Last week, the (reputed) poor were having a whinge.
A few of them have been hurling eggs at the Prime Minister in the less salubrious suburbs of Napier, blaming him and his ilk for their lot in life.
They've been standing in the streets with their young children, teaching them chants such as "One, two, three, four, stop the war on the poor".
Now I know it is horribly politically incorrect of me to say so in the current climate of permissive victimisation that dominates New Zealand culture, but since when was there a war on the poor?
Last time I checked, anyone who couldn't get a job or had a family and didn't get enough in that job to care for them adequately could put up their hand and have it filled with enough cash to ensure the necessities of life.
I know it is a neat little coincidence that "war" and "poor" rhyme so well, but at a time when we are reflecting on the genuine sacrifices made by New Zealanders in real wars where young lives were lost, I think the "poor" should take a reality check.
This month a Washington-based think-tank concluded that of 130 countries, New Zealand was the most socially advanced in the world.
We got an A+ for personal rights, freedoms, access to schooling, tolerance for minority groups and good water and sanitation. Health care is largely free for all children under 6 years old and welfare benefits are widely available.
Compared to life in so many other places across the world, this hardly seems like a situation where our political leaders deserve to be egged for their negligence.
While most New Zealanders will (quietly) agree with me, a bleating minority will be furious at that fact that a well-heeled, white middle-class professional such as myself dares to have an opinion on a topic of which I clearly have no experience.
In my defence, I was a child of relative poverty myself, growing up in a single-parent home with hand-me-down clothes and getting by with the help of a state-funded widow's benefit and an awe-inspiring single mum.
The difference between my upbringing and consequent position in life compared to those encouraging their children to hurl abuse at our leaders and blame them for their struggle is largely one of attitude.
My mum brought me up with a fair dose of tough love and a belief that the only one responsible for my destiny was me.
She taught me to believe that with hard work and commitment, I could achieve whatever I applied myself to. I knew support was there for me when I needed it (both from her and the state in the way of student allowances and heavily subsidised education), but beyond that I was free to rise or fall according to my own efforts and decisions.
Kiwis had an "up by the bootstraps" attitude and didn't waste time playing the blame game.
Today there are children and families living in poverty, and it is a terrible situation that I hope those with influence will continue to address. But are those people the ones to blame for this poverty? Or are they just held responsible for it in a world where we have been allowed to stop being responsible for ourselves?