agree with you that 500 peso a month is a paltry amount.. and it's almost a joke that an issue should be made of such a small amount.

Dave one of the things I am trying to convey here , M.O.O. it is my belief that no country should reserve the right to expect citizens of another country to sponsor their citizens in retirement or otherwise , I suppose we can argue til the cows come home , but what gives anyone the right to even think they have a say in the finances of those in a different country let alone make their policy around this....

Edited by oztony
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lamoe
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, to_dave007 said:

I'm sorry to hear about the hard times..  but......

Under PH family law..  the Family Code.. children are specifically obligated to support parents. Nowhere in the Family Code does it say that this obligation extinguishes after emigration.  Does the daughter still carry a PI passport and claim Balikbayan privileges when she enters PI?

In this case the SS benefit is 500 peso..  or AUD 13.88.. or about 45 minutes work at minimum wage in Oz or a single pack of cigarettes..  or a McD meal or a couple cups of coffee.  The SS people are saying..  if your daughter lives overseas, get your AUD13.88 from her..  rather from a SS pension that you didn't contribute to. And if you set the drama aside.. I have no doubt that you can see some small thing that you can deprive yourselves of each month to send that AUD13.88.

I agree with you that 500 peso a month is a paltry amount.. and it's almost a joke that an issue should be made of such a small amount.

But PI is entitled to make their own laws.. regardless whether you or I might like them.  In this case..  SS is saying..  Your SS pension of AUD13.88/month that you did not contribute to is denied, get the AUD$13.88 from your daughter overseas...  she can afford it.  Does not matter if you or I LIKE it..  but this is a reasonable policy position for SS to take...  in the total context of PI law... and without ANY means test on the daughter at all.

Simply put..  If your kids can support you, the state should not need to.  Get the AUD13.88/month from your daughter, not from the SS pension that you did not contribute to.  And if your daughter lives in Oz, she can afford AUD$13.88/month. Like it or not, it's a reasonable SS policy position.. even WITHOUT any test of daughters ability to pay.

So..  I am defending the SS POLICY POSITION here..  not necessarily the actions of the barangay officials.  I'm guessing that this SS policy position has existed for years, and that it's likely NOT a recent change.  I'm also guessing that for years it's been well known throughout the community that the old guys daughter is married and living overseas.  And yet the SS exclusion policy wasn't enforced until now.  Given the timing of your post I'm wondering if this is a "post election" change.. with newly minted barangay officials in 2019.  If so..  this is likely payback for some perceived offense by the old guy during the election.

Edit: was typing - I'm slow - when OZTONY posted

 

From the info provided, there are assumptions being made  - and items not mentioned

"Simply put..  If your kids can support you, the state should not need to.  Get the AUD13.88/month from your daughter, not from the SS pension that you did not contribute to.  And if your daughter lives in Oz, she can afford AUD$13.88/month. Like it or not, it's a reasonable SS policy position.. even WITHOUT any test of daughters ability to pay."

Missing info  - goes to children required by law to support parents - is the Fillipina working or have her own independent cash flow?

If not, then any money she would send to her father would be that earned / obtained by her husband - if he were the type that controlled all monies being spent and said 'no more money for papa' then the only way for her to obtain it would be to in essence steal it.

Taking something without permission, either explicit or implied, is stealing, doesn't matter what the relationship is.

I know they're  married, don't know enough about OZ laws to say it 'it's not illegal to steal from your husband' to support your father

I doubt the PH law states if married to a foreigner, the foreigner is also legally obligated to also support the parents.

Assumptions  by the officials? -  it appears they were informed that daughter is married , in OZ, so of course rich, and therefor it doesn't matter where the money comes from does it?

 

Edited by lamoe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oztony
2 minutes ago, lamoe said:

Assumptions  by the officials? - 

And also Dave has a lot of assumptions ...

If people are able to I am sure they help their family's , my wife is dependent on me and I will not have any other country or person tell me what I should or have to do with my money ... get real ... anyone that thinks that is OK has to be a muppet .....

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lamoe
Quote

  37 minutes ago, to_dave007 said:

"Like it or not, it's a reasonable SS policy position.. even WITHOUT any test of daughters ability to pay"

It is not reasonable - it is typical , as OZTONY stipulated, saying  a foreign citizen must support a Filipino family (mama, papa) or they will cut off  gov funds is wrong.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to_dave007
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, lamoe said:

it appears they were informed that daughter is married , in OZ, so of course rich, and therefor it doesn't matter where the money comes from does it?

Just drama..  No-one is assuming anyone is RICH.   The amount in question is $13.88 a month.  Don't make it bigger than it is.

And if she lives in Oz..  she can pick up pop bottles to get $13.88 a month.

35 minutes ago, lamoe said:

 saying  a foreign citizen must support a Filipino family (mama, papa) or they will cut off  gov funds is wrong.

She's still a Philippines citizen until Tony tells us that she renounced her PI citizenship and gave up her passport.  Citizenship has it's costs.

Under PI law..  an adult child is obligated to support a parent.  Are you suggesting that this law is inappropriate?  or that daughter can run from that obligation by emigrating?

You guys are forgetting that pensions..  whether in Australia or USA or Canada or PI are relatively RECENT changes.  It's barely 100 years ago that there no pensions available, even in the first world.  Families have been expected to support the elderly for thousands of years.  And in the PI.. families are STILL expected to support the elderly.  That's the law.  

Edited by to_dave007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to_dave007
27 minutes ago, oztony said:

And also Dave has a lot of assumptions ...

If people are able to I am sure they help their family's , my wife is dependent on me and I will not have any other country or person tell me what I should or have to do with my money ... get real ... anyone that thinks that is OK has to be a muppet .....

Noun. muppet (plural muppets) (Britain, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, slang, derogatory) An incompetent or foolish person.

Tony..  you may be an administrator..  But if you wish this to remain a civilized discussion than please edit your post to remove the name calling. If you prefer not to..  let me know and I'll exit the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to_dave007
36 minutes ago, oztony said:

If people are able to I am sure they help their family's , my wife is dependent on me and I will not have any other country or person tell me what I should or have to do with my money ... get real ... anyone that thinks that is OK has to be a muppet .....

IMHO you assumed an obligation to support your wife's parents in their old age when you married a Filipina.  You knew that PI had a very weak SS system years ago..  Sure..  if your wife works, I would expect that support to come from her.  But if she does not, it comes from you, or the old guy doesn't get his $13.88.  Tough luck..  That's just a small part of the price of marrying into a Filipino family, and you know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oztony
36 minutes ago, oztony said:

And also Dave has a lot of assumptions ...

If people are able to I am sure they help their family's , my wife is dependent on me and I will not have any other country or person tell me what I should or have to do with my money ... get real ... anyone that thinks that is OK has to be a muppet .....

 

7 minutes ago, to_dave007 said:

Noun. muppet (plural muppets) (Britain, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, slang, derogatory) An incompetent or foolish person.

Tony..  you may be an administrator..  But if you wish this to remain a civilized discussion than please edit your post to remove the name calling. If you prefer not to..  let me know and I'll exit the discussion.

Dave ... I have used the word "muppet" as a descriptor ... you were not called a muppet ... at all.. please don't twist things around here.

You don't believe that anyone in another country should tell me what to do with my money do you...? (the answer to this solves it)

Because I was saying only a foolish person "muppet" would think that another country can dictate to a person in a different country what to do with their money ....

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
to_dave007
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, oztony said:

You don't believe that anyone in another country should tell me what to do with my money do you...? (the answer to this solves it)

Of course not.. No-one is telling YOU to do anything..  You can let the old man be hungry or send the wife out to pick up bottles to send the money.  No need for you to do anything at all but bitch and complain.

11 minutes ago, oztony said:

Dave ... I have used the word "muppet" as a descriptor ... you were not called a muppet ... at all.. please don't twist things around here.

Because I was saying only a foolish person "muppet" would think that another country can dictate to a person in a different country what to do with their money ...

Over and out.

Edited by to_dave007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oztony
12 minutes ago, to_dave007 said:

IMHO you assumed an obligation to support your wife's parents in their old age when you married a Filipina.  You knew that PI had a very weak SS system years ago.. 

Why would you assume that I assumed ? You have a few assumptions going on here...

I had no idea about the PI SS system , or the family's payment into such etc. etc. You are also assuming that I knew the PI had a weak SS system ,... h ow would I know about this stuff ? I was not aware of any SS details in regards to the family... Maybe I stuffed up , are you meant to interview them about this stuff when you first meet ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yikes! the universe

but aren't all countries tied together in one way or another with money?? I used to look at a map with boarders but as time goes on I'm realizing that the whole world is a creditor/debtor society. So maybe it's justified that they ask those question. Just my thought:unknw:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oztony

After reading the guidelines that Maximillan posted , as bent up as they appear to me , it certainly looks like the old boy is not entitled to this payment , I only became aware he was syphoning  from this fund when I made the OP . Of course we support the old bugger , I have no idea how much gets sent , the wife does all that ... I know he runs on the smell of an oily rag so the cost of it would be unnoticeable to me ... hell I spend 50 bucks a day on smokes and beer ...

Anyway , I just thought it would make a good discussion with differing view points , I have asked wifey to tell him to ditch the little caper he has embarked upon ...and funny enough they have asked him to be president of the little group that receives it LOL..

i still stand by my opinions though , I find it terribly odd for people in another place to base policy around things out of their own country in regards to other peoples money... it is what is .... welcome to Maharlika ... or are still in the Philippines...:lol:

@to_dave007   Sorry you got offended bro , I wasn't calling you a muppet ,

(forget the $13 McDo burger I have plugged about 7 mil peso into there over the last 15 years or so) 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lamoe
1 hour ago, to_dave007 said:

IMHO you assumed an obligation to support your wife's parents in their old age when you married a Filipina.  You knew that PI had a very weak SS system years ago..  Sure..  if your wife works, I would expect that support to come from her.  But if she does not, it comes from you, or the old guy doesn't get his $13.88.  Tough luck..  That's just a small part of the price of marrying into a Filipino family, and you know it.

You're assuming an assumption

Care to site a link that states that a foreign agrees to follow all Philippine laws that pertain only to Filipinos when they get married?

1 hour ago, to_dave007 said:

Just drama..  No-one is assuming anyone is RICH.   The amount in question is $13.88 a month.  Don't make it bigger than it is.

And if she lives in Oz..  she can pick up pop bottles to get $13.88 a month.

She's still a Philippines citizen until Tony tells us that she renounced her PI citizenship and gave up her passport.  Citizenship has it's costs.

Under PI law..  an adult child is obligated to support a parent.  Are you suggesting that this law is inappropriate?  or that daughter can run from that obligation by emigrating?

You guys are forgetting that pensions..  whether in Australia or USA or Canada or PI are relatively RECENT changes.  It's barely 100 years ago that there no pensions available, even in the first world.  Families have been expected to support the elderly for thousands of years.  And in the PI.. families are STILL expected to support the elderly.  That's the law.  

RIIIIGHT  - no Filipino ever assumes all foreigners are rich - Kano Price is a myth - one of the reasons we don't walk together  when shopping in Carbon - P50 a Kg for her is P100 to 125 for me

Forced labor and coercion with the threat of retribution against a relative is is OK ? Pay or else?

You're correct the money is minimal to most of us and most of us do provide some form of assistance to the family according to our abilities..

No one is forgetting   pensions  - however much we may disagree with Social Security

As for the care of the elderly - you seem to be forgetting that for those thousands of years most economic structures were agrarian or nomadic and centered on the fact that  everyone from very young to very old, even in  mercantile ones  had to contribute to insure survival. There was no retirement - most worked at something till they died.

http://www.chanrobles.com/civilcodeofthephilippinesbook4.htm

If indeed the law indicates any revenue generating action  - walking the streets, picking up bottles - is demanded I will admit my error in reasoning.

It appears from this article - as with many laws here - ambiguity rather than clarity is the rule of the day and that ANY blood relative (mother, father, brother, sisters, children, etc.) can demand support from any other member - not just parents to children

Spouses are beholding only to each other

The article also refers to this section of the law which defines the procedure of bringing a lawsuit to have a law enforced.

https://www.lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html#r61

Atty. La Vina's interpretation would preclude picking up bottles

Quote

 

http://fqmom.com/right-parents-demand-support-children-exchange-raising/

 

For Atty. La Viña, the law is essentially triggered by need and means. The one demanding for said support must need the support and the other party must have the means to give support after it has already allocated support to his other dependents who are higher on the list.

 When I asked how easily can this law be used by parents, siblings, other family members, and what protection does a citizen have from claimants who are just lazy to earn a living, Atty. Bundang referred me to the Rules of Court Rule No. 61 Support Pendente Lite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Guidelines. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..