Sick and tired of Cullen

[idleidolidyll]

Thats a subject for another day when I can be bothered arguing with an uncompromising mindset.

that's a fukkin joke coming from a conservative: someone who is by definition uncompromisingly stuck in a groove.

us socialists welcome change, change is good, change is necessary and there are far more valid elements of cultures than just the extant sets in NZ

change will embrace these and conservatives will quiver in fear

[idleidolidyll]

"It" doesn't favour anyone

Individuals are by nature greedy, and in your socialist utopia there will be those who will covet the communal pittance the neighbours have had redistributed to them.

oh dear

that old crap again

socialism is a combination of both communism and capitalism, Marx described it as the pathway between one and the other but not actually either; you describe communism and call it socialism just like those who propagandize you expect you to. is that a baaa i hear?

but yes, capitalism DOES favour the few (and the greedy), that's what it is by nature

[Sanx]

although it has shortened the dole queue

Nope, a booming global economy did that. It would be more accurate to say that the dole queue shortened despite Labour's best efforts at increasing the cost, paperwork and risk involved in employing anyone.

increased trade and business

Oh did they? If you take the large price increases in global dairy and wood prices out of the equation, you'd find that the balance of payments deficit has increased. Not a good sign of increased trade and business, is it?

started a superannuation program

A super program significantly worse than that available in Aussie and other countries, with far less tax benefits accruing to those contributing to their own future. But that's to be expected with Labour.

improved health and other services

Now that claim is just laughable, unless if by "improved health and other services" you mean increased bureacracy in those government departments responsible for providing those services. Hands up anyone that's seen a marked improvement in service delivery in this country.

Agreed though, a proportional rep system more like Germany might help but only a fool would believe that would solve all or even many of our problems. The scary thing is that disaffected voters might make the ultimate cock up and reinstate the system of electoral dictatorship we had before MMP. National will be pressing them to do just that the next time it holds power.

The problem with proportional representation is that it allows the lunatic fringe to gain seats in parliament. Like the Nazi's first seats in the Reichstag in 1928. (Godwin's law not invoked, as this is historical fact.)

One of the arguments for a FPP is that it reflects the general feeling of the country, not every feeling. There's also the demonstrable fact that pure PR systems tend to produce far less stable governments.

As hated as it might be in political circles here; i support binding referenda

And binding referenda are a form of FPP government. They're black and white. Either the referendum passes or it doesn't pass. There's no middle ground, no lunatic fringe, no alternative policies, no third way. In fact, one might argue it's the purest form of FPP.

And it's ironic that your support of binding referenda is mirrored really in only one country - Switzerland, the bastion of free-market economics. A country with very strict laws on immigration, virtually open for trade, little in the way of social services to those that cannot afford to pay, etc.

[Robert Taylor]

sweden?

who the fuck mentioned sweden?

i posted norway, finland and nz!

i'm sure there's an optometrist near you somewhere that can help

I thought that you had some level of ability to interpret the point being made and that you were actually beginning to learn some manners. Sadly I was mistaken on at least one of those counts. Sweden is a socialist dominated country that is often mentioned by socialists as a model socialist utopia.

[Robert Taylor]

that's a fukkin joke coming from a conservative: someone who is by definition uncompromisingly stuck in a groove.

us socialists welcome change, change is good, change is necessary and there are far more valid elements of cultures than just the extant sets in NZ

change will embrace these and conservatives will quiver in fear

Heck that well and truly is the most hypocritical and ( sorry ) HILARIOUS statement that you have outpoured out of yourself thus far. I am on record as giving credit to a number of socialist politicians, guys that I would never vote for but have respect for their integrity.
I just betcha that when it comes down to cold hard reality that I have more social conscience than you have, and am infinitely more polite.

[Robert Taylor]

that's a fukkin joke coming from a conservative: someone who is by definition uncompromisingly stuck in a groove.

us socialists welcome change, change is good, change is necessary and there are far more valid elements of cultures than just the extant sets in NZ

change will embrace these and conservatives will quiver in fear

Change over the decades has resulted in more violent crime and an unacceptable degradation in personal discipline and politeness. Change has resulted in a relaxation of standards. LARGELY SUCH CHANGE HAS BEEN PUSHED BY THE LEFT, they can have the ''credit'' for it. This country and others needs a return to compulsory military training for ALL school leavers so personal discipline and standards can be knocked into people. I would support such change.

[Robert Taylor]

dear bob

it matters not a rats arse what you say your description of conservatism is; the DEFINITION of conservatism is a belief that it's all good right now or back then and change is scary

in fact the oxford paperback says this (politically):
conservative: disliking or opposed to change, tending to want to maintain existing institutions

your use of the word is in its propagandist definition not its actual definition and therefore your entire argument has just gone whoosh!!! right out the farkin window

Actually, how about a return to previous institutions that werent broken and didnt need fixing.

[Robert Taylor]

Yep, it's a no-brainer, isn't it? I'm also sick of social engineering, and the government's "when I want your opinion, I'll give it to you" attitude

Like a good many I am also sick and tired of Idle Leftys ''socialists know best and conservatives are wrong wrong wrong'' preaching. Perhaps the thread should be renamed? Im indeed myself opinionated but will listen and debate calmly, I venture to say I look like a saint in comparison to this guys domineering soapbox and the rivers of filth ( expletives ) that pour forth from it. A good spanking or two when he was a child may have tempered his attitude ( pre Bradford times ) and delivered some politeness.

[Sanx]

in fact the oxford paperback says this (politically):
conservative: disliking or opposed to change, tending to want to maintain existing institutions

Would that be the Oxford English Dictionary that you once decried as a tool of capitalist corporations because you didn't happen to agree with its definition of socialism or capitalism?

Anyway - you're guilty of selectively quoting the full definition of the word. Rather like your take on most things, you quote (repeatedly and loudly) the bits that can be twisted to fit your ideology and conveniently ignore the rest. But just in case your dictionary was missing a page; the word 'conservative' has many meanings but when used in a political sense it means one of two things:

• Of or relating to the political theory of conservatism; or
• A member of a conservative party, group, or movement.

The meaning you deliberately misquoted does not apply to the political use of the word 'conservative'. In fact, there's very little correlation between the two meanings at all.

Just as there's little correlation between Labour, as in the political movement, and labour, as in work; something a large minority of dyed-in-the-wool Labour supporters studiously avoid.

[idleidolidyll]

Would that be the Oxford English Dictionary that you once decried as a tool of capitalist corporations because you didn't happen to agree with its definition of socialism or capitalism?

good grief man, get a grip

it was I who used the Oxford to post definitions of both systems on this forum and it was the wafflers who whined

do you need them posted again?

Socialism: A political and economic theory advocating that the community as a whole should own and control the means of production, transport, property etc. A social system based on this.

Capitalism: An economic system in which trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

I've never had an argument with either description from the Oxford dictionary. I posted those originally because idiots were describing the two systems from propaganda instead of from fact.

Some ignorami stated categorically (sic) that capitalism was trade and industry. Hilarious! With or without capitalism, there has always been trade and industry.

Here's some humble pie: you must be very hungry

I'll get back to your other straw men after work

[idleidolidyll]

Anyway - you're guilty of selectively quoting the full definition of the word.

Wow! I'm 'guilty' of selectively quoting the FULL definition of the word.

Indeed I am, the previous post is the FULL definition from the NZ Oxford Paperback Dictionary. ISBN 0 19 5584104

'Guilty' as charged: ha! ha! ha! ha! rotflmfao!

[idleidolidyll]

The meaning you deliberately misquoted does not apply to the political use of the word 'conservative'. In fact, there's very little correlation between the two meanings at all.

dumber and dumber

The reason that the word Conservative was chosen to describe the political ideology was that it mirrored the beliefs of the proponents: that all is good right now (because their group had power) and they didn't want that to change.

My quote yesterday was indeed the full definition from the oxford as referenced in the previous post.
Bob himself emphasizes that point in a post just a few messages ago when he advocates going backward to a time when he thought the system was better for him. That's the conservative way: "fuck the rest of you, I want what's best for me."

The supposed lack of correlation you proffer is nothing less than the propaganda aspect

[idleidolidyll]

Just as there's little correlation between Labour, as in the political movement, and labour, as in work; something a large minority of dyed-in-the-wool Labour supporters studiously avoid.

Do you know the mad hatter personally? Sorry mate, I'm a student of politics and a student of communication past and present. Your (il)logical fallacy is hilarious, a silly fallacy normally called "muddying the waters".

Mind yoyu, at least that's a change from your straw man stuff

[Flatcap]

socialism is a combination of both communism and capitalism,

So you are in support of capitalism then...?

By your argument you need us greedy capitalists, so be thankful

[Hinny]

[quote=devnull;1583608]Socialism isn't the answer... it's failed miserably in every country it's been tried

What are the countries with the highest standards of living today?

How would you describe their ruling political parties?

There is a widespread notion that the Scandinavian countries have crafted for themselves the highest standard of living in the world. Their socialist economies create the wealth needed to support this standard of living.