Imprisonment looking attractive

I'VE never liked the equation that governments use to come up with their cost of living figures.

Lumping big luxury, not to mention, infrequent purchases like cars and giant flat screens in with the likes of a kilo of bananas.

Talk about creative accounting. While the powers that be cook up inventive ways to present the facts I'm left with barely anything to cook at all.

Weekly trips to the supermarket prove my food budget is increasingly buying me less and less, yet according to the cost of living figures, reported monthly, I should be able to buy the same, if not more.

You know the world has gone crazy when a bottle of wine costs less than a freaking cauliflower.

A leg of lamb would only be possible on my budget via crowd funding, lay-by or hire purchase.

With the clones near ready to embark on their own journey of financial independence I'm left to ponder my options for survival.

I always knew my income would drop significantly at this time, as it should, but I wasn't quite prepared for just how much that drop would be. My new benefit rate will be just under $250 a week and that includes an accommodation allowance. Here's a maths problem for you:

Kate has $247 to live on for one week. She pays rent of $200. Overnight two payments come out of her account to cover power ($40) and phone and internet ($30). Then there is $20 minimum for petrol and of course, like any other human being, Kate requires food to survive. Let's afford her the luxurious sum of $60 (according to WINZ guidelines).

There are other reasonable and essential costs such as clothing, shoes, medical expenses, car registration, bank fees (I'm predicting a great many dishonour fees), lawn mowing, car repairs and WOF costs.

We haven't even touched on the costs that are considered non-essential but normal, like cosmetics, perfume, hair cuts, insurance, birthday and Christmas gifts for immediate family, not to mention all the general household items that need replacement due to basic wear and tear, like appliances, towels and linens.

Forget about the luxury items like fast food, alcohol or, heaven forbid, a latte and even if Kate were to move to a cheaper home her accommodation allowance would be adjusted accordingly, so she would earn even less.

Should Kate:

A. Stay put, pay a little less weekly for power, phone and internet and slowly starve to death.

B. Stay put with no power, phone or internet and live off uncooked foods assuming she has the petrol to get to the supermarket, or

C. Live in her car near a WiFi hotspot and dine on fast food and take-out.

Just taking into account the most basic of costs: rent, power, phone/internet, petrol and food, Kate is actually short by $103 each week, despite being told her weekly income is more than sufficient to live on - according to the cost of living figures.

I can't speak for all beneficiaries, of course, but how anyone can suggest that living like this is a choice or that I'm not motivated enough to find employment is just absurd. I wouldn't wish this standard of living on anybody, if you can even call it living. Never mind the lack of food, the stress alone will finish me.

I'm sorry that I am such a burden to the taxpayer, it was never my plan.

I know my sanity is questionable at the best of times but what does it say about us if I would be better off committing a crime that comes with a lengthy term of imprisonment. Three meals a day, no bills to pay, free dental and medical care, free education, daily exercise, recreation rooms and weekly visits from family and friends. I can't find work anyway, so it's not like a criminal record will hinder my chances of employment.

At the moment I cost the taxpayer about $12,500 a year. In prison I'll cost them $92,000. Even if you subtracted the labour costs from that figure you have a much truer reflection of the real cost of living and it's a hell of a lot more than my $247 a week.

Perhaps MPs like Steven Joyce, can ponder long and hard about that next time they take a $1248 taxi trip, at the taxpayers expense, for they are the highest paid beneficiaries of us all.

When imprisonment presents itself as a much more attractive option, economically, than being on a benefit, it's time to admit to the possibility that the current system just isn't working.

I wonder if you can rent-to-own your own cell. Gated community, multiple locations. Could be a new way to get a foot on to the property ladder, Hmm, not as crazy at it seems and certainly no crazier than the cost of living figures we are being quoted.

Kate Stewart is a politically incorrect columnist of no repute. Born and bred in Wanganui, she does not suffer fools gladly but does suffer from the occasional bout of hayfever - your feedback is welcome:investik8@gmail.com