Rodney Hide resigns [Archive] - Kiwi Biker forums

oneofsix

28th April 2011, 15:17

Bullshit Brash came into the leadership with National under English at about 20 points ahead of Labour in the polls, he then single handedly lost what was going to be a National Lead Government. The Guy is 70yrs old he like Douglus still believe in the failed policies of Rodgernomics which nearly bought NZ to its knees.

Look around you all the rich dudes that benefited from Douglas/Brashes free market sell anything that moves policies sold what they could pocketing large commissions and now all live overseas spending their riches - Fay / Richwaite and co ect. The shame of MMP is it means NZ taxpayers money is wasted paying wankers like those belonging to Act, the Maori Party and others - pigs in the trough.

The shame isn't on MMP but on those that support (vote for) the pigs in the trough and the pigs themselves. Shit look at ACT (if you can bear the view) the perk busters that were slopping up the perks and now a party that will take a non-member over a founder. :whocares:

Maha

28th April 2011, 15:20

''what we need in this country is a Dictator , a Dictator with some Balls to make the hard calls that the current system cannot make''

We did once, she now works for the UN.

oneofsix

28th April 2011, 15:23

''what we need in this country is a Dictator , a Dictator with some Balls to make the hard calls that the current system cannot make''

We did once, she now works for the UN.

close but didn't quite go to dictator. She was still subject to the system and had to do deals with lesser parties which lead to her eventual downfall and job at the UN. :bye:
Or was that a promotion cause now she gets to interfere in more than one little Pacific Island nations politics :yes:

BoristheBiter

28th April 2011, 15:25

The shame isn't on MMP but on those that support (vote for) the pigs in the trough and the pigs themselves. Shit look at ACT (if you can bear the view) the perk busters that were slopping up the perks and now a party that will take a non-member over a founder. :whocares:

You mean like all the pigs in the welfare trough?
Or the party whose support comes from the pigs in the welfare trough?
Or the pigs in the racist party welfare trough?
Or the pigs in the can't even get along with anyone so i will go form my own racist party welfare trough?

Sorry couldn't stop saying pigs and trough.:facepalm:

Maha

28th April 2011, 15:25

close but didn't quite go to dictator. She was still subject to the system and had to do deals with lesser parties which lead to her eventual downfall and job at the UN. :bye:
Or was that a promotion cause now she gets to interfere in more than one little Pacific Island nations politics :yes:

I dont have to many hairs left to split sorry.

oneofsix

28th April 2011, 15:28

You mean like all the pigs in the welfare trough?
Or the party whose support comes from the pigs in the welfare trough?
Or the pigs in the racist party welfare trough?
Or the pigs in the can't even get along with anyone so i will go form my own racist party welfare trough?

Sorry couldn't stop saying pigs and trough.:facepalm:

they all feed off the rest of us and support each other to do so. Send them all to the freezing works :corn:

oneofsix

28th April 2011, 15:31

I dont have to many hairs left to split sorry.

Oh go on. I was all set to suggest that she reacted so badly to the Fiji situation because she was jealous. This is getting :offtopic: so back to ACT II

BoristheBiter

28th April 2011, 15:32

Oh go on. I was all set to suggest that she reacted so badly to the Fiji situation because she was jealous. This is getting :offtopic: so back to ACT II

Thats a popcorn company.:corn:

Quasievil

28th April 2011, 15:46

pussys

.............................

James Deuce

28th April 2011, 16:17

That reminds me. I must ring Phil Goff this evening and tell him I've taken over the Labour Party.

oldrider

28th April 2011, 16:23

That reminds me. I must ring Phil Goff this evening and tell him I've taken over the Labour Party.

How would he know that you hadn't? :blink:

oneofsix

28th April 2011, 16:26

That reminds me. I must ring Phil Goff this evening and tell him I've taken over the Labour Party.

Any volunteers for National? the Greens? Maori party - oops Honi's new party could negate them. We could end up with an election worth the effort. :innocent:

James Deuce

28th April 2011, 16:32

How would he know that you hadn't? :blink:
Elegant plan, isn't it?

Mental Trousers

28th April 2011, 16:34

Funny thread, lots of negative comments etc, personally I dont have an opinion on the matter as yet, however my only opinion is that as long as their are politicians and the current system remains we will never ever progress, what we need in this country is a Dictator with a vision of progress and success, a Dictator with some Balls to make the hard calls that the current system cannot make i.e social dependency system and other gravy trains, we need someone like

You've convinced me, I'll do it.

With Hide gone and Banksy likely to be running for Parliament look for ACT to be the 3rd largest party by a comfortable margin at the next Election. After all, who else is there??

Crasherfromwayback

28th April 2011, 16:37

All I need now is a army to take control

let the uprising begin

WHO IS WITH ME !!!!!!!!!!

Probably old idealidiot

SPman

28th April 2011, 17:25

That reminds me. I must ring Phil Goff this evening and tell him I've taken over the Labour Party.
Please do, James!

Until people start to take an actual interest in the doings of those, whose actions determine the way the country operates, the disinterested, couldn't-care-less voting population, will get the self serving, opportunistic wankers they richly deserve! Most of you have me visualising Jackals fighting over gleanings from the table, while those in charge sup well on the main courses. Few seem to lift their eyes, other than to snarl at the others....
I feel like I’m living in America these days, where Average Joe’s have been brainwashed into applauding and commending our smug, rich prick overlords while viciously turning on the disadvantaged i.e themselves and their neighbours, in the pathetic hope that they one day will be as rich and awesome as ‘good bastard’ Key.

nosebleed

28th April 2011, 17:47

Anyone else think Don Brash sounds like he should be on Fresh Up's "Thirst is creepy" ad campaign?

Maha

28th April 2011, 17:52

Anyone else think Don Brash sounds like he should be on Fresh Up's "Thirst is creepy" ad campaign?

He was talking about counting/hatching chickens on the radio this morning....:corn:

Pussy

28th April 2011, 17:53

That reminds me. I must ring Phil Goff this evening and tell him I've taken over the Labour Party.

If you crossed Fil Goof with James Dean, you would end up with "Rebel without a clue".
Even if you did, James, he wouldn't notice.

Gremlin

28th April 2011, 18:20

All I need now is a army to take control

let the uprising begin

WHO IS WITH ME !!!!!!!!!!
I dunno... can we vote on this?

Paul in NZ

28th April 2011, 18:32

Elegant plan, isn't it?

Heather just called me to tell you to stop running the country and to get home cos dinners on the table or else shes taking over the National party

mashman

28th April 2011, 19:55

With Hide gone and Banksy likely to be running for Parliament look for ACT to be the 3rd largest party by a comfortable margin at the next Election. After all, who else is there??

Good news for the Nats and good news for ACT that the Nats won't contest ACT's seats. Oh well.

98tls

28th April 2011, 20:08

A dwarf that dresses like a faggot or a faggot that wishes he was a dwarf:woohoo:Great choice eh,:facepalm:Anyone care to dig up Stalin,no doubt he wouldnt say much but he would no doubt still acheive more than any of this lot.On our ballot form there should be a box with "anyone but anyone mentioned above".

Fatt Max

28th April 2011, 20:35

Funny thread, lots of negative comments etc, personally I dont have an opinion on the matter as yet, however my only opinion is that as long as their are politicians and the current system remains we will never ever progress, what we need in this country is a Dictator with a vision of progress and success, a Dictator with some Balls to make the hard calls that the current system cannot make i.e social dependency system and other gravy trains, we need someone like me for example:innocent:

All I need now is a army to take control

let the uprising begin

WHO IS WITH ME !!!!!!!!!!

Ok then, I'm in...

Will there be pies...?

Fatt Max

28th April 2011, 20:36

He was talking about counting/hatching chickens on the radio this morning....:corn:

Was he, what a cock.....geddit, cock, see.....

FJRider

28th April 2011, 20:37

Ok then, I'm in...

Will there be pies...?

There'll be pie's !!!!! ... count ME in ... :yes::yes:

98tls

28th April 2011, 20:42

There'll be pie's !!!!! ... count ME in ... :yes::yes:

Told you before,pies are not to be used for relief.:facepalm:What part of "any port in a storm" are you misunderstanding?

davebullet

28th April 2011, 20:48

Ok then, I'm in...

Will there be pies...?

P.I.E. = Politicians In Excile

FJRider

28th April 2011, 20:53

Told you before,pies are not to be used for relief.:facepalm:What part of "any port in a storm" are you misunderstanding?

But ... but ... YOU SAID ... if its got a slit up front ... with a bit of fluff 'round it ... GO FOR IT ... (You said if I give it a good licking first ... it would be better too ... but it just makes the pastry cold ... ):shutup: :blink: :facepalm: :sunny: :corn:

trustme

28th April 2011, 21:15

Bullshit Brash came into the leadership with National under English at about 20 points ahead of Labour in the polls, he then single handedly lost what was going to be a National Lead Government. The Guy is 70yrs old he like Douglus still believe in the failed policies of Rodgernomics which nearly bought NZ to its knees.

Look around you all the rich dudes that benefited from Douglas/Brashes free market sell anything that moves policies sold what they could pocketing large commissions and now all live overseas spending their riches - Fay / Richwaite and co ect. The shame of MMP is it means NZ taxpayers money is wasted paying wankers like those belonging to Act, the Maori Party and others - pigs in the trough.

Rogernomics was not a failure. Rogernomics was not the disease , it was the cure for years of a govt spending way beyond it's means. Bloody unpleasant medicine it may have been but if we did not take it we were stuffed.
What have we learned ?? SFA , govt spending way beyond it's means, over $300m in the red every week, unless some serious calls are made Rogernomics will be back in one form or another

I do agree the execution of Rogernomics was disgraceful, the direction was right the way it was done was not good

Brash may give the Nats the support needed for them to have the courage to make some tough calls.

Flip

28th April 2011, 21:38

Brash may give the Nats the support needed for them to have the courage to make some tough calls.

Yea like more tax cuts for the wealthy.

Mully

28th April 2011, 22:09

Brash may give the Nats the support needed for them to have the courage to make some tough calls.

Funnily enough, I was having a politics conversation with someone at work today about this

We thought that since Brash is 70, he's likely to not go much longer than one term. We wondered if this meant (provided he held enough seats to be a thorn in National's side) he'd push some of the unpopular decisions that no (future thinking) scumbags want to consider,,,

Will be interesting to see if this is the making or the breaking of the ACT party.

trustme

28th April 2011, 22:16

Yea like more tax cuts for the wealthy.

When you are in financial doodoo you have 2 choices does not matter whether you are an individual, business or country.
Reduce expenditure or increase earnings. The Nats are tinkering with the first & have not addressed the second
Raising taxes will achieve neither. The so called wealthy simply look to minimise their tax liability [ family trusts ] or bugger off because they can do better elsewhere
I remember when the tax rate went to 39% my accountant commented that overnight his role changed from a business advisor , helping clients to grow their business to a tax advisor , assisting his clients to minimize their tax liability.
39% + 12.5 % GST meant people could be paying over 50% tax, people would not pay it, it was a disincentive to growth

trustme

28th April 2011, 22:23

Funnily enough, I was having a politics conversation with someone at work today about this

We thought that since Brash is 70, he's likely to not go much longer than one term. We wondered if this meant (provided he held enough seats to be a thorn in National's side) he'd push some of the unpopular decisions that no (future thinking) scumbags want to consider,,,

Will be interesting to see if this is the making or the breaking of the ACT party.

Nats sidelined his commission for getting us on a par with Australia.
Will he push for some changes that the electorate will find unpalatable. Undoubtedly.
Would they be to our long term benefit
Probably
Most people can't see past their next paypacket.

phill-k

28th April 2011, 22:24

Rogernomics was not a failure. .

Tui add is it, please enlighten me what policy, SOE sale or whatever under the Rogernomics / Ruth I'm so important I need to fly concord Richardson ideology benefited NZ

mashman

28th April 2011, 22:32

When you are in financial doodoo you have 2 choices does not matter whether you are an individual, business or country.
Reduce expenditure or increase earnings.

Option 3: Pool your cumulative resources so that everyone "wins" :) (i know, too hard box)

trustme

28th April 2011, 22:35

Rogernomics was forced on us by a govt that sent us broke . we were on the verge of defaulting on our financial commitments. We were unlikely secure any more credit to keep the govt afloat. Have a look at Greece, Portugal Ireland, the poms are not far behind them, would you want to be in their position. When rogernomics was born that is exactly where we were, 30 years later & while it is not all tea & bikkies we are not in the parlous state that those countries find them selves in. That may change if we don't get our house in order.
Lange always said that they did the right thing but they did it the wrong way. I would probably agree, his ' cup of tea ' was a total cop out.

Option 3 . Examples of when this has worked would be appreciated. Nth Korea is a stunning success , Cuba , outstanding.

Winston001

28th April 2011, 23:33

Tui add is it, please enlighten me what policy, SOE sale or whatever under the Rogernomics / Ruth I'm so important I need to fly concord Richardson ideology benefited NZ

Oh very well. But its straight to bed for you afterwards.

NZ Post and Telegraph: took 6 weeks to get a new phone connection. Telecom - same day connect.

NZ Rail - people earning $20k paid tax so a track guy could earn $40k. Ditto for the coal mines, although they weren't sold.

Actually I can't be bothered. The accurate information is easy enough to find.

One stark fact: after the 1984 election the $NZ fell 20% overnight on foreign markets when our financial position became clear. It bottomed at US$0.39.

Today NZ is regarded as a safe, stable economy and the exchange rate is US$0.80.

superman

28th April 2011, 23:46

Today NZ is regarded as a safe, stable economy and the exchange rate is US$0.80.

The Australian dollar is bounding ahead. US$1.10 :yes: We should so just piggy back... have a shared currency :woohoo:

Winston001

29th April 2011, 00:10

Bloody Aussies. :blink:

Yes the idea of a political union has been discussed for over 100 years and allegedly Australian law has an open provision for NZ to become a State.

Its probably not necessary to go that far but a currency union and some economic support wouldn't go astray. :D

Tasmania for example is a lovely place and has roading and public facilities way above its worth. That's because the other States subsidise it. I could live with that.

mashman

29th April 2011, 01:04

Option 3 . Examples of when this has worked would be appreciated. Nth Korea is a stunning success , Cuba , outstanding.

That's the point and stop pointing the commy finger :) unless that's as far as your imagination is willing take you :bleh:. It has never been tried before (not in the current western context anyway)... Calling it a Resource Based Economy is about the only safe haven for labelling purposes. Communism/Socialism/Collectivism/GoFuckYourselfism it is not.

So far every economic strategy has failed. Every single one. This has been proven time and time again, a millenia or 2/3/4/5 of gradually getting worse... and it isn't getting any better is it? and it doesn't look like it ever get better using the current systems does it? It isn't just the last term, or 2 terms, or 3 terms etc... that's to blame, but in NZ, pretty much since the West took over NZ from the Maori. Oddly enough a peaceful people who have had their way of life shattered in the pursuit of land, power, resources and money. No more, no less.

Yet society persists with these systems because they work? or can't think of anything better? Or do some just like it this way? Either way, I think they're all fucked in the head, in fact way beyond being fucked in the head.

What do YOU want for NZ? because the current/previous systems bring you escalating crime, massive overpopulation, societal divides, environmental devistation and turns people against each other for no real reason other than some smart cunt knows what button to push... not to mention it brings the obliteration of true innovation.

So when I say pooling resources. I mean the lot. Everything everyone living in NZ has. But it's unthinkable that someone else can have a share of what I currently have :facepalm:. That's the only thing stopping NZ. The politics of getting things done are just a pretty side-show for voters these days... and the flashing lights really aren't that bright any more.

Irony... Adults spending years teaching children the virtues of respect and sharing :killingme

Option 3 is filed, as best as I can tell, under Resource Based Economy.

James Deuce

29th April 2011, 06:40

One stark fact: after the 1984 election the $NZ fell 20% overnight on foreign markets when our financial position became clear. It bottomed at US$0.39.

I reckon the worst thing about that period was interest running at 18-23% which fostered a high risk, short-term investment mentality leading people to squander their life savings when the share market went *poof* overnight in '87. The interest rates stayed the same but people lost everything and were then stuck with rapidly increasing mortgage repayments.

trustme

29th April 2011, 07:42

That's the point and stop pointing the commy finger :) unless that's as far as your imagination is willing take you :bleh:. It has never been tried before (not in the current western context anyway)... Calling it a Resource Based Economy is about the only safe haven for labelling purposes. Communism/Socialism/Collectivism/GoFuckYourselfism it is not.

So far every economic strategy has failed. Every single one. This has been proven time and time again, a millenia or 2/3/4/5 of gradually getting worse... and it isn't getting any better is it? and it doesn't look like it ever get better using the current systems does it? It isn't just the last term, or 2 terms, or 3 terms etc... that's to blame, but in NZ, pretty much since the West took over NZ from the Maori. Oddly enough a peaceful people who have had their way of life shattered in the pursuit of land, power, resources and money. No more, no less.

Yet society persists with these systems because they work? or can't think of anything better? Or do some just like it this way? Either way, I think they're all fucked in the head, in fact way beyond being fucked in the head.

What do YOU want for NZ? because the current/previous systems bring you escalating crime, massive overpopulation, societal divides, environmental devistation and turns people against each other for no real reason other than some smart cunt knows what button to push... not to mention it brings the obliteration of true innovation.

So when I say pooling resources. I mean the lot. Everything everyone living in NZ has. But it's unthinkable that someone else can have a share of what I currently have :facepalm:. That's the only thing stopping NZ. The politics of getting things done are just a pretty side-show for voters these days... and the flashing lights really aren't that bright any more.

Irony... Adults spending years teaching children the virtues of respect and sharing :killingme

Option 3 is filed, as best as I can tell, under Resource Based Economy.

Lovely, utopia, lets all have a cocoa & a group hug. The real world is full of people all of whom have differing wants, needs & ambitions. The human race does not do sharing, never has, never will. We are what we are, we are not about to change, there will always be leaders & followers, people who acquire & those who don't, people who aquiesse to the common good & those who protect their own interests .
The brotherhood of the human race is a crock, the Maori were a peaceful people :blink::blink::blink:, let me canvas a few maoiori for their opinion,:shit::shit: or maybe a few of the slaves captured by raiding parties :facepalm::facepalm:
Cheap shot I guess, I think your proposal is nice but naive.

trustme

29th April 2011, 07:46

Berries

29th April 2011, 07:51

wife did not work
Me too. Want to swap ?

BoristheBiter

29th April 2011, 08:03

Option 3: Pool your cumulative resources so that everyone "wins" :) (i know, too hard box)

Option 4. stop welfare payments savings 2.4 billion.

trustme

29th April 2011, 08:16

I reckon the worst thing about that period was interest running at 18-23% which fostered a high risk, short-term investment mentality leading people to squander their life savings when the share market went *poof* overnight in '87. The interest rates stayed the same but people lost everything and were then stuck with rapidly increasing mortgage repayments.

If asked my opinion of the 2 worst things from that era

1/ The manner in which the SOE's were sold, the tax payer certainly did not get the true value of the assets sold. The Govt Printing Office was virtually given away. Telecom had invested big time to update, it was sold before the benefits of that investment came on stream, we funded the upgrade & the buyer profited, not us.Fay Richwhite did us no favours.
2/ Our manufacturing industry was decimated & remains a shell of what it once was. Our manufacturing was based around an extremely protected environment due to import licensing & other govt controls. Deregulation meant that manufacturers who had not invested in technology , who were not efficient found it impossible to compete in an open market & many are no longer around.When they went jobs went. Unfortunately nothing has replaced them we are far too dependant on the primary sector.
We need to invest in high tech low volume manufacturing that attracts a premium price, we need lots more of these guys
Alloy yachts, Scott Technology, Glidepath, Buckley Systems,. There are plenty more out there but nowhere near enough.

scott411

29th April 2011, 08:46

That's the point and stop pointing the commy finger :) unless that's as far as your imagination is willing take you :bleh:. It has never been tried before (not in the current western context anyway)... Calling it a Resource Based Economy is about the only safe haven for labelling purposes. Communism/Socialism/Collectivism/GoFuckYourselfism it is not.

So far every economic strategy has failed. Every single one. This has been proven time and time again, a millenia or 2/3/4/5 of gradually getting worse... and it isn't getting any better is it? and it doesn't look like it ever get better using the current systems does it? It isn't just the last term, or 2 terms, or 3 terms etc... that's to blame, but in NZ, pretty much since the West took over NZ from the Maori. Oddly enough a peaceful people who have had their way of life shattered in the pursuit of land, power, resources and money. No more, no less.

Yet society persists with these systems because they work? or can't think of anything better? Or do some just like it this way? Either way, I think they're all fucked in the head, in fact way beyond being fucked in the head.

What do YOU want for NZ? because the current/previous systems bring you escalating crime, massive overpopulation, societal divides, environmental devistation and turns people against each other for no real reason other than some smart cunt knows what button to push... not to mention it brings the obliteration of true innovation.

So when I say pooling resources. I mean the lot. Everything everyone living in NZ has. But it's unthinkable that someone else can have a share of what I currently have :facepalm:. That's the only thing stopping NZ. The politics of getting things done are just a pretty side-show for voters these days... and the flashing lights really aren't that bright any more.

Irony... Adults spending years teaching children the virtues of respect and sharing :killingme

Option 3 is filed, as best as I can tell, under Resource Based Economy.

has this ever worked anywhere before?? i think basic human greed would kill this, the way it has killed everything else, we the human race tend to think of ourselves way to much, and want shiny new things that our neighbour does not have

phill-k

29th April 2011, 09:08

NZ Post and Telegraph: took 6 weeks to get a new phone connection. Telecom - same day connect. Agree but that was the same the world over, the profits Telecom have exported overseas to their owners since have been way in excess of what was originally paid for it, advances in technology would have come to telecom regardless of who owned it. Today we face a bill of some $2billion dollars to upgrade our broadband, if we still owned Telecom it would be funded by them - fail

NZ Rail - people earning $20k paid tax so a track guy could earn $40k. Ditto for the coal mines, although they weren't sold. Sold off to Toll who ran it into the ground after stripping profit and assets from it, as a low populous country with many km's of roads to fund and support, subsidising the railways would have kept the need for the heavy truck fleet we now have who monopolise and damage our roads but who are subsidised by other users to maintain them - fail

One stark fact: after the 1984 election the $NZ fell 20% overnight on foreign markets when our financial position became clear. It bottomed at US$0.39.

Today NZ is regarded as a safe, stable economy and the exchange rate is US$0.80. agree thankfully we saw the light and got rid of the likes of Douglus, have a look at the on line polls about Brash, overwhelmingly he is not wanted but because we have MMP we will be stuck with him. His latest demand is that he be finance minister in the next government tail wagging and all that. On his tombstone will be I failed at politics not once not twice but three times, I hope Key if he is returned has the Balls to not allow that, in fact I would like Key to come out now and state just exactly what role he will give Brash in any new government, that will certainly influence my vote and I'd guess many others.

............

The Everlasting

29th April 2011, 09:11

For some reason I just cannot stand Don brash,he just pisses me off.

I prefer Rodney Hide,even though he didn't have the support anymore.

sinned

29th April 2011, 09:21

trustme

29th April 2011, 09:21

Phill. You have to remember we had exhausted our lines of credit we were on the verge of defaulting on our financial obligations.

If I was about to default on my mortgage , if my overdraft was maxxed out & I had no where left to go I would be selling my bike, my boat [ dont have one ] my bach [ sold to get rid of debt ] the wifes car. I would do what ever I had to to avoid the bank selling my house. The Lange govt were in that position, it would have been nice to keep the family silver but no one has every come up with a credible, sensible, viable alternative to what happened
We are probably in total agreement that they were undersold
Then we buy rail back & pay an absolute premium :shit::shit::shit:

oneofsix

29th April 2011, 09:30

trustme

29th April 2011, 10:07

By that logic then a builder would sell his tools and vehicle to pay his debts

Absolute garbage.
It will be the bank who sells the builders tools & vehicle when he defaults on his debts. That is the thing you have to avoid at all costs because you no longer control your destiny.

oneofsix

29th April 2011, 10:40

Absolute garbage.
It will be the bank who sells the builders tools & vehicle when he defaults on his debts. That is the thing you have to avoid at all costs because you no longer control your destiny.

Are you saying then that the builder wont sell his tools? If you can't make money then the bank will foreclose :yes: but you don't sell off that which is making you money. You sell your loss makers. Our pollies let the OCED and business round table etc lead them around by the nose hence why traitors like Faye and Ritchway do so will out of them.
Of course the other way the business similarly fails apart is that Govt. isn't business. Like the NZPO used to make a loss on postal but when separate it was turned in to a profit maker, now a lot of people take credit for fat trimming and redirection and ignore what was also lost was a training and apprenticeship system and an employment scheme (a hiden work for the dole if you like)

mashman

29th April 2011, 11:05

Lovely, utopia, lets all have a cocoa & a group hug. The real world is full of people all of whom have differing wants, needs & ambitions. The human race does not do sharing, never has, never will. We are what we are, we are not about to change, there will always be leaders & followers, people who acquire & those who don't, people who aquiesse to the common good & those who protect their own interests .
The brotherhood of the human race is a crock, the Maori were a peaceful people , let me canvas a few maoiori for their opinion, or maybe a few of the slaves captured by raiding parties
Cheap shot I guess, I think your proposal is nice but naive.

:rofl: I'd prefer a beer and an orgy :niceone:, and you're right to a point. But I think you're wrong about the human race.

The real world is full of people that haven't been offered a viable, yes viable, alternative. They have to make do within the confines of the current systems in place. I've lived in the real world for 40 years and for all of the posturing I have yet to see a party tackle any of the main issues. Issues that have been around since the day of man. So I can see why you, and others would say that man can't change, but I think you're wrong :bleh:. Change the systems and you'll have a drastically different place to live, love, work etc... and the human race does, and always has done sharing... importing and exporting etc... when there are disasters, people from around the globe flock to help. We share ideas constantly. Why would we do these things if the human race was not a brotherhood? You sell the human race short by a huge margin... It's a debate that will never happen whilst people decry the possibility and whilst people believe that others are only capable of being self serving. It's naive to think that human beings are incapable of change for the benefit of their country. After all, isn't that the basic tennet of Politics? For the benefit of the country?

Obviously the Maoiori didn't want to share and would defend with menances (who can blame them). The Maori did share and look at the state of the place. That says to me that the Maori weren't weak, but were inherently peaceful. But I don't know my history and my naivety knows no bounds.

Why do politicians fuck with the taxation system? What was Roger and his nomics trying to achieve? I'm sorry. Everything that I have said has been attempted using drastically outdated systems and we see what that has produced, yet refuse to think of a way of doing things to actually make things "better". The politicians aren't making ANYTHING "better".

has this ever worked anywhere before?? i think basic human greed would kill this, the way it has killed everything else, we the human race tend to think of ourselves way to much, and want shiny new things that our neighbour does not have

I'm sure it's still practiced by some rain forest dwelling civilisations, and it must be working as they've been living for millenia... but to my knowledge it hasn't been tried by a "civilised" western culture. We are inherently greedy, :killingme BULLSHIT. We're anything but. Yes we can be, but it's not our overriding characteristic.

If your community can grow enough food to feed the community, do you take more than you need, greed, knowing that it means that someone else is going to starve? Why?

Look there is no denying the FACTS that there are bigger issues in New Zealand than Hide living up to his name and Brash living up to his :). There are ways to solve pretty much 90% of those issues. But that's your choice. Would you rather have a more secure society, or allow the personal gain game destroy the country? You can educate your population either way :yes:... shame we do it the wrong way.

And before anyone tries to throw the real world at me again. The real world are trying to do EXACTLY the same thing, but they're using a set of systems that is doomed to fail and has been proven to fail. Do you want to change it or not? Your choice does not affect just you, but everyone... like it or not, that is a FACT.

oneofsix

29th April 2011, 11:19

:rofl: I'd prefer a beer and an orgy :niceone:, and you're right to a point. But I think you're wrong about the human race.
+1 :woohoo:

Obviously the Maoiori didn't want to share and would defend with menances (who can blame them). The Maori did share and look at the state of the place. That says to me that the Maori weren't weak, but were inherently peaceful. But I don't know my history and my naivety knows no bounds.
I thought this was more the other way round, the Maoiori bing peaceful and sharing and the Maori being the more aggressive invaders. But now rumour has it they are all one peoples, just different tribes.

Why do politicians fuck with the taxation system? What was Roger and his nomics trying to achieve? I'm sorry. Everything that I have said has been attempted using drastically outdated systems and we see what that has produced, yet refuse to think of a way of doing things to actually make things "better". The politicians aren't making ANYTHING "better".
He was trying to reinvent the trickle down system. I say reinvent because in basics it goes back to the old feudal system and this iswhat I think all pollies and power brokers are trying to enforce because it gives the best control over the population

The reason we are sold the "humans are basically greedy" line is because it supports the capitalist system. It is not true. Recently there was an experiment in Welly where they opened a free shop, people went in intending to take whatever they could but came out with just what they required, abit like the Hamiltonians paying for their goods at the PnS whilst the self checkout worked and even coming back and paying the next days when the store was meant to be open.

Okey Dokey

29th April 2011, 11:19

Never mind about NZ Rail and the phone system.

I regret the subsequent loss of the manufacturer Crown Lynn. Great stuff, that :yes:

Built to last, but couldn't compete on a "level" playing field with imported china. Sadly missed.

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 12:16

Don Brash is working his way towards a position where he can actually do something about the economy.

As the Governor of the Reserve Bank he was limited in what he could do, restricted to reacting to trends in the economy and making small adjustments to get things back into balance.

With the National Party he was encumbered by the inherent inertia of a large, well established organisation that will resist the kind of change that we're going to need.

In a National/ACT coalition where ACT holds far more seats than they have so far he'll have the necessary leverage to get things moving. Wouldn't surprise me if he went gunning for the Finance Ministers position in the coalition.

With Roger Douglas alongside him (already is as seen in how abruptly Rodney Hide has been rolled) and Banksy (skipping straight past the position he missed out on), Don Brash is about to take this country where we've never been before.

It's going to be quite a ride.

short-circuit

29th April 2011, 12:30

With Roger Douglas alongside him (already is as seen in how abruptly Rodney Hide has been rolled) and Banksy (skipping straight past the position he missed out on), Don Brash is about to take this country where we've never been before.

...yeah - to the cleaners

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 12:36

So far every economic strategy has failed. Every single one. This has been proven time and time again.....

ALL economic strategies fail. None of the strategies available to us now, including the strategies people can dream up, will last forever.

However, each different strategy we turn to will advance us toward a position where eventually we have it all.

What we're debating now is which branch in a path to take towards that eventual goal. People always make the mistake of arguing which ever economic/political strategy they subscribe to is the answer forever and a day, when in fact the strategic path they're arguing for is a stepping stone.

I don't think the human race as a whole is yet capable of seeing the final path to the goal. We'll get there, but for now all we can do is take step, see where it takes us and learn from that so we can take the next step forward.

Rogernomics, Communism, Resource Based Economy, Ultra Capitalism, Keynsianism, Marxism ....... they're all stepping stones on our way to the eventual goal.

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 12:38

...yeah - to the cleaners

Some would say we've been there already ...

mashman

29th April 2011, 13:12

ALL economic strategies fail. None of the strategies available to us now, including the strategies people can dream up, will last forever.

However, each different strategy we turn to will advance us toward a position where eventually we have it all.

What we're debating now is which branch in a path to take towards that eventual goal. People always make the mistake of arguing which ever economic/political strategy they subscribe to is the answer forever and a day, when in fact the strategic path they're arguing for is a stepping stone.

I don't think the human race as a whole is yet capable of seeing the final path to the goal. We'll get there, but for now all we can do is take step, see where it takes us and learn from that so we can take the next step forward.

Rogernomics, Communism, Resource Based Economy, Ultra Capitalism, Keynsianism, Marxism ....... they're all stepping stones on our way to the eventual goal.

I agree that it's an iterative process and that no "single" strategy is a catch all for setting us on the right path, but i'm yet to see one in the last 20 years that has done anything positive for a country as a whole. Have you? Baby steps or not, building on top of what we currently have is not the way forwards. It's an utterly utterly broken system of laws and financial mismanagement. Hence I'd rather Option 3, because the year 3 tinker achieves nothing and only a complete overhaul will "change" the way society views itself and it's possibilities.

I disagree at our readiness (we haven't asked them yet :)). I'm ready :). There's likely a few on KB that are ready too, perhaps others in the country :shit: :rofl:... We ALL watch and yearn for change year in and year out and see nothing but more failed tinkering from badly thought out and badly implemented policies. I guess it's all a matter of personal perspective, but i've yet to see anything actually change for the better, and not just for the few either :). :rofl:@ taking the steps... I understand that that's what it takes in the current "environment", don't get me wrong, I do see it, but I also see a much easier way of addressing societies issues :yes: without sacrificing the finances of the country too, after all we live on a global market... we could do things a damn site better :yes: a damn site better.

Of that stepping stone list you produced, the Resource Based Economy is the only one that doesn't require a financial system :). Therefore no budget constraints, ideas for ideas sakes validated on their merit and not how much it's gonna cost. You have to admit, financial cost is the killer.

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 13:40

I agree that it's an iterative process and that no "single" strategy is a catch all for setting us on the right path, but i'm yet to see one in the last 20 years that has done anything positive for a country as a whole. Have you?

When my parents were children they lived in houses that used coal ranges for cooking. They literally heated water up which got poured into a tub so they could take a bath. I'm not exaggerating either, I've seen both of the houses with my own eyes.

How many houses these days still have coal ranges and coppers?? Children don't get pulled out of school to go and find a job so that their family can eat either. At least, not in this country. These days starving children are almost entirely due to their parents.

I call that progress. How come you don't??

I disagree at our readiness (we haven't asked them yet :)). I'm ready :). There's likely a few on KB that are ready too, perhaps others in the country :shit: :rofl:...

Unfortunately, you and the others that are ready don't constitute the entire human race. When humans eventually attain a state where everyone has everything they want or need it won't be while we're fractured into different nations, races or believes.

Do you truly think you're at that level??

Of that stepping stone list you produced...

It's just a list of various theories, an incomplete one at that. It's not in anyway stepping stones to be taken in a certain order etc. I'm sure that's not how you took it but it reads that way. Sorry if I'm mistaken.

Jantar

29th April 2011, 14:04

...yeah - to the cleaners
About time too. Someone needs to clean up the mess left by the Liarbore government.

mashman

29th April 2011, 15:20

When my parents were children they lived in houses that used coal ranges for cooking. They literally heated water up which got poured into a tub so they could take a bath. I'm not exaggerating either, I've seen both of the houses with my own eyes.

How many houses these days still have coal ranges and coppers?? Children don't get pulled out of school to go and find a job so that their family can eat either. At least, not in this country. These days starving children are almost entirely due to their parents.

I call that progress. How come you don't??

Heh, i've lived in a caravan without electricity or gas or a bath or a functioning cooker in my time, although it did come with in cupboard mice :). I've also lived in "problem" areas and scrounged down the back of the couch for nappy and food money... in context, some people don't have baths at all and use the local rivers for everything water related, some don't have cookers either... have a little look at the TV, you may see it every now and then :bleh: and that is present day, not 30 years ago (:shifty:) But yes, back in NZ...

:shit: starving due to their parents... true to a certain extent, but that's mainly down to what can be afforded through the chosen lifestyle... of which, in the current environment, there are very few choices, some legal, some not so (but pay better). And some children leave school themselves and become "earners" in their own right, some have children to earn money, some break and enter, some go a mugging etc... we've replaced one shite system with another and have called it progress, and they are all based on amassing enough money to survive.

So no, I don't really look at it as political progress. More technology led progress.

Unfortunately, you and the others that are ready don't constitute the entire human race. When humans eventually attain a state where everyone has everything they want or need it won't be while we're fractured into different nations, races or believes.

Do you truly think you're at that level??

Someone has to be first. If it works, do you not think the entire human race would follow? I'd say they're not ready because they're not fully aware of the alternative and it's glaring upsides. I've always been ready, but until I worked it out through myself, I never thought it truly feasible either... the last 2 - 3 years have really hammered it home, to a point where I am happy to be seen as nothing more than just another faceless human being and to do what's necessary to support the lives and the environment around me (after all, that's what I am currently, but I could do without the financial pressure encroaching on my family time). And i'm not a fuckin hippy :rofl:, just a realist in an unrealistic world. My personal wants have waned... sure I still want want want, but won't do what it takes to get get get, the cost in my case being time with my family... i'd also be more than happy with less, if it meant society was a little safer and much more cooperative... trust is key I suppose, and where money is a factor ......... :facepalm:

So yes, i truly feel that i'm at that level (give or take), and i'm 100% sure that i'm not alone in that respect... there will be, at least, one other somewhere, heh. I also reckon (ass hat guess) that most of NZ is at that level too... they just need to be engaged on the subject :killingme... now there's an easy challenge for the pollies (that is their job isn't it?)

It's just a list of various theories, an incomplete one at that. It's not in anyway stepping stones to be taken in a certain order etc. I'm sure that's not how you took it but it reads that way. Sorry if I'm mistaken.

Yeah I understood what you meant. Yet I see them as a string of catastrophic strategy failures (in no particular order) that have led us to the point we are at today. And given we've made huge strides forwards in terms of technology and understanding the world around us, socially we've taken giant strides backwards because of those theories.

BoristheBiter

29th April 2011, 15:53

Heh, i've lived in a caravan without electricity or gas or a bath or a functioning cooker in my time, although it did come with in cupboard mice :). I've also lived in................................socially we've taken giant strides backwards because of those theories.

I would love to be able to look though those rose colored glasses you have on.

All I see is people wanting what I have worked hard for and expect to do nothing for it or someone saying i should share it around.

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 16:06

Heh, i've lived in a caravan without electricity or gas or a bath or a functioning cooker in my time, although it did come with in cupboard mice :). I've also lived in "problem" areas and scrounged down the back of the couch for nappy and food money... in context, some people don't have baths at all and use the local rivers for everything water related, some don't have cookers either... have a little look at the TV, you may see it every now and then :bleh: and that is present day, not 30 years ago (:shifty:) But yes, back in NZ...

Other countries are getting there. Different countries advance at different rates, but they are all moving away from subsistence living etc. Not at a rate that would please the vast majority of people, but it is happening.

... we've replaced one shite system with another and have called it progress, and they are all based on amassing enough money to survive.

So no, I don't really look at it as political progress. More technology led progress.

It's an advancement over Tribalism, Cannibalism, Feudalism, Slavery ..... might be shite, but it's getting better. These days a much higher percentage of the population live above the poverty live than ever before.

That's progress whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

Someone has to be first. If it works, do you not think the entire human race would follow?

Thing is, there's no getting there first. Waiting to take that finally step, maybe, but nobody is actually there (as in at the goal) yet. The entire human race won't follow, it'll advance all at once.

I'd say they're not ready .......... (chopped for brevity) ...... now there's an easy challenge for the pollies (that is their job isn't it?)

I'd say you're probably ahead of most, but not standing on the final step. Probably a couple of generations (Economics wise) ahead of your time. Chances are you won't be alive to see the day that you're waiting for arrive. You definitely won't be around to see the day it fails and we move on to the next step after that.

Yeah I understood what you meant. Yet I see them as a string of catastrophic strategy failures (in no particular order) that have led us to the point we are at today. And given we've made huge strides forwards in terms of technology and understanding the world around us, socially we've taken giant strides backwards because of those theories.

My point still stands. All current and near future (well the next thousand years or so I guess) economic theories can and will fail. We have to go from one to another, seeing each through until they fail, progressing one step at a time. Taking a giant leap from where we are now to economic and social nirvana isn't possible. As a whole, the human race can't do that.

(might have to up the word limit on posts soon ......)

mashman

29th April 2011, 17:23

Other countries are getting there. Different countries advance at different rates, but they are all moving away from subsistence living etc. Not at a rate that would please the vast majority of people, but it is happening.

It's an advancement over Tribalism, Cannibalism, Feudalism, Slavery ..... might be shite, but it's getting better. These days a much higher percentage of the population live above the poverty live than ever before.

That's progress whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.

That is a fair point, but it's only (yes i'm dissapointed :)) progress in so much as others are being afforded the same rights as those that have already had those rights for countless decades/millenia before them... you forgot about the vote for women, sexist pig :shifty:...

Thing is, there's no getting there first. Waiting to take that finally step, maybe, but nobody is actually there (as in at the goal) yet. The entire human race won't follow, it'll advance all at once.

I disagree... We make laws based on the success of laws in other countries irrespective of the known social consequences :yes:... we've taken cultures from other countries and employed them across the globe (the french don't like that) etc... The US and USSR where the first in space and other countries have come on line in that respect too... someone has to be first or it'll never happen... even more so when it comes to economic policy... I doubt a global disaster (let alone the one we're currently experiencing :)) will change the way our economy works. Primarily as the mass deaths will create openings in the job market for when things get back to "normal". Brutal as it sounds, "they" only see us as resources, and we are replaceable. Someone will have to go first. And it is doable even in this economy. Tis just logistics, knowledge and mental state :blink:.

I'd say you're probably ahead of most, but not standing on the final step. Probably a couple of generations (Economics wise) ahead of your time. Chances are you won't be alive to see the day that you're waiting for arrive. You definitely won't be around to see the day it fails and we move on to the next step after that.

From an understanding point of view maybe, but that's only because very few have worked it out for themselves... heh with my eating habits, every extra day is a pleasant surprise :). I might be around if it all comes to an end in 2012 :killingme, but that is still an awful long way away :).

My point still stands. All current and near future (well the next thousand years or so I guess) economic theories can and will fail. We have to go from one to another, seeing each through until they fail, progressing one step at a time. Taking a giant leap from where we are now to economic and social nirvana isn't possible. As a whole, the human race can't do that.

It does and I agree given our current progress and strategy. If the strategy dictates the rate of progress, then change the strategy to one that changes almost everything over night. What seems impossible is completely achievable and in under a generation :yes: After all, if you can think it, it's possible. No need to baby step, very few things would change in the short term (money would be completely virtual for global market purposes). Hence I think that the giant leap is completely possible, and I believe it could be accomplished and implemented within approx 2 years of sitting down to plan it. After all, if it takes to 2 years before you switch it on, how many people in the country won't know its coming? The rest of the world would come on board within 5 years and all in under a single generation. I can see it, I just can't affect it :killingme... HAIL ME waaaaaaaa hahahahahahahaaaaaaaa

(might have to up the word limit on posts soon ......)

Don't dooooo eeeeeet...

mashman

29th April 2011, 17:35

I would love to be able to look though those rose colored glasses you have on.

All I see is people wanting what I have worked hard for and expect to do nothing for it or someone saying i should share it around.

Try using that imagination thing, it's really quite a remarkable gismo... whenever it finds a problem, it generally finds a solution too :)... and if I can grasp the concept, fumb duck that I am, what's wrong with the rest of ya :bleh:

:rofl:... me me me :shifty:... the troll is strong with this one... you're paranoid.

Pussy

29th April 2011, 18:11

Pfffft!

Let them eat cake.

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 18:18

I disagree... We make laws based on the success of laws in other countries irrespective of the known social consequences :yes:... we've taken cultures from other countries and employed them across the globe (the french don't like that) etc... The US and USSR where the first in space and other countries have come on line in that respect too... someone has to be first or it'll never happen... even more so when it comes to economic policy... I doubt a global disaster (let alone the one we're currently experiencing :)) will change the way our economy works. Primarily as the mass deaths will create openings in the job market for when things get back to "normal". Brutal as it sounds, "they" only see us as resources, and we are replaceable. Someone will have to go first. And it is doable even in this economy. Tis just logistics, knowledge and mental state :blink:.

What I think of as the end point is only possible if everyone gets there together. It's possible to reach the last step first, but then you have to sit around and wait for everyone else to catch up. When, finally, everyone has then the entire race moves forward.

Of course, if we end up with different strains of Human then each ends up taking their own path. But each group takes the last step collectively, ie not all of the groups recombine. A bit esoteric but ....

Basically for me, what you think of as Nirvana (if I can call it that, what do you call it??) is one of the steps, not the goal.

... heh with my eating habits, every extra day is a pleasant surprise :). I might be around if it all comes to an end in 2012 :killingme, but that is still an awful long way away :).

You and me both.

It does and I agree given our current progress and strategy. If the strategy dictates the rate of progress, then change the strategy to one that changes almost everything over night. What seems impossible is completely achievable and in under a generation :yes: After all, if you can think it, it's possible. No need to baby step, very few things would change in the short term (money would be completely virtual for global market purposes). Hence I think that the giant leap is completely possible, and I believe it could be accomplished and implemented within approx 2 years of sitting down to plan it. After all, if it takes to 2 years before you switch it on, how many people in the country won't know its coming? The rest of the world would come on board within 5 years and all in under a single generation. I can see it, I just can't affect it :killingme... HAIL ME waaaaaaaa hahahahahahahaaaaaaaa

One thing that we learn from history is that large scale change is usually catastrophic, if not right away then later on. Maybe not for those instigating and implementing the change (think British/French/Dutch etc Colonies), but almost definitely for others caught up in those changes.

Communism didn't work, neither did Fascism and few others. They were big changes where power is centralized and everybody is equal. Mainly because people don't want to be equal and when you centralize power it just makes it easier for a small group to manipulate everything. So taking a big leap away from what we have now to what you see as the end point won't work. Until the term power is no longer relevant it has to be baby steps.

People don't react well to change either. Change means that things people are comfortable with are no longer the things they're comfortable with, they're something else.

oneofsix

29th April 2011, 18:36

Mainly because people don't want to be equal and when you centralize power it just makes it easier for a small group to manipulate everything.

<snip>

People don't react well to change either. Change means that things people are comfortable with are no longer the things they're comfortable with, they're something else.

people want to be equal, they don't want to be the same. Everyone wants to feel there is something special about them that sets them apart but that doesn't mean they are not equal it means not the same, not a clone or a number.

People will change if they can see the +ve in it but because we all value different things change is difficult. Crisis often drives change, the climate change could cause a big change in society as it has in the past.

Smifffy

29th April 2011, 18:42

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 18:43

people want to be equal, they don't want to be the same. Everyone wants to feel there is something special about them that sets them apart but that doesn't mean they are not equal it means not the same, not a clone or a number.

Indeed. Loose use of the word equal by me.

People will change if they can see the +ve in it but because we all value different things change is difficult. Crisis often drives change, the climate change could cause a big change in society as it has in the past.

People will change if they get to keep what they've got and gain something else. They may only have history, eg this is where my fathers fathers father blah blah, but they won't give that up. Otherwise there'd be nobody left in some countries.

oneofsix

29th April 2011, 19:13

Indeed. Loose use of the word equal by me.

People will change if they get to keep what they've got and gain something else. They may only have history, eg this is where my fathers fathers father blah blah, but they won't give that up. Otherwise there'd be nobody left in some countries.

that last sentence could describe NZ if ACT get any power :shutup:
People will give stuff up for something worth while otherwise why do they migrate. NZ's come from ancestors that were willing to risk all otherwise we wouldn't be here being as we are an immigrant nation.
That fathers fathers fathers thing causes heaps of issues especial as it tends to take on a myth quality and what the great great grandchild believes often doesn't reflect the truth or if they go back another father or two the whole story changes.

Ocean1

29th April 2011, 19:18

I call that progress. How come you don't??

Your parents? I grew up with those things, I remember the night cart doing his twice weekly rounds with a huge Clydsdale. And I'm not that old.

However, Mashmate might be younger. And you really have to have experienced the difference, otherwise it's just fairy stories, not real.

We don't know how lucky we are, mate. Not unless you can remember fetching water from the well on the way back from digging the spuds for tea...

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 19:35

that last sentence could describe NZ if ACT get any power :shutup:
People will give stuff up for something worth while otherwise why do they migrate. NZ's come from ancestors that were willing to risk all otherwise we wouldn't be here being as we are an immigrant nation.

For those that have chosen to emigrate the gains outweigh the loses, no argument there.

That fathers fathers fathers thing causes heaps of issues especial as it tends to take on a myth quality and what the great great grandchild believes often doesn't reflect the truth or if they go back another father or two the whole story changes.

For sure.

Your parents? I grew up with those things, I remember the night cart doing his twice weekly rounds with a huge Clydsdale. And I'm not that old.

However, Mashmate might be younger. And you really have to have experienced the difference, otherwise it's just fairy stories, not real.

We don't know how lucky we are, mate. Not unless you can remember fetching water from the well on the way back from digging the spuds for tea...

I'm extremely grateful I don't have to experience those things. Those tv shows where people go back in time to the 1900's to experience how their grand parents lived are pure insanity. The people that take part in those things need to be kicked in the nuts until they say they've learnt their lesson, then kicked somemore until the kicker believes them.

Ocean1

29th April 2011, 20:38

I'm extremely grateful I don't have to experience those things.

There's a certain nostalgia attached to the time, born more of its inherent honesty than the physical demands. Not sure how, but both rich and poor managed to exist without the concept of discretionary income, perhaps there was no recreational time in which to spend it. Life was fairer, I think. Whether or no, the fact remains your deserts were far more a function of your efforts than at any time since.

mashman

29th April 2011, 20:49

What I think of as the end point is only possible if everyone gets there together. It's possible to reach the last step first, but then you have to sit around and wait for everyone else to catch up. When, finally, everyone has then the entire race moves forward.

Of course, if we end up with different strains of Human then each ends up taking their own path. But each group takes the last step collectively, ie not all of the groups recombine. A bit esoteric but ....

Basically for me, what you think of as Nirvana (if I can call it that, what do you call it??) is one of the steps, not the goal.

Gotcha... I agree, apart from getting there together. I think whoever moves forwards first must do so with just about every man woman and child under no illusion that it could all go pear shaped, but are willing to take the risk. Hence I reckon it'll have to happen with with the blessing of a country full of people... it will need to be tested with the world watching... it ain't like you'd be able to keep it a secret as TPTB of every nation would need to be involved from the start. I think you'd find the catch up wouldn't take long at all... providing there's no resistance. Something i'm very skeptical about, but hopefully something that "they" wouldn't deny and wouldn't fight.

Different strains of human? that sounds interesting... do tell :yes:...

I'd like to think of it as... "Life Jim, but not as we know it" :)... I've no problem with what people will call it... likely they'll all have their own term and will label it how their "collective" decide to label it. Valhalla always sounded like a cool name though :).

You and me both.

Oh to go out with a bang and not a whimper :).

One thing that we learn from history is that large scale change is usually catastrophic, if not right away then later on. Maybe not for those instigating and implementing the change (think British/French/Dutch etc Colonies), but almost definitely for others caught up in those changes.

Communism didn't work, neither did Fascism and few others. They were big changes where power is centralized and everybody is equal. Mainly because people don't want to be equal and when you centralize power it just makes it easier for a small group to manipulate everything. So taking a big leap away from what we have now to what you see as the end point won't work. Until the term power is no longer relevant it has to be baby steps.

People don't react well to change either. Change means that things people are comfortable with are no longer the things they're comfortable with, they're something else.

True mate. But that's, as you say, small groups making the decision. What we're talking about has to be accepted by everyone in the country, and to a certain extent the world, well the world leaders at least. It should be our business how our country runs, in the context of "Life Jim". To that end I doubt there'd be that many problems.

As you say, we're not all born equal and that should be celebrated, not derided. Tis one of the things that really irks me about the way we live today. Snotty nosed twats looking down on people, and vice versa (yes I am guilty of those things too, although I truly wish I wasn't). What a waste :facepalm: I'm fed up with baby steps, it's insulting to the human race when I know how much more capable we are. Fuck there's some really smart people out there. Pooling those skills for "us" and not the money whores can only be a good thing?

Heh, fear of the unknown eh. I put no stock in it. I feel fear, but it's not what I don't know that scares me. I think people are inherently the same. It's what we know that scares us... and by default allows us to allay our fears. It's disgusting that it's used to keep the status Quo... the money market being the thing that lets countries rise or fall. As i mentioned above, the change would be very well publicised and pretty much everyone needs to buy into it. Would that make you more comfortable with the change?

BoristheBiter

29th April 2011, 21:06

Try using that imagination thing, it's really quite a remarkable gismo... whenever it finds a problem, it generally finds a solution too :)... and if I can grasp the concept, fumb duck that I am, what's wrong with the rest of ya :bleh:

:rofl:... me me me :shifty:... the troll is strong with this one... you're paranoid.

I must be having a bad day as that just makes no sense what so ever.

I think it just comes down to you have much more faith in the human race than i do.

If i think me me me whats wrong with that? will you pay for all my bills? i don't think so and i don't expect you to. i expect to go to work, do a days work, get paid for it and come home and enjoy the things i have worked hard for. If my family and friends need a hand with something i am more than happy to help out if i am able to but i will not give anything, not even a thought, to someone that thinks they are entitled to sit on there arse all day and expect us to dish out money.

And there is no trolling necessary in this thread.

Winston001

29th April 2011, 21:07

Whether or no, the fact remains your deserts were far more a function of your efforts than at any time since.

That's a nice line. Succinct. Mind if I steal it for future use?

mashman

29th April 2011, 21:08

You're parents? I grew up with those things, I remember the night cart doing his twice weekly rounds with a huge Clydsdale. And I'm not that old.

However, Mashmate might be younger. And you really have to have experienced the difference, otherwise it's just fairy stories, not real.

We don't know how lucky we are, mate. Not unless you can remember fetching water from the well on the way back from digging the spuds for tea...

:rofl: @ Mashmate... can I keep it :)

Yes I have lived in a coal fired house. The Raeburn heated the water for the radiators and the bath. I learned to treat it with respect... as I was the first back in the evening, if i didn't get the fucker revved it was a bollocking from the rest of the household for lack of hot water, warm house etc.... I also found that if you leave the dampner open and pass out after a weekend long acid fuelled bender, that the hot water tank overflows into your sisters bedroom and melts her records together, and that being rudely awakened by a SCREAMING concerened step mother really doesn't make her a bitch. Also, don't open the door when someone else has left the dampner open, it tends to engulf you in flames in a WER moment...

I've learned a billion and one other things along the way. Including, but not limited to, wood doesn't chop itself and axes don't always chop your toes off when you miss the chopping block... but getting the stitches makes you wish you'd lost the toes :shutup:.

I enjoyed country living. I do know how lucky I am... but have taken way too much for granted learning my lessons. True though, first hand experience is a great educator.

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 21:22

Different strains of human? that sounds interesting... do tell :yes:...

I'd like to think of it as... "Life Jim, but not as we know it" :)... I've no problem with what people will call it... likely they'll all have their own term and will label it how their "collective" decide to label it. Valhalla always sounded like a cool name though :).

When we finally get off this planet and interplanetary (or interstellar) travel is common place people born and raised their entire lives off planet will evolve along a totally different path to those that live at the bottom of a gravity well. In very low or zero gravity muscle mass is no longer needed. Large bones are no longer needed to support muscle. Weight is a hindrance and costs fuel. Joints such as elbows and knees are easily damaged etc. Imagine a race of extremely skinny people with arms and legs that look more like tentacles.

There are plenty of interesting things happening inside my head, not just economics :D

Oh to go out with a bang and not a whimper :).

I hope to be banging away when my time cums hahaha

Heh, fear of the unknown eh. I put no stock in it. I feel fear, but it's not what I don't know that scares me. I think people are inherently the same. It's what we know that scares us... and by default allows us to allay our fears. It's disgusting that it's used to keep the status Quo... the money market being the thing that lets countries rise or fall. As i mentioned above, the change would be very well publicised and pretty much everyone needs to buy into it. Would that make you more comfortable with the change?

It's not so much fear of the unknown, more the fear of losing what they have. When people are uncomfortable or scared, they turn to the things they know and derive safety and comfort from. Big changes such as those you think are needed means that everyone has to give up their blanky or night light etc.

mashman

29th April 2011, 21:26

I must be having a bad day as that just makes no sense what so ever.

I think it just comes down to you have much more faith in the human race than i do.

If i think me me me whats wrong with that? will you pay for all my bills? i don't think so and i don't expect you to. i expect to go to work, do a days work, get paid for it and come home and enjoy the things i have worked hard for. If my family and friends need a hand with something i am more than happy to help out if i am able to but i will not give anything, not even a thought, to someone that thinks they are entitled to sit on there arse all day and expect us to dish out money.

And there is no trolling necessary in this thread.

I rarely do make sense and that ain't your problem :). What I meant was, in response to your rose tinted specs comment, that you already have the rose tinted specs. It's up to you wether you choose to use them (and potentially torture yourself for having looked) or not, and up to you how long you decide to keep them on each day.

Possibly, but I understand why you wouldn't.

The idea is that we shouldn't have any bills to pay. As for the rest I'm pretty much with ya there.

Ocean1

29th April 2011, 21:29

That's a nice line. Succinct. Mind if I steal it for future use?

It fell off the back of that cart, somewhere on West Plains Rd. Help yourself.

Winston001

29th April 2011, 21:30

When we finally get off this planet and interplanetary (or interstellar) travel is common place people born and raised their entire lives off planet will evolve along a totally different path....

Whaddya mean "finally"? Where are you posting from? Course, things are a bit heavy around Betelgeuse at the mo so maybe our photons have slowed to you. Going out for a cruise Galactic North. Rock on. :woohoo:

Winston001

29th April 2011, 21:33

It fell off the back of that cart, somewhere on West Plains Rd. Help yourself.

Oooohhhh nearly choked with laughter on that. Was out that way today. Bling.

Ocean1

29th April 2011, 21:37

It's not so much fear of the unknown, more the fear of losing what they have.

Is true, people work harder to avoid losing something than they do for the possibility of gaining something. Any casino manager will tell you people take more risks with house money, the deeper into their own reserves they get the more conservative they behave.

mashman

29th April 2011, 21:40

When we finally get off this planet and interplanetary (or interstellar) travel is common place people born and raised their entire lives off planet will evolve along a totally different path to those that live at the bottom of a gravity well. In very low or zero gravity muscle mass is no longer needed. Large bones are no longer needed to support muscle. Weight is a hindrance and costs fuel. Joints such as elbows and knees are easily damaged etc. Imagine a race of extremely skinny people with arms and legs that look more like tentacles.

There are plenty of interesting things happening inside my head, not just economics

hell yeah. I just hope when I'm shaking the tentacle as a greeting it isn't a reproductive organ... evil aliens :)

Doesn't everyone :blink:

I hope to be banging away when my time cums hahaha

heh, don't you mean when your end cums :)

It's not so much fear of the unknown, more the fear of losing what they have. When people are uncomfortable or scared, they turn to the things they know and derive safety and comfort from. Big changes such as those you think are needed means that everyone has to give up their blanky or night light etc.

True. But by the time those changes are about to come into force, I would imagine that they would have gotten over the fear of losing everything, let alone anything.

oh and whilst yer extending the character limit, can you add a link to grow the reply to thread box to double its height :).

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 21:45

hell yeah. I just hope when I'm shaking the tentacle as a greeting it isn't a reproductive organ... evil aliens :)

I just hope they don't evolve so that bodily gasses double as direction thrusters :facepalm:

oh and whilst yer extending the character limit, can you add a link to grow the reply to thread box to double its height :).

Use Chrome or find the addon for Firefox.

mashman

29th April 2011, 21:58

I just hope they don't evolve so that bodily gasses double as direction thrusters :facepalm:

Burping and farting at the same time could make for an interesting experience... your rotation would let you know which one was more powerful though :blink:

Use Chrome or find the addon for Firefox.

lazy cnut :innocent:

Mental Trousers

29th April 2011, 22:34

True mate. But that's, as you say, small groups making the decision. What we're talking about has to be accepted by everyone in the country, and to a certain extent the world, well the world leaders at least. It should be our business how our country runs, in the context of "Life Jim". To that end I doubt there'd be that many problems.

As you say, we're not all born equal and that should be celebrated, not derided. Tis one of the things that really irks me about the way we live today. Snotty nosed twats looking down on people, and vice versa (yes I am guilty of those things too, although I truly wish I wasn't). What a waste :facepalm: I'm fed up with baby steps, it's insulting to the human race when I know how much more capable we are. Fuck there's some really smart people out there. Pooling those skills for "us" and not the money whores can only be a good thing?

The problem with getting to the point you're aiming for is a number of instincts and behaviours have to be breed out of the Human race in order to get there. For instance, focusing on the herd and less reliance on the self and the family is needed. Far more altruistic personality types are required. A lot more trust in others as well. Other changes too.

Our instincts are the reason we won't get to the point you think we should be at for a long, long time.

mashman

29th April 2011, 23:49

The problem with getting to the point you're aiming for is a number of instincts and behaviours have to be breed out of the Human race in order to get there. For instance, focusing on the herd and less reliance on the self and the family is needed. Far more altruistic personality types are required. A lot more trust in others as well. Other changes too.

Our instincts are the reason we won't get to the point you think we should be at for a long, long time.

The problem is that noone of any influence will be brave enough to champion the idea, potentially through fear of derision (i know that one inside out :rofl: and i'd rather it isn't bred out, it has its use :yes:). How do you mean breed out? Educated out? Coz education is key. But i'd argue that focussing on the herd would be the wrong thing to do and I would hope that the focus of people would be on self, family and friends. Otherwise we may as well just stay as paid drones :yes:. +1 on the Trust issue, coz that's what impedes the altruistic side of our nature init? Removing the financial system would go a long way to removing the trust issues I would say?

Poppycock :rofl:... I wouldn't say this was an instinct type situation. Primarily as you'd get to think it for a few years and adjust before the change comes into effect. It's not just thrown upon you and you have to live with it, like legislation that's passed under urgency to open up NZ to the "outsiders" because that's all they can think of to generate revenue type thing. But yeah, the initial "switch off" instinct (that we're so adept at) when you first here, "hey we could live so much more cleverer", is gonna be hard to break. Hence the need for a person of "influence" to raise the issue. Get people talking about it, discussing the pros and cons etc... a televised Jacques Fresco v John Key debate on the merits of Resource Based Economy v Capitalism would be an interesting watch :yes:

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 08:48

Get people talking about it, discussing the pros and cons etc... a televised Jacques Fresco v John Key debate on the merits of Resource Based Economy v Capitalism would be an interesting watch :yes:

I see where you are coming from but it will take a massive shift in the mindset needed for this change in thinking.
It will take most of the good ideas out of most form of structure (tribalism, feudalism etc) without brining the bad along as well and the only way i can see this happening is if there is a massive world wide event (well it is nearly 2012) but even then it will resort to survival of the fittest.

There is such a massive gap in the state of enlightenment between the peoples of this earth that I could never really imagine this happening.

At the end of the day we are just animals the have used the use of tools to make sure our genepool stays strongest.

Mental Trousers

30th April 2011, 09:57

The problem is that noone of any influence will be brave enough to champion the idea, potentially through fear of derision (i know that one inside out :rofl: and i'd rather it isn't bred out, it has its use :yes:).

You seriously underestimate what it takes to move an entire society to make the sort of changes you're talking of. While I think the system you're aiming for is achievable (one day) I think you're permanently looking through those rose coloured glasses as to how to achieve it. I'm sure it'll happen, but that's a hell of a long way off in our distant future.

How do you mean breed out? Educated out? Coz education is key. But i'd argue that focussing on the herd would be the wrong thing to do and I would hope that the focus of people would be on self, family and friends. Otherwise we may as well just stay as paid drones :yes:. +1 on the Trust issue, coz that's what impedes the altruistic side of our nature init? Removing the financial system would go a long way to removing the trust issues I would say?

Poppycock :rofl:... I wouldn't say this was an instinct type situation. Primarily as you'd get to think it for a few years and adjust before the change comes into effect. It's not just thrown upon you and you have to live with it, like legislation that's passed under urgency to open up NZ to the "outsiders" because that's all they can think of to generate revenue type thing. But yeah, the initial "switch off" instinct (that we're so adept at) when you first here, "hey we could live so much more cleverer", is gonna be hard to break. Hence the need for a person of "influence" to raise the issue. Get people talking about it, discussing the pros and cons etc... a televised Jacques Fresco v John Key debate on the merits of Resource Based Economy v Capitalism would be an interesting watch :yes:

Bred as in evolution. We are the way we are because instincts for family, self preservation and accumulation were necessary for survival. We haven't evolved past those yet and we have to if the system you're thinking of is to have any chance to work. You can't change thousands of years of evolving in a few years of listening to a couple of people talking about things. If it was that easy our society would be a hell of a lot different than it is now.

mashman

30th April 2011, 12:02

I see where you are coming from but it will take a massive shift in the mindset needed for this change in thinking.
It will take most of the good ideas out of most form of structure (tribalism, feudalism etc) without brining the bad along as well and the only way i can see this happening is if there is a massive world wide event (well it is nearly 2012) but even then it will resort to survival of the fittest.

There is such a massive gap in the state of enlightenment between the peoples of this earth that I could never really imagine this happening.

At the end of the day we are just animals the have used the use of tools to make sure our genepool stays strongest.

What's so difficult about changing your mindset? You want to or you don't. Decision made. Isn't that how it works?
I wouldn't take any of the best bits from any structure. I'd encourage the decision makers to design the new "system" from the bottom up and mitigating as you hit problems. Wether there are similarities to older systems or not should only be by coincidence, not design.
I think we'd go back to the same system. After all, those in "power" have bunkers to survive in and when they come out of those bunkers they will go back to business as usual. To that end also, i'd rather society was already prepared for a disaster, and not reacting to it the way we do. The Chch situation, it's politics and beaurocracy, galls me to the core. We should already be building by now (we can build or we can't, what are they waiting for... oh yeah, figuring out how to best spend the money :facepalm:). Chch should be rebuilt within 5 years, houses first (tinted specs or not).

:rofl:, no there isn't. The state of enlightenment is just a statement or two away imho, you get it, or don't. After all, the people follow the lead as sheep in the current system, why wouldn't the same stand for the implementation of a different system? Isn't that how it's always happened?

:rofl: no we're not. The genepool thing is a misnomer to a certain degree imho. You could be an exceptional person up to the age of 18, gene tweaking your population to the extent that Hitler would be proud, then fall off your bike and be brain damaged for the rest of your natural. Yer genes aren't gonna help you then. Pointless.

mashman

30th April 2011, 12:16

You seriously underestimate what it takes to move an entire society to make the sort of changes you're talking of. While I think the system you're aiming for is achievable (one day) I think you're permanently looking through those rose coloured glasses as to how to achieve it. I'm sure it'll happen, but that's a hell of a long way off in our distant future.

Bred as in evolution. We are the way we are because instincts for family, self preservation and accumulation were necessary for survival. We haven't evolved past those yet and we have to if the system you're thinking of is to have any chance to work. You can't change thousands of years of evolving in a few years of listening to a couple of people talking about things. If it was that easy our society would be a hell of a lot different than it is now.

By the sounds of it you're overstimating how hard it will be. As mentioned to BTB above, probably 99% of us are sheep wether we like it ot not. If those in power decided that they were going to switch to a Resource Based Economy within 2 years, what would the sheeple do about it? Nothing, we'd accept the wisdom and just take it (look at the shit we're taking now:)). I use the term sheeple, not in a derogatory way, but essentially that's what we are when it comes to staying within the confines of the system. A group of people make the rules, we fit our lives around them and live as best we can. What has been so different under any of the other systems we've already tried?

Anyhoo, my rose tinted specs are nothing more than having my eyes open to the FACT that human beings, when armed with the knowledge, can achieve anything they choose to. We have proven this over and over and over again, just take a look around :yes:. Moving to a new system is just an exercise in logistics for those that are involved in it's design... which to be honest would be just about everyone in the country to a certain degree. I'd dedicate a Q+A style TV channel to it and have an FAQ site with forum where questions could be asked and answered.

It won't happen if we keep procrastinating. I hear you and BTB, Oh it's possible, but improbable at the moment :blink:. That does not compute (is it's possible, it's possible any time :yes:). What i'm "tabling" is not a new theory. It has been around for millenia. Yet we are still going in completely the opposite direction. Perhaps a natural disaster will cull the heard for us. But if TPTB survive that cull, it'll be business as usual when they come out from their bunkers. They ain't gonna come out with flowers in their hair and preaching a new way of life are they?

Tis only a matter of will and logistics :yes:... evolution is not playing a part here. Would living in such a new style of society really change you that much? Do you think you would have evolved "over night"? Or would you have just changed your mind and accepted what TPTB had decided?

2 years bang to boom.

We have to go from where we are today to where we want to go without fucking NZ over socially or financially. The timetable is 2 years what needs to be done? Pick holes all you like, it's just the rose tinted specs talking.

1. Talk to the country in terms of what we're going for. (someone may alert us to what we've missed)
2. Let the world leaders know what we're gonna do.
2. Create a department to look after trading (that includes financial affairs... for now :)).
3. Identify and Quantify critical areas, Food, Water, Power, Transport, Sewerage, Waste Disposal, Emergency Services, Medical Research (probably others, but not that many more?).
4. Identify key jobs for critical areas.
5. Design a new Education system to cater for the key jobs for critical and whatever anyone fancies doing (potentially all on the job training).
6. Repeat step 2.
7. Implement.

Done. Did i miss anything?

We already have laws and immigration policies etc... Society is currently functioning isn't it?

Simplistic and without the i's dotted and t's crossed, but why not?

By all means tell me I'm dreaming, but don't use the public and their cognitive ability as an excuse, people aren't THAT stupid. If they understand and accept stage 1, then it's game on. You already admit it can be done, but can't see it happening. If you offer it as a serious alternative to the country, do you think they'd say no? And if they say yes we'll have it... improbably just became 2 years and counting :). tinted specs or not, that would be the reality.

Et voila "Life Jim".

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 12:46

By the sounds of it you're overstimating how hard it will be. As mentioned to BTB above, probably 99% of us are sheep wether we like it ot not. If those in power decided that they were going to switch to a Resource Based Economy within 2 years, what would the sheeple do about it? Nothing, we'd accept the wisdom and just take it (look at the shit we're taking now:)). I use the term sheeple, not in a derogatory way, but essentially that's what we are when it comes to staying within the confines of the system. A group of people make the rules, we fit our lives around them and live as best we can. What has been so different under any of the other systems we've already tried?

Anyhoo, my rose tinted specs are nothing more than having my eyes open to the FACT that human beings, when armed with the knowledge, can achieve anything they choose to. We have proven this over and over and over again, just take a look around :yes:. Moving to a new system is just an exercise in logistics for those that are involved in it's design... which to be honest would be just about everyone in the country to a certain degree. I'd dedicate a Q+A style TV channel to it and have an FAQ site with forum where questions could be asked and answered.

It won't happen if we keep procrastinating. I hear you and BTB, Oh it's possible, but improbable at the moment :blink:. That does not compute (is it's possible, it's possible any time :yes:). What i'm "tabling" is not a new theory. It has been around for millenia. Yet we are still going in completely the opposite direction. Perhaps a natural disaster will cull the heard for us. But if TPTB survive that cull, it'll be business as usual when they come out from their bunkers. They ain't gonna come out with flowers in their hair and preaching a new way of life are they?

Tis only a matter of will and logistics :yes:... evolution is not playing a part here. Would living in such a new style of society really change you that much? Do you think you would have evolved "over night"? Or would you have just changed your mind and accepted what TPTB had decided?

2 years bang to boom.

We have to go from where we are today to where we want to go without fucking NZ over socially or financially. The timetable is 2 years what needs to be done? Pick holes all you like, it's just the rose tinted specs talking.

1. Talk to the country in terms of what we're going for. (someone may alert us to what we've missed)
2. Let the world leaders know what we're gonna do.
2. Create a department to look after trading (that includes financial affairs... for now :)).
3. Identify and Quantify critical areas, Food, Water, Power, Transport, Sewerage, Waste Disposal, Emergency Services, Medical Research (probably others, but not that many more?).
4. Identify key jobs for critical areas.
5. Design a new Education system to cater for the key jobs for critical and whatever anyone fancies doing (potentially all on the job training).
6. Repeat step 2.
7. Implement.

Done. Did i miss anything?

We already have laws and immigration policies etc... Society is currently functioning isn't it?

Simplistic and without the i's dotted and t's crossed, but why not?

By all means tell me I'm dreaming, but don't use the public and their cognitive ability as an excuse, people aren't THAT stupid. If they understand and accept stage 1, then it's game on. You already admit it can be done, but can't see it happening. If you offer it as a serious alternative to the country, do you think they'd say no? And if they say yes we'll have it... improbably just became 2 years and counting :). tinted specs or not, that would be the reality.

Et voila "Life Jim".

I don't think you are dreaming I just think you are totally wrong and are looking at this way to simplistically.

For the human race to change all must change and think the same, And in who's mind is that a good idea? we can't even decide to wave or not to wave.

And what do you do with the ones that don't want to work, those that are too old, or those that are injured?

mashman

30th April 2011, 13:07

I don't think you are dreaming I just think you are totally wrong and are looking at this way to simplistically.

For the human race to change all must change and think the same, And in who's mind is that a good idea? we can't even decide to wave or not to wave.

And what do you do with the ones that don't want to work, those that are too old, or those that are injured?

Awwww ta :rofl:... Fair point, but can you be more specific than just "totally wrong"?

That I can't agree with. We don't think the same at the moment and society functions :), irrespective of the underlying system. To that end I wouldn't expect people to change just because the underlying system does, just accept what system is in place and try to live by its rules, exactly the same way we do at the moment.

Those who don't want to work, the old etc... what do we do with them at the moment? Why is that going to change. The idea would be that working is a social requirement and not a precursor to having enough money to live on. There will be those that see the value in it and those who sit at home and watch TV... like I say, why does life have to be so different under a Resource Based Economy? As far as i'm concernend, as a country, we'd be working smarter and everyone would be better off. What they choose to do is up to them. But if the social responsibility isn't respected, then there's no food, no water, no emergency services etc... hence there'd be no point, we may as well stick with the money oriented system. Only way to find out is to ask people.

Would you do your bit? I'd retrain to be a sewer rat if that's what was required. The benefits of working in a society where I volunteer to work, by far outweigh the social problems where someone grudgingly does it for money, or doesn't do it at all and finds less social ways of making their living.

Mental Trousers

30th April 2011, 13:09

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 13:40

Awwww ta :rofl:... Fair point, but can you be more specific than just "totally wrong"?

That I can't agree with. We don't think the same at the moment and society functions :), irrespective of the underlying system. To that end I wouldn't expect people to change just because the underlying system does, just accept what system is in place and try to live by its rules, exactly the same way we do at the moment.

Those who don't want to work, the old etc... what do we do with them at the moment? Why is that going to change. The idea would be that working is a social requirement and not a precursor to having enough money to live on. There will be those that see the value in it and those who sit at home and watch TV... like I say, why does life have to be so different under a Resource Based Economy? As far as i'm concernend, as a country, we'd be working smarter and everyone would be better off. What they choose to do is up to them. But if the social responsibility isn't respected, then there's no food, no water, no emergency services etc... hence there'd be no point, we may as well stick with the money oriented system. Only way to find out is to ask people.

Would you do your bit? I'd retrain to be a sewer rat if that's what was required. The benefits of working in a society where I volunteer to work, by far outweigh the social problems where someone grudgingly does it for money, or doesn't do it at all and finds less social ways of making their living.

I would do my bit, but if someone doesn't work the whole system will fall down, sounds very close to what we have now.

What needs to change is just remove all benefits, from everyone so if you don't work your family has to look after you, or pay someone too.

GOOG GOD I'VE TURNED INTO DON BRASH:sick:

mashman

30th April 2011, 14:05

Sorry, but unlike Boris I think you are dreaming mashman. At least partly.

Changes in society are not easy to implement. It runs against human instinct to simply drop everything to take up something else. We always work from a base that's known and solid and then take a step, knowing we still have one foot firmly planted on firm ground. Those instincts aren't something that you can educate away in a couple of years.

No apologies necessary :shifty:, I fully understand how it sounds, I have been in your "skeptical" position :yes:. Now i'm not.

Tell those who have been through war that change isn't easy to implement. That's not a dramatic statement, it's a serious suggestion and I bet the answer you get back is, we never had a choice and just had to get on with it. Yes that's how we currently live and react to changes in our environment, we suck it up and make the best with what we have. It's slow and it's fucking things up much quicker than the changes to make things better are being rung in. It's a strategy that doesn't work and that is not the limits of human thought and capability, not even close. The instincts aren't what need to change. The system which propogates them is, the system people react to. The rest won't matter as it will be educated out, it will be life as normal, idiots posting on forums with wacky inconceivable ideas, people murdering people etc... but not for money and with things being built to last, toys included :yes:.

If you really want people to consider what you're talking about a lot more thought is required about how to get there. Ignoring human nature and thinking it can be overruled by knowledge and education is what'll stop the acceptance of what you're thinking. I reckon the majority of people are certainly able to see what you're talking about has definite advantages and could work. Unfortunately, getting there is the big problem and the route you suggest is completely unrealistic, fanciful and naive (don't take the use of naive etc as an attack btw).

Each of those numbered points would have to be exploded, I have no doubt about that (and I have addressed them, in some detail, with myself and every issue is a state of mind and acceptance). I understand that it seems like an utterly inconceivable plan to change how a country runs in such a short space of time. We're not just talking about a couple of people off a forum tabling the idea and doing all the planning. There are some very smart groups people out there that could knock this kinda stuff out of the park in a matter of months. After all, they can come up with taxation policies, ipods, robotics, innovations the likes of which people used to laugh at as being possible etc... I think you sell the human race short.

I'd like to think that i'm not ignoring human nature at all, more bringing out the best in it perhaps. Human nature is to follow. It is only the chosen system that we HAVE to live under that needs to change. Why not make it a "smart" one? As mentioned in the last post, most people will choose the path of less resistance, it sounds good, what the fuck, let's give it a whirl, it can't be any worse than what we already have (isn't that called the swing vote?). If TPTB decided to take the country forwards under a Resource Based Economy system then, like those who have just been through a war, the population will follow because they have no choice... some without caring or fear. It's what currently happens. We see and react to change every day... granted some cope better with change than others, on an individual basis, but not if everyone is in the same boat. Some more concerned folk, such as yourself and BTB will raise their concerns and may never get past the fact that it just can't be done, but you would probably accept it if was the wisdom of the smart people wouldn't you? (primarily because you won't have any choice if the implemented it anyway.)

You're hiding behind what you perceive to be human nature, as I am, but I think you're selling human nature short by a massive margin. If the cost v benefits analysis supports the change, why wouldn't people go along with it? Especially if it has come from a position of respect, like from a Politician :blink:... they do what suits them anyway :) and we ALWAYS suck up the changes.

heh, I am naive and make no bones about it. Getting there could be as simple as the steps outlined above. What's missing other than a full blown explanation? I'm pretty sure even you can fill in most of the gaps :shifty:... K.I.S.S

mashman

30th April 2011, 14:27

I would do my bit, but if someone doesn't work the whole system will fall down, sounds very close to what we have now.

What needs to change is just remove all benefits, from everyone so if you don't work your family has to look after you, or pay someone too.

GOOG GOD I'VE TURNED INTO DON BRASH:sick:

Why would it fall down just because someone refuses to work? There will be 2.5 million people available to work, for arguments sake. How many of them work in Finance? Add them to the unemployed list.

What would you then ask them unemployed to do for society? I would request that some took a builder to a farm and set up home next door to the farmer and they shared the farmers workload. Halving the working day of the farmer. Would you become a farmer if you had an extra half a day to play with, knowing that you had also done your bit? again, it's something i'd be more than happy to do. If there are gonna be lazy people, let there be lazy people. What's the worset they can do in a Resource Based Economy where money doesn't exist? they don't need to go out and make a living... in fact they become cannon fodder for the Doctors to practice on :).

:rofl:, sure, go for it... I'm sure it will make the world a safer place as those who "can't" get jobs that pay enough to make ends meet decide to take what you have instead of "contributing".

Don't be hard on yourself... you coulda turned into Clarke :)

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 15:26

Why would it fall down just because someone refuses to work? There will be 2.5 million people available to work, for arguments sake. How many of them work in Finance? Add them to the unemployed list.

What would you then ask them unemployed to do for society? I would request that some took a builder to a farm and set up home next door to the farmer and they shared the farmers workload. Halving the working day of the farmer. Would you become a farmer if you had an extra half a day to play with, knowing that you had also done your bit? again, it's something i'd be more than happy to do. If there are gonna be lazy people, let there be lazy people. What's the worset they can do in a Resource Based Economy where money doesn't exist? they don't need to go out and make a living... in fact they become cannon fodder for the Doctors to practice on :).

:rofl:, sure, go for it... I'm sure it will make the world a safer place as those who "can't" get jobs that pay enough to make ends meet decide to take what you have instead of "contributing".

Don't be hard on yourself... you coulda turned into Clarke :)

What about those that don't want to work?
Your ideals are sound but at some point you will have to deal with those that just don't want to be in or contribute to society.
I already take our extra fruit and swap with others that have extra fruit and veg that i don't have (the joy of living in the country) but i still need other things and i can't see the gas station down the road taking 4 spuds per liter.

And ther is no need for abusive comments like that:rofl:.

Mental Trousers

30th April 2011, 15:32

1. Talk to the country in terms of what we're going for. (someone may alert us to what we've missed)

You do realize that even with the most respected, most powerful, most intelligent people backing the best option it's still impossible for everyone in the country to agree on who should be leading the country?? That's something that the regulations say has to be tested every few years and yet you want to convince people that

there's something wrong (many will agree but many won't)
there's a better way (this'll split those that think there's something wrong cos everyone has their own ideas)
you know the path to get there (split everyone again)
everyone has to ditch their current believes, behaviours and way of doing everything (there goes those that have stuck with you so far)

So you go from starting with 4 million people down to a handful.

If there was a way for the human race to get on the fast track and sort this shit out I think a lot more people would have told us what it is by now.

So far you're not convincing me, Boris and most likely many others. Good luck convincing the rest of this little country (let alone the world).

mashman

30th April 2011, 16:29

You do realize that even with the most respected, most powerful, most intelligent people backing the best option it's still impossible for everyone in the country to agree on who should be leading the country?? That's something that the regulations say has to be tested every few years and yet you want to convince people that

1. there's something wrong (many will agree but many won't)
2. there's a better way (this'll split those that think there's something wrong cos everyone has their own ideas)
3. you know the path to get there (split everyone again)
4. everyone has to ditch their current believes, behaviours and way of doing everything (there goes those that have stuck with you so far)

So you go from starting with 4 million people down to a handful.

If there was a way for the human race to get on the fast track and sort this shit out I think a lot more people would have told us what it is by now.

So far you're not convincing me, Boris and most likely many others. Good luck convincing the rest of this little country (let alone the world).

Ok, in terms of leadership. I was thinking that there'd be a council of "elders". Hey, "they" may have a few years on us, but they've got experience the likes of which some of us will never obtain in a lifetime. A council of 50 perhaps, 20 maybe, 200 could be the go... a council of wise asses (each with their own responsibilities) figuring out which proposals are worth "implementing". e.g. finding the best shampoo for each type of hair out of all proposed brands, not 10 different varieties with the same ingredients where only one brings you to orgasm in the shower etc... hitting the shelves. The winner hits the shelves (fuckin hell it's shampoo for christ sake, could there be a greater waste of resources?)... i know i know, human nature, vanity etc... If the council are doing a bad job, or any particular members are, or someone up and coming is smarter, then why wouldn't the council member move aside? Have a polling system if you like.

There are probably hundreds of variations as to how you would structure your "governing" body. The above is my preference at the moment... my mind can be changed :yes:.

1. There are hundreds of things wrong, I doubt anyone will need convincing of that and pretty much everyone can think of 1. I reckon most will go for crime.
2. Crime: A Resource Based Economy will not rely on finance and hence a financial system. Financially motivated crime sorted. 80 - 90%?
3. I know A path to get there, not the path... but it's certainly a shortcut in comparison to the current strategies that we have. There will be smarter folk with far simpler solutions and a softer, less looney way about them.
4. People can believe what they like, as long as they do so within the rules of society... no different to the current situation that we have.

Quite possibly, but until they are informed and asked, we'll never know :).

:rofl: They have been for years, not many of us have been listening to such pie, pi, pye in the sky. I think the Venus Project crowd say they have about 50 million people subscribing to the idea behind a Resource Based Economy... which really doesn't surprise me at all... shame they don't all live in one place :). If it's not talked about and isn't mainstream, how do we expect to find out about it?

Heh, it ain't up to me to convince you as such... I can only offer my "vision", answering questions how I see things panning out... you have to figure out the "best" way of doing things for yourself, if you have the time and energy that is... and it really doesn't take that long to figure out that there are by far better ways of doing things and that they are a matter of will to achieve... Perhaps the current systems are good enough for you. They aren't for me, not by a long chalk. And the current and future strategies being put forwards by our political leaders are shite! They aren't even what I would class as a baby step.

mashman

30th April 2011, 16:29

What about those that don't want to work?
Your ideals are sound but at some point you will have to deal with those that just don't want to be in or contribute to society.
I already take our extra fruit and swap with others that have extra fruit and veg that i don't have (the joy of living in the country) but i still need other things and i can't see the gas station down the road taking 4 spuds per liter.

And ther is no need for abusive comments like that.

They just won't work, in excatly the same way that they don't at the moment. Let them for the time being and if no carrot can be found then there's not a lot anyone can really do about it. Although I won't pretend to understand why given the "new" society that'll be around them. Tis that or leave them to die, at which point they'll turn into something entirely different and all to survive. At that point I wouldn't blame them. Although, if I've figure it correctly, there are going to be periods during people's lives where they won't have to work. I mean, there are more than enough people in the country to provide the bare essentials, probably by about a factor of 3. So if 1 in 3 work, we should be sweet. Perhaps there'll be a social penalty card and you won't be able to obtain KFC, only veggies to counteract that they're sittin on their ass :rofl:, dunno, but you can't force people to work.

Onya for trading your fruit etc... there's a chip shop in Kapiti that has a sign in the window saying that they'll trade chips for Lemons. Fak I'm jealous, I'd love to get back into country living, although properly this time.

Winston001

30th April 2011, 17:02

...when I know how much more capable we are. Fuck there's some really smart people out there. Pooling those skills for "us" and not the money whores can only be a good thing?

Damned if I can see how Rodney Hide got us into this discussion. :blink:

Anyway Mash, I can only think of two philosophies which espouse what you are saying ie. that humans should work unselfishly and share for the good of everyone.

Communism.

Christianity.

The first has been tried and failed. The second has stumbled in various iterations for 2000 years, sometimes succeeding often not.

So your thinking is not new but good on you.

Winston001

30th April 2011, 17:14

Winston001

30th April 2011, 17:18

Asian societies tend to be more group focused than anglo-saxons. I'd guess some African ethnicities are too. This allows these societies to grow harmoniously and plan ahead.

The downside is that the individual is made to conform. There isn't much tolerance for disagreement.

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 18:00

They just won't work, in excatly the same way that they don't at the moment. Let them for the time being and if no carrot can be found then there's not a lot anyone can really do about it. Although I won't pretend to understand why given the "new" society that'll be around them. Tis that or leave them to die, at which point they'll turn into something entirely different and all to survive. At that point I wouldn't blame them. Although, if I've figure it correctly, there are going to be periods during people's lives where they won't have to work. I mean, there are more than enough people in the country to provide the bare essentials, probably by about a factor of 3. So if 1 in 3 work, we should be sweet. Perhaps there'll be a social penalty card and you won't be able to obtain KFC, only veggies to counteract that they're sittin on their ass :rofl:, dunno, but you can't force people to work.

Onya for trading your fruit etc... there's a chip shop in Kapiti that has a sign in the window saying that they'll trade chips for Lemons. Fak I'm jealous, I'd love to get back into country living, although properly this time.

The problem i see is some of these ones that won't work will just take what they want and i doing so will cause others to hoard and protect what is theirs and so it will come full circle.

This type of thinking has been tried before and has failed due to human greed, and I don't just mean in the west. Most of these ideas are a cross over between tribalism and communism and it just doesn't work at some time someone just says fuck it i want to keep whats mine.

Mental Trousers

30th April 2011, 18:30

Heh, it ain't up to me to convince you as such... I can only offer my "vision", answering questions how I see things panning out... you have to figure out the "best" way of doing things for yourself, if you have the time and energy that is... and it really doesn't take that long to figure out that there are by far better ways of doing things and that they are a matter of will to achieve... Perhaps the current systems are good enough for you. They aren't for me, not by a long chalk. And the current and future strategies being put forwards by our political leaders are shite! They aren't even what I would class as a baby step.

You'd do well to provide links that people can take a look at because your vision is just that, your's. To get people thinking along the same lines they need to see what you base this vision on because so far, for me anyway, you've actually done more damage to the idea than good!!

The Resource Based Economy (http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com/)
The Venus Project (http://www.thevenusproject.com/)
Jacque Fresco (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco)
The Venus Project on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/user/thevenusprojectmedia)
The Venus Project: The Redesign of a Culture (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq1r0w0i6JI)
Welcom to the Future (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_LKW5byYmw)
Cities in the Sea (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBjr-uSEFcI)
Self-erecting Structures (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3Z9AIAIU_E)
Designing the Future (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6_-XT97Yu8)
Future by Design (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870112/)
Zeitgeist: Addendum (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1332128/)
Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1781069/)

Swoop

30th April 2011, 20:14

...was a training and apprenticeship system (a hiden work for the dole if you like)
Do you truly believe that the apprenticeship system was a glorified "work-for-the-dole" scheme?
If so, the country would be dead on its feet. No electricians, plumbers, carpenters, mechanics, engineers, etc, etc. This system produced intelligent, capable people that kept the country running.

Winston001

30th April 2011, 20:26

The Resource Based Economy (http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com/)
The Venus Project (http://www.thevenusproject.com/)
Jacque Fresco (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco)
The Venus Project on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/user/thevenusprojectmedia)
The Venus Project: The Redesign of a Culture (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq1r0w0i6JI)
Welcom to the Future (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_LKW5byYmw)
Cities in the Sea (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBjr-uSEFcI)
Self-erecting Structures (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3Z9AIAIU_E)
Designing the Future (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6_-XT97Yu8)
Future by Design (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870112/)
Zeitgeist: Addendum (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1332128/)
Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1781069/)

Thanks for the links, much appreciated.

FJRider

30th April 2011, 20:31

The downside is that the individual is made to conform. There isn't much tolerance for disagreement.

THIS is KB ... disagreement is ... THE NORM ... :facepalm:

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 20:32

Do you truly believe that the apprenticeship system was a glorified "work-for-the-dole" scheme?
If so, the country would be dead on its feet. No electricians, plumbers, carpenters, mechanics, engineers, etc, etc. This system produced intelligent, capable people that kept the country running.

shit i would have got more money on the dole, and could have stayed in bed all day.
Some of us just want more out of life than others.

mashman

30th April 2011, 21:00

You'd do well to provide links that people can take a look at because your vision is just that, your's. To get people thinking along the same lines they need to see what you base this vision on because so far, for me anyway, you've actually done more damage to the idea than good!!

The Resource Based Economy (http://www.theresourcebasedeconomy.com/)
The Venus Project (http://www.thevenusproject.com/)
Jacque Fresco (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacque_Fresco)
The Venus Project on youtube (http://www.youtube.com/user/thevenusprojectmedia)
The Venus Project: The Redesign of a Culture (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq1r0w0i6JI)
Welcom to the Future (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_LKW5byYmw)
Cities in the Sea (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBjr-uSEFcI)
Self-erecting Structures (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3Z9AIAIU_E)
Designing the Future (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6_-XT97Yu8)
Future by Design (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0870112/)
Zeitgeist: Addendum (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1332128/)
Zeitgeist: Moving Forward (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1781069/)

That's actually quite insulting in ways, but I'm sure it wasn't meant that way :yes:. Glad you went and looked though, it's a vision (albeit the guy has it designed. He's no hippy chump... he must have been through hell watching the world go down the gurgler the way it has... knowing what he knows.). I only found those links etc... when someone posted it... probably whilst discussing the same kind of thing :). People just ain't workin things out for themselves any more are they? I love the site, but was dissapointed that they didn't have a "roadmap" for how to get there (I missed him in Wellington :crybaby:). As i said earlier. You've got to figure it out for yourself first. The you know and aren't just being spoonfed or brain washed by somes elses ideology.

I'm not very good at telling people what they want to hear. I'm not wired that way. And an internet forum is hardly the place to get a vision across is it? Facial expressions, tone of voice, gestures etc... they all add to it. I have guilt that I shafted a great idea :rofl:

Ocean1

30th April 2011, 21:12

I have guilt that I shafted a great idea :rofl:

Don't sweat it, dude, you didn't.

mashman

30th April 2011, 21:37

Shag! You guys have filled a page wile I refreshed my browser.

Not sure whether you touched on the evolutionary influence.

Humans are social animals and do function in loose herds. We do act altruistically helping others at a cost to ourselves for no payment/benefit. This puzzles psychologists and the theory is that helping the group is an investment in your own safety and well being. If you help your sick neighbour then their family etc may help you in the future.

Which is what happens in a community.

The primal instinct in every animal is selfish. Survival. We can't breed it out of ourselves and indeed its a strength. That instinct drives people to invent things, try new ideas, gather more material wealth so that they are safe from need. The group benefits from the individual's efforts.

heh. It's been a bloody good (and very rare) chat I reckon. Even though MT won't admit that it can be done in 2 years... he secretly knows it :rofl: j/k

That could very well be the case. But judging by the multitude of reactions society currently exhibits I don't think that is the main driver. Survival is a given these days, financial security in one form or another exists from the govt, healthcare, some spending money, roof over your head etc... Everything else is just cream. I don't see our instincts being the major cause in any way, not in this instance, and out instincts will not drag us out of this funk. That's one of the reasons I don't think the evolutionary influence is in effect.

Asian societies tend to be more group focused than anglo-saxons. I'd guess some African ethnicities are too. This allows these societies to grow harmoniously and plan ahead.

The downside is that the individual is made to conform. There isn't much tolerance for disagreement.

It works well in business terms. Most corner shop owners I've known have cousins of cousins owning dairies, restaurants, carpet shops etc... When Dad moves on, either the son/daughter takes over, or the business is sold on (traded?) within the family. The dairy owners son may go serve his "apprenticeship" in the restaurant business and take that over after serving his time. Fuckin smart way to keep the money in the family.

Pah, you've just described the lifestyle of most of the worlds population. But I agree that aspect will never change. And as you say, it brings its own rewards.

mashman

30th April 2011, 21:52

Damned if I can see how Rodney Hide got us into this discussion. :blink:

Anyway Mash, I can only think of two philosophies which espouse what you are saying ie. that humans should work unselfishly and share for the good of everyone.

Communism.

Christianity.

The first has been tried and failed. The second has stumbled in various iterations for 2000 years, sometimes succeeding often not.

So your thinking is not new but good on you.

Shitty politicians and their never ending ability to screw the public over... for me anyway :)

That's kind of insulting too :). This is not a philosophy, it's a lifestyle choice that everyone will share, irrespective of their religion, their party beliefs, the fact that their mother is butt ugly etc... Fak me :facepalm:. This is why I was reluctant to put up the Venus Project and their Resource Based Economy. It's the best idea I've seen so far and it had a label on it, as my powers of conveying what I "see" obviously weren't cutting it.

I know my thinking isn't new. We established that many posts ago :rofl:, probably whilst you where having a sneaky watch of the wedding highlights :shitfy: :). It just isn;t main stream and bloody well should be. The array of shit people have to put up with these days is avoidable imho.

mashman

30th April 2011, 21:55

Do you truly believe that the apprenticeship system was a glorified "work-for-the-dole" scheme?
If so, the country would be dead on its feet. No electricians, plumbers, carpenters, mechanics, engineers, etc, etc. This system produced intelligent, capable people that kept the country running.

... it then turned into a hidden work for the dole and jobless figures massaging mechanism :)

mashman

30th April 2011, 22:01

The problem i see is some of these ones that won't work will just take what they want and i doing so will cause others to hoard and protect what is theirs and so it will come full circle.

This type of thinking has been tried before and has failed due to human greed, and I don't just mean in the west. Most of these ideas are a cross over between tribalism and communism and it just doesn't work at some time someone just says fuck it i want to keep whats mine.

What's the problem for either group, if there's always going to be enough to go around? No real point in hoarding, no point in getting pissed off at that the hoarders that are hoaring when there's always going to be enough to go around. We're dealing with a country full of individuals. You have no idea what they are each capable of. Neither do I, but I do know that they aren't stupid lazy bastards and could be smarter than you an I put together (granted i'm not shoring you up much there, but every little helps :)). They have what they want and get on with living their lives.

There will be nothing to get greedy over if money is not part of your primary economic makeup. :rofl:, don't worry about what someone else has. If someone wants to say that's mine, get yer hands off, get the next one.

Mental Trousers

30th April 2011, 22:09

heh. It's been a bloody good (and very rare) chat I reckon. Even though MT won't admit that it can be done in 2 years... he secretly knows it :rofl: j/k

:facepalm:

Mate, it'd take more than 2 years to get 50% of the country to start considering there's a problem. A large proportion of them won't even acknowledge there's a problem to start with.

But it's been a good chat. A rarity on here.

Winston001

30th April 2011, 22:19

Survival is a given these days, financial security in one form or another exists from the govt, healthcare, some spending money, roof over your head etc...

Really? Spent any time in India? Rural China? Most of Africa and South America? Survival is still a daily struggle for the 4.5 billion people who do not have govt healthcare, unemployment benefits, or even weatherproof housing.

I was in India on a voluntary aid project 4 years ago and toured the Dharavi slum http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/05/dharavi-mumbai-slum/jacobson-text I saw old toilets being smashed by boys with hammers to make new porcelain. You don't work, you don't eat.

BoristheBiter

30th April 2011, 22:28

... it then turned into a hidden work for the dole and jobless figures massaging mechanism :)

Now I find that insulting.

How dare you put hard working people who are looking at getting ahead in life in the same category as some fuckwit lazy arsed bastard that wants to sit on their arse expecting someone else to pay for they shit.

You say in a previous post about handing down businesses from father to son, what do you think that is, it's an apprenticeship, just because TPTB had a period of time when they subsidised part of it makes it no less ofvalue.

mashman

30th April 2011, 22:29

Really? Spent any time in India? Rural China? Most of Africa and South America? Survival is still a daily struggle for the 4.5 billion people who do not have govt healthcare, unemployment benefits, or even weatherproof housing.

I was in India on a voluntary aid project 4 years ago and toured the Dharavi slum http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/05/dharavi-mumbai-slum/jacobson-text I saw old toilets being smashed by boys with hammers to make new porcelain. You don't work, you don't eat.

Sorry, I was meaning in NZ. That's one of the reasons I'd like to see a new system tried out and tried out quickly. It is fuckin disgusting, an epic fail. I've only ever seen the aftermath of Kosovo at close quaters (a year on), how people were living etc... :crybaby:, it was hardly surprising that the long term humanitarians were all slightly "unbalanced"... but I know it was nowhere near as bad as what the people had endured/experienced before I got there.

The world is shit. We are capable of changing that in the blink of an eye imho.

mashman

30th April 2011, 22:45

:facepalm:

Mate, it'd take more than 2 years to get 50% of the country to start considering there's a problem. A large proportion of them won't even acknowledge there's a problem to start with.

But it's been a good chat. A rarity on here.

Possibly, tis just my asshat estimate of how ready I reckon the majority are, and I doubt there's a man or woman that would deny that there is anything wrong. Could be though. But if they were honest and thought about it... meh, who knows. I reckon 2 years is generous to get the buy in. Word gets around quickly, but the plan will take that length of time at least, but should be good enough in 2 years. Those who won't tag along, will be those who truly believe that they have something to lose and that society won't benefit in the slightest. I wouldn't underestimate that lobby as they'd fight dirty.

mashman

30th April 2011, 22:50

Now I find that insulting.

How dare you put hard working people who are looking at getting ahead in life in the same category as some fuckwit lazy arsed bastard that wants to sit on their arse expecting someone else to pay for they shit.

You say in a previous post about handing down businesses from father to son, what do you think that is, it's an apprenticeship, just because TPTB had a period of time when they subsidised part of it makes it no less ofvalue.

oh hell I must have offered the wrong end of the stick there... i wholly agree with what swoop said about apprenticeships... fuckin brilliant things... but they were used by TPTB to massage jobless figures and screw the educational institute that apprenticeships are/were. Unfortunately YTS et al did more damage than good in the UK. Private enterprise probably didn't help the situation either.

rainman

30th April 2011, 22:58

Interesting chat, apologies if I thread-dredge and pick up a few points from the last few pages...

These days a much higher percentage of the population live above the poverty live than ever before.

Is that even true, globally, and if so is it sustainable? I think there has been some improvement in some places, but I'm not sure you can claim "much higher". Besides in numbers, not proportions, the number keeps going up. 1.4m people below $1.25 a day and a squeeze on the middle class. Wealth is being concentrated at the top, and that's accelerating. Plus we're about to be dealt a dose of old-fashioned energy deprivation upside the head, which has an adverse effect on economic progress... and people tend not to be at the sharing best when times are tight.

Communism didn't work, neither did Fascism and few others.

Like Capitalism? :)

people want to be equal, they don't want to be the same.

People want fairness. I don't think many people actually expect equality, and anyone with a brain recognises we're all different in terms of skill, capability, attitude, and many other factors. Thus the old "to each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities" shtick. But I'm just being pedantic.

When we finally get off this planet and interplanetary (or interstellar) travel is common place people born and raised their entire lives off planet will evolve along a totally different path to those that live at the bottom of a gravity well.

Hmmm. Problem with that is that it will take a very very large amount of energy (and political will, and a good bit of scientific advance) to organise anything faintly resembling a real space colonisation enterprise. And we don't feasibly have that - certainly not the energy, or the tech. I think we have to learn to make a go of this planet first before we go fuck up any others.

Anyway Mash, I can only think of two philosophies which espouse what you are saying ie. that humans should work unselfishly and share for the good of everyone.

Communism.

Christianity.

At the risk of sounding like an evangelist: Buddhism (or any of the several similar philosophies that encourage a more realistic understanding of reality, combined with an accurate perspective on the nature of individuality, and a healthy dose of compassion...) The key causes of suffering are greed/attachment, aversion, and delusion. Think about it: much of the debate here has included about how humans are intrinsically greedy. What if that was just a faulty cultural assumption? What if we could be better than that, and still be happy?

Mate, it'd take more than 2 years to get 50% of the country to start considering there's a problem. A large proportion of them won't even acknowledge there's a problem to start with.

Now there you are spot on. NZ in particular has not for some time had the facility to have anything like an honest debate about our circumstances, let alone the true state of the world.

Winston001

1st May 2011, 00:10

Sorry, I was meaning in NZ...

The world is shit. We are capable of changing that in the blink of an eye imho.

We can't embrace the sort of changes you are talking about just in NZ. It has to be the world.

Speaking of which, I think the world is great. Full of interesting people, enthralling experiences, stunning geography, delicious food. The kindest and most open people I have encountered in my life have been in Third World countries. Specifically the Sudan and India. People lived on $5/day hand to mouth but still smiled and had a kind word to say. In fact these people were so generous I was humbled.

Lets not underestimate the human spirit. The world is amazing and wonderful.

Mental Trousers

1st May 2011, 08:40

Is that even true, globally, and if so is it sustainable? I think there has been some improvement in some places, but I'm not sure you can claim "much higher". Besides in numbers, not proportions, the number keeps going up. 1.4m people below $1.25 a day and a squeeze on the middle class. Wealth is being concentrated at the top, and that's accelerating. Plus we're about to be dealt a dose of old-fashioned energy deprivation upside the head, which has an adverse effect on economic progress... and people tend not to be at the sharing best when times are tight.

India and China are the 2 most populous countries in the world. Both of them are gradually hauling themselves away from subsistence living. By no means are they there yet, but they're definitely moving that way. As they do, more and more of their people are living in better conditions.

There are statistics out there, but the only thing you can rely on with statistics is that somebody is pushing their own wheel barrow and representing their view point with them.

Like Capitalism? :)

As I've said, they'll all fail, including Capitalism. Thing is, we haven't seen the best or worst of Capitalism yet so it's a fair way to go before it's done. I'll be interested to see how closely Capitalism and Democracy are linked though. Could be very difficult keeping one but not the other.

Hmmm. Problem with that is that it will take a very very large amount of energy (and political will, and a good bit of scientific advance) to organise anything faintly resembling a real space colonisation enterprise. And we don't feasibly have that - certainly not the energy, or the tech. I think we have to learn to make a go of this planet first before we go fuck up any others.

Yep. That was a tangent that mashman wanted a bit more information on and is a conversation for another thread. But at the moment you're not wrong. Humans evolving for a zero gravity environment is a long way off in our future.

Now there you are spot on. NZ in particular has not for some time had the facility to have anything like an honest debate about our circumstances, let alone the true state of the world.

Sad but true.

mashman

1st May 2011, 08:46

morning has broken and it would seem it found me in a similar condition :).

We can't embrace the sort of changes you are talking about just in NZ. It has to be the world.

Speaking of which, I think the world is great. Full of interesting people, enthralling experiences, stunning geography, delicious food. The kindest and most open people I have encountered in my life have been in Third World countries. Specifically the Sudan and India. People lived on $5/day hand to mouth but still smiled and had a kind word to say. In fact these people were so generous I was humbled.

Lets not underestimate the human spirit. The world is amazing and wonderful.

I disagree on that. NZ doesn't create all of its own laws and doesn't implement all of it's own policies. Politicians spend vast amounts of time and money borrowing implementing what they think is the best of the bunch from around the world. It's shit. Someone always goes first. The NWO, if it ever happens, will still use this shit system to its own ends and billions will die because of it.

Sounds like you had some great times. Fuckin heartbreaking at the same time though ain't it. The fact that they're happy and smiling never truly sugar coated it for me, it just compounded my view of what the western world will do for a buck :yes:, what the western world is capable of and will allow to happen when pursuing its own agenda, under the banner of capitalism and beaurocracy. Who in their right mind votes for that shit? There are much better ways.

I'm not understimating the human spirit at all, well not all of it, quite the opposite :)... hence why I believe that people are ready to consider a different way of living. Maybe NZ isn't the place, but it needs to be a western country that goes first. The world will argue about it for 50 years, or miss the point entirely. The people of a country will argue for under a year before a consensus is reached imho, potentially a lot less than that, especially in a "smaller" country.

rainman

1st May 2011, 11:15

India and China are the 2 most populous countries in the world. Both of them are gradually hauling themselves away from subsistence living. By no means are they there yet, but they're definitely moving that way. As they do, more and more of their people are living in better conditions.

There are statistics out there, but the only thing you can rely on with statistics is that somebody is pushing their own wheel barrow and representing their view point with them.

It think it comes down to whether you think we're heading in the right direction, steadily improving towards a world where everyone will have enough, or not. I guess you're in the first camp. I'm in the second. It's been fun the last 50 years, but we're now at the end of progress.

And progress hasn't been as clearcut as the rosy-tinted spectacle brigade would have it: the west has never stopped screwing over the poor rest, just got better at being less overtly colonial about things. That game's shifting to China, but they're just more of the same, really (or worse, ask the Tibetans). We're heading unavoidably into a sharply resource-constrained world, which is going to kill off our ideas of abundance and progress. There's already not enough world to go around so that 9 billion people can live like us - when that constraint gets more obvious I think we'll be forced to do some of the uncomfortable thinking we currently have no appetite for.

Swoop

1st May 2011, 15:28

... it then turned into a hidden work for the dole and jobless figures massaging mechanism :)
Please explain when this occurred and what was it that caused it to become what you say it is.
I'm interested in your thoughts on this.

mashman

1st May 2011, 16:23

Please explain when this occurred and what was it that caused it to become what you say it is.
I'm interested in your thoughts on this.

I first noticed it in the mid-eighties, give or take. I knew some older kids, the ones I used to play football with on the park, and they went did real apprenticeships... not the govt subsidised ones (well not directly, not sure), but it was a career for them, their choice. Your options where outlined as, go to Uni, get a job or go on the dole... If you went on the dole, YTS was in your future like it or not, it was pushed every visit you went. My underdstanding, it was a work placement assigned to you by the govt, subsidised by the govt, a resource for public or private puposes. You did it and got an extra 10 quid a week, on top of your dole money (i think it was 10 quid). And it meant you were working and were not an unemployed statistic (fair enough), even though you were still on the dole, with bonus :blink:. It was for, what we thought at the time, the dumb cnuts. If you were thick, you ended up on the YTS. (i now realise the idiocy of that, but I was 13/14 at the time).

It wasn't seen as an apprenticeship. Unless you'd class making coffee and sweeping the floors every day of the week for the rest of your natural life a career choice. Having not been through the scheme, that's about all I know of it. I know of noone who embraced it.

I was on the Job Seekers Allowance once... same thing, different name... still $10 quid extra to sweep the floors etc... (i didn't bother with the extra 10 quid). I cut my hair and was subsequently employed a couple of weeks later (fuckin pathetic).

Anyhoo, long story short. I remember that it used to be a valid career choice. Then it became an excuse to earn an extra $10 quid.

Quasievil

1st May 2011, 17:49

mashman

1st May 2011, 19:01

Everyone wants the right outcomes for this country, but few people will accept the required pain it will take us to get there.

This takes me back to my original post, if I was the Dictator it would just happen and everyone would just have to get the fuck over it.

Do you mean?

You have 2 lifestyles, ergo 2 styles of leadership to choose from.

This drip feeding of policies we have v's Someone who just makes what seems to be the right decisions for people

A group of trustworthy? guys and gals, that find it more convenient to work off reports and advice?

v's

Your dictatorship. Motivations yet to be disclosed.

And the lifestyle choices would be either a Financial Economy or Resource Based Economy.? to the tune of:

They are very different. You have 6 months to decide and vote. Pick one, because it's the one you'll be stuck with for the next 10 years. 1 of these options will change the life of everyone man, woman, and child in the country. We're putting it in, in 2 years time because you chose it.

Is that the sort of thing you were going for? Bit Brash isn't it :facepalm:

IdunBrokdItAgin

1st May 2011, 20:08

I saw the Youth Training Scheme as way to get training rather than getting an ongoing job with your YTS placement.

I started out on YTS, after both school and community college (still without two GCSEs to rub together), at a the main office of a building maintenance company.

None of my friends did YTS and they all thought I was mad to be working for 1 pound an hour (40 pounds for 40 hour week) when you could get only slightly less for working no hours at all.

It was a crap job, and I had to work for one of the biggest assholes I have ever met, but it taught me how to use basic computer office applications and (more importantly) how to act in an office environment.
About 9 months later I went on to an entry level office admin role, at a different company.
No way would I have got that first "proper" job without my YTS experience.

Lots of jobs and years later, I still appreciate what YTS did for me, I messed up and hardly ever went to school but YTS gave me a second opportunity to not be a drop-kick for the rest of my life.

Sorry for diverting the thread but YTS did what it was supposed to do, IMHO.

It wasn't supposed to be a solution to unemployment, or a way of hiding it, but more of a way for young idiots (like I was myself at the time) to get real-world work experience.
What you did with that experience was up to the individual - there is only so much hand holding the state can do.

Just my 2p.

Quasievil

1st May 2011, 20:14

Do you mean?

You have 2 lifestyles, ergo 2 styles of leadership to choose from.

This drip feeding of policies we have v's Someone who just makes what seems to be the right decisions for people

A group of trustworthy? guys and gals, that find it more convenient to work off reports and advice?

v's

Your dictatorship. Motivations yet to be disclosed.

And the lifestyle choices would be either a Financial Economy or Resource Based Economy.? to the tune of:

They are very different. You have 6 months to decide and vote. Pick one, because it's the one you'll be stuck with for the next 10 years. 1 of these options will change the life of everyone man, woman, and child in the country. We're putting it in, in 2 years time because you chose it.

Is that the sort of thing you were going for? Bit Brash isn't it :facepalm:

Bit Cryptic aint it, not sure what you mean in your post there Mr Mash

my point is undeniable the country has to and must change, we cant borrow $300mil a week forever can we.
The $$ inputs have to equal the $$ outputs or preferably higher $$ inputs than $$ outputs in an ideal NZ.
NZ has got a MASSIVE expenditure attached to socialist ideals, brought upon us by Vote harvesting governments more interested in staying in power than they are in the countries progress as a whole, to me that is disgusting and reflects the fact that a government is the least desirable organisation to administer the countries affairs. The Government, any government is hopeless at , Health, Education and just about everything they should excel at, whats so fucking hard that a succession of governments over the course of decades still cant figure it out??

seriously whats so damn hard, its easy, especially when you take the government out of it, with politicians out of these areas only then you will see progress.

Things that piss me off are

the welfare system is a burden upon the working members of society..........what would I do or vote for, how about 6 months after you apply and start receiving a benefit it gets stopped therefore you have 6 months to find a job. why do we have 3rd generation beneficiaries in this country

Hospital system enough said, it is a complete and inefficient fuck up, the sooner it is privatized completely the better

Education again hopeless in every respect, I have nothing good to say about it, the sooner its privatized completely the better

People for the most part are not stupid, why do we need the government to have hold of so many of societies fundamental requirements especially in view of the fact they are not very efficient in the delivery of these service, why cant I have a significant tax break to allow me to make these choices myself with MY OWN money, I dont want or need to government and its stupid career politicians to take my money to make decisions for me, I can do it better for myself and my family far better than anyone one else in NZ.

Give me my money back and let me make my choices, sound like ACT policies..........you bet ya!

Hitcher

1st May 2011, 20:26

trustme

1st May 2011, 20:32

Much in all as it pains me to say this, privatising health & education would be a total balls up. Looked at the US health system & how it does not function.
I don't think privatising education would solve a thing , there would be a plethora of service providers all chasing a piece of the pie all looking to make a buck with massive duplication of administration & an overall reduction in efficiency.

Hey wait a minute , that sounds like Bradfords reform of the power industry. Yup my power bill really went down , not. I failed to see how it could possibly result in cheaper power prices. I fail to see how privatising health or education would improve things, undoubtedly they need to be made far more efficient & accountable for their performance

Sometimes privatisation is not the answer

BoristheBiter

1st May 2011, 20:37

I first noticed it in the mid-eighties, give or take. I knew some older kids, the ones I used to play football with on the park, and they went did real apprenticeships... not the govt subsidised ones (well not directly, not sure), but it was a career for them, their choice. Your options where outlined as, go to Uni, get a job or go on the dole... If you went on the dole, YTS was in your future like it or not, it was pushed every visit you went. My underdstanding, it was a work placement assigned to you by the govt, subsidised by the govt, a resource for public or private puposes. You did it and got an extra 10 quid a week, on top of your dole money (i think it was 10 quid). And it meant you were working and were not an unemployed statistic (fair enough), even though you were still on the dole, with bonus :blink:. It was for, what we thought at the time, the dumb cnuts. If you were thick, you ended up on the YTS. (i now realise the idiocy of that, but I was 13/14 at the time).

It wasn't seen as an apprenticeship. Unless you'd class making coffee and sweeping the floors every day of the week for the rest of your natural life a career choice. Having not been through the scheme, that's about all I know of it. I know of noone who embraced it.

I was on the Job Seekers Allowance once... same thing, different name... still $10 quid extra to sweep the floors etc... (i didn't bother with the extra 10 quid). I cut my hair and was subsequently employed a couple of weeks later (fuckin pathetic).

Anyhoo, long story short. I remember that it used to be a valid career choice. Then it became an excuse to earn an extra $10 quid.

WTF? Quid, in the eighty's? funny i was using dollars.

They still have the same schemes, they pay the employer min wage for the person. they then pay the worker, works if you want to take someone on but can't afford it. we have done it a couple of times, one is now a dairy farmer, the other is now a tradesman.

What is your problem with these types of schemes? It could be the way I am reading your posts but you seem very bitter towards this type of training.
All i see is a win win, gets people off the dole and into work and trained in some type of skill/trade that is needed. better than all these paper pushers working in the Safety and Health sector that have been to uni.

Quasievil

1st May 2011, 20:41

Is the welfare system a burden on the economy because beneficiaries get a vote? There are probably more beneficiaries than non-beneficiaries. Perhaps they should start their own political party. Figure that one out.

Only the working should get the right to vote:yes: they are the ones paying for everything.

BoristheBiter

1st May 2011, 20:44

Bit Cryptic aint it, not sure what you mean in your post there Mr Mash

my point is undeniable the country has to and must change, we cant borrow $300mil a week forever can we.
The $$ inputs have to equal the $$ outputs or preferably higher $$ inputs than $$ outputs in an ideal NZ.
NZ has got a MASSIVE expenditure attached to socialist ideals, brought upon us by Vote harvesting governments more interested in staying in power than they are in the countries progress as a whole, to me that is disgusting and reflects the fact that a government is the least desirable organisation to administer the countries affairs. The Government, any government is hopeless at , Health, Education and just about everything they should excel at, whats so fucking hard that a succession of governments over the course of decades still cant figure it out??

seriously whats so damn hard, its easy, especially when you take the government out of it, with politicians out of these areas only then you will see progress.

Things that piss me off are

the welfare system is a burden upon the working members of society..........what would I do or vote for, how about 6 months after you apply and start receiving a benefit it gets stopped therefore you have 6 months to find a job. why do we have 3rd generation beneficiaries in this country

Hospital system enough said, it is a complete and inefficient fuck up, the sooner it is privatized completely the better

Education again hopeless in every respect, I have nothing good to say about it, the sooner its privatized completely the better

People for the most part are not stupid, why do we need the government to have hold of so many of societies fundamental requirements especially in view of the fact they are not very efficient in the delivery of these service, why cant I have a significant tax break to allow me to make these choices myself with MY OWN money, I dont want or need to government and its stupid career politicians to take my money to make decisions for me, I can do it better for myself and my family far better than anyone one else in NZ.

Give me my money back and let me make my choices, sound like ACT policies..........you bet ya!

+10
Yep labour only got 37% of the vote last time they got into power but because they could make some back hand deals they were able to govern.
So they fucked it all up by giving what the minor partys wanted. time for the shoe to be on the other foot me thinks.

63% didn't want them there, how fucked is our system?

BoristheBiter

1st May 2011, 20:45

Winston001

1st May 2011, 22:15

I saw the Youth Training Scheme as way to get training rather than getting an ongoing job with your YTS placement...

It wasn't supposed to be a solution to unemployment, or a way of hiding it, but more of a way for young idiots (like I was myself at the time) to get real-world work experience...

They still have the same schemes..

What is your problem with these types of schemes? It could be the way I am reading your posts but you seem very bitter towards this type of training.
All i see is a win win, gets people off the dole and into work and trained in some type of skill/trade that is needed...

I'm with you guys. How can training and learning ever be a bad thing?

Am thinking of a teenager - nice lad, has an after-school job - but is driving his parents crazy by not going to school, going off with his mates when ever he feels like it, bring policemen home...:shit:

Anyway he's getting started on one of these training schemes at the SIT polytech, through school. Best thing that could happen to him and I'm glad the system exists.

pete376403

1st May 2011, 22:18

+10
Yep labour only got 37% of the vote last time they got into power but because they could make some back hand deals they were able to govern.
So they fucked it all up by giving what the minor partys wanted. time for the shoe to be on the other foot me thinks.

63% didn't want them there, how fucked is our system?

Well obviously National didn't get a majority in the last election either, otherwise they wouldn't have had to form a coalition (ie back hand deals) with ACT, the Maori party and Peter Dunne.

Hitcher

1st May 2011, 22:31

Well obviously National didn't get a majority in the last election either, otherwise they wouldn't have had to form a coalition (ie back hand deals) with ACT, the Maori party and Peter Dunne.

One day people will realise that that is the whole point of MMP. Invented in post-war Germany to stop the Nazis regaining power, it's a system that's deliberately designed to play the ends off against the middle. In New Zealand it results in us, every three years, getting a Government that nobody voted for.

Never mind. People think they love MMP, despite most not having a clue how their two votes work. Just brilliant. Democracy is an outstanding concept.

mashman

1st May 2011, 22:51

<snip>

I didn't think it was that cryptic, but fair enough...

I oppose just about everything your dictatorship stands for. I agree with the Health and Education issues, but they will never be solved by privatisation... their profit margins will see to that. And I don't believe people are stupid at all, not really.

<snip>

I'm glad someone used it for what it was for. I lived amongst plenty of people who didn't view YTS that way.

<snip>

I wholly believe that apprenticeships are the primary way forwards for human beings. But not the way they're currently being used, or have been used for the last 20 years. They should have had all of the funding they required to make them attractive to prospective job hunters, but seem to be seen as menial tasks. If you want people to contribute/learn, you have to pay them enough to have a life. Hardly surprising so many stay on the dole.

Only the working should get the right to vote they are the ones paying for everything.

To what end?

BoristheBiter

1st May 2011, 22:53

Quasievil

1st May 2011, 22:56

I agree with the Health and Education issues, but they will never be solved by privatisation... their profit margins will see to that.

Oh Okay, I got it I now understand your politics, profit is bad, rightio then, just imagine having profitable business in this country OMG

best we keep borrowing $300 mil a week then eh lol

there is no helping you now.:facepalm:

BoristheBiter

1st May 2011, 23:07

I wholly believe that apprenticeships are the primary way forwards for human beings. But not the way they're currently being used, or have been used for the last 20 years. They should have had all of the funding they required to make them attractive to prospective job hunters, but seem to be seen as menial tasks. If you want people to contribute/learn, you have to pay them enough to have a life. Hardly surprising so many stay on the dole.

?

They stay on the dole because they are lazy and don't want to do a good days work.

I just don't subscribe to your point of view on this. I did my trade and advanced trade at the end of the 80's, most people i work with or employ are tradesman, having gone though an apprenticeship scheme of some type and i can't say i know of one person that would have contemplated being on the dole or being part of this group you are talking about and most like me would be highly offended you have put them into this category of bludgers.

pete376403

1st May 2011, 23:09

Oh Okay, I got it I now understand your politics, profit is bad, rightio then, just imagine having profitable business in this country OMG

best we keep borrowing $300 mil a week then eh lol
there is no helping you now.:facepalm:

How much of that $300mill/week is being used to fund the tax cuts for the wealthy?
Sure that there's Christchurch to pay for but English has been going on about that borrowing since National got in, long before they had an earthquake to clean up.

pete376403

1st May 2011, 23:12

Hence my last few words in that post.
This system is shit and after what Hitcher posted above there is nothing else to say.
Mmm okay - I read your post as saying that Labour somehow got in on the back of shonky deals with the unstated implication was that National didn't need to do that. I stand corrected.

mashman

1st May 2011, 23:17

Oh Okay, I got it I now understand your politics, profit is bad, rightio then, just imagine having profitable business in this country OMG

best we keep borrowing $300 mil a week then eh lol

there is no helping you now.:facepalm:

:rofl: I'd venture that you don't understand my politics, not many do :yes:... they goes way beyond profit.

That 300 is 350 according to the media, and as prices aren't dropping you can bank on it rising. Let's see what the crown accounts say a years after National have sold off the assets they'd like to. We'll probably be up at 400 per week by then.

BoristheBiter

1st May 2011, 23:19

Mmm okay - I read your post as saying that Labour somehow got in on the back of shonky deals with the unstated implication was that National didn't need to do that. I stand corrected.

I should have split that last sentence up.

The problem is as they are just as bad as each other so who do you vote for?
I am sick of the petty school ground shit that these guys/girls do on a daily basis.
But then you see it on here so why should we expect any difference from those we vote into government.

mashman

1st May 2011, 23:26

They stay on the dole because they are lazy and don't want to do a good days work.

I just don't subscribe to your point of view on this. I did my trade and advanced trade at the end of the 80's, most people i work with or employ are tradesman, having gone though an apprenticeship scheme of some type and i can't say i know of one person that would have contemplated being on the dole or being part of this group you are talking about and most like me would be highly offended you have put them into this category of bludgers.

I agree to a point. But I reckon if the money was more realistic, there'd be more out there using the schemes.

I lived in a street, for 6 years, full of those who did the schemes to get the monkey off their backs, no more. They didnlt do their apprenticeships for long at all... all this in a country the size of NZ, but with 60+ million people... That street no longer exists, they flattened it (quelle surprise)... but the people will still be the same. Funny as fuck, and earning as much as they need in a manner they find less "taxing" :shifty:... "scams" passed on through generations :yes:.

I'm not bagging those who used the apprenticeship system for learning, generating a career etc... and i'm certainly not putting them in with the bludgers... I've seen the other side of the same coin, in the country that I lived in.

Winston001

1st May 2011, 23:44

I am sick of the petty school ground shit that these guys/girls do on a daily basis.
.

Me too. But that is how political debate is carried on all over the world. In some countries (Philippines?) they even have fights in the parliament.

Ok - David Lange tried to change all this petty backbiting in the first year of the 1984 Labour Government. It was refreshing to hear MPs agreeing with each other across the House and even passing compliments. Of course it never lasted (sigh)...

Geoffrey Palmer tried as well but was unsuccessful.

The problem is - if the bitter comments on KB and Radio Pacific are any guide - that people like nasty insults being hurled, and seize on soundbites as if they were truths.

I think in this very thread there is a reference to "fund the tax-cuts for the wealthy". That is inflammatory, misleading, but exactly the sort of thing people love to repeat. The reality is 10% of people pay 75% of the tax to support the rest of us. Plus taxation is taking away somebody's income, not a gift to that person - any slight reduction can only be a move toward fairness.

BoristheBiter

2nd May 2011, 07:39

I agree to a point. But I reckon if the money was more realistic, there'd be more out there using the schemes.

I lived in a street, for 6 years, full of those who did the schemes to get the monkey off their backs, no more. They didnlt do their apprenticeships for long at all... all this in a country the size of NZ, but with 60+ million people... That street no longer exists, they flattened it (quelle surprise)... but the people will still be the same. Funny as fuck, and earning as much as they need in a manner they find less "taxing" :shifty:... "scams" passed on through generations :yes:.

I'm not bagging those who used the apprenticeship system for learning, generating a career etc... and i'm certainly not putting them in with the bludgers... I've seen the other side of the same coin, in the country that I lived in.

OK so where are we talking?
Guess it wasn't NZ then so you really have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to them in this country do you?

They didn't do there apprenticeship because they are lazy fucks and would rather someone else pay for their shit.

I went from a below average wage while servicing my time to now being very comfortable, why? because I can see the bigger picture. If there are still in the same street doing the same shit after 20 years who is thw bigger fool?

Spearfish

2nd May 2011, 07:46

I went from a below average wage while servicing my time to now being very comfortable, why? because I can see the bigger picture. If there are still in the same street doing the same shit after 20 years who is the bigger fool?

I'm the same, its probably not the done thing to say so though?

In your few words is the key and its not just being able to see the bigger picture.

BoristheBiter

2nd May 2011, 07:50

I'm the same, its probably not the done thing to say so though?

In your few words is the key and its not just being able to see the bigger picture.

Too many people like to sit back and blame someone else for their shit life.
Its like watching a fat person say i can't lose weight while sitting in front of the TV, eating a pack of chips.

Quasievil

2nd May 2011, 08:07

How much of that $300mill/week is being used to fund the tax cuts for the wealthy?
Sure that there's Christchurch to pay for but English has been going on about that borrowing since National got in, long before they had an earthquake to clean up.

Whats weathly ?
And the so called weathly pay most of the tax so dont go down that road of "labour spouted savour of the poor" bullshit.

Im all about huge reduction of tax and privatization, as I said, I can spend my money on my required services far better than any stupid politician with an agenda.

Spearfish

2nd May 2011, 08:13

Too many people like to sit back and blame someone else for their shit life.
Its like watching a fat person say i can't lose weight while sitting in front of the TV, eating a pack of chips.

Yeah you're right but that's a symptom, based on a genuine feeling of helplessness.
Its far reaching to not just in the so called struggling sector of NZ and has been a tool used by political parties, probably more one side than the other, to great success.
Dependancy reached an all time low or high when working for families was introduced basically the country was told- there, there here is the GOVT teet to suckle from and while they had us over their shoulder burping the dependant they whisper "dont vote for them they will take your only chance of security away"
I'm not sure if the problem is that politics like that WERE being used or that they CAN be used and work!!
It says a lot about how NZ's feel about themselves.

Swoop

2nd May 2011, 08:22

and they went did real apprenticeships... not the govt subsidised ones (well not directly, not sure), but it was a career for them, their choice. Your options where outlined as, go to Uni, get a job or go on the dole... If you went on the dole, YTS was in your future like it or not,

My underdstanding, it was a work placement... It wasn't seen as an apprenticeship. Unless you'd class making coffee and sweeping the floors every day of the week for the rest of your natural life a career choice.
OK.

I think we need to establish a line which separates the two entities.

The YTS is a work placement programme which was devised by government to get people into work (normally on a very low wage).

The apprenticeship scheme is where a person (usually a school leaver, but not always that age) would enter into a legally binding contract with an employer who would agree to train the person up to the standard of a tradesman. Wages of the apprentice were always based on a percentage of the tradesman's wage and would take another "step up the wage ladder" every 6 months or 12 months until arriving on similar wages to the tradesman at the completion of the apprenticeship.
Concurrently, the apprentice would be learning and studying at polytechnic or via correspondence school and would sit the Trade Certificate examination (one or sometimes two, 3hr exam/s) to become fully qualified.

There is a vast difference between the two entities.

mashman

2nd May 2011, 08:42

OK so where are we talking?
Guess it wasn't NZ then so you really have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to them in this country do you?

That's fair enough. It was the UK and I saw the other side of the coin, I decided that kids are kids and that Kiwi kids are different to kids in the UK by accent alone. My bad. I'll take your word that it's different over here.

There is a vast difference between the two entities.

Fair enough. But that's not how everyone saw it. Unfortunately same shit, different "employer". I understand the idea behind the apprenticeship and truly believe that it was hijacked (forcing people into jobs that didn't want to be there, were others who did could have had the place), and damaged, by the YTS. You can seperate the intentions of the schemes all you like, but it's the perception of the potential candidates that matters innit.

BoristheBiter

2nd May 2011, 09:03

That's fair enough. It was the UK and I saw the other side of the coin, I decided that kids are kids and that Kiwi kids are different to kids in the UK by accent alone. My bad. I'll take your word that it's different over here.

.

No, I think you are right, kids are kids the world over. You have them that want to better themselves and those that don't, those that will do anything to get ahead and those that want someone else to do it for them and then there are those that just want to do nothing and get the giro.
The big difference is the 57 million people living there.
I was saying the difference is in what you feel apprenticeships mean.

BoristheBiter

2nd May 2011, 09:05

mashman

2nd May 2011, 09:08

No, I think you are right, kids are kids the world over. You have them that want to better themselves and those that don't, those that will do anything to get ahead and those that want someone else to do it for them and then there are those that just want to do nothing and get the giro.
The big difference is the 57 million people living there.
I was saying the difference is in what you feel apprenticeships mean.

True, depending on how you view it, an apprenticeship is a career move, or a way to earn money in the short term... although I know those who chose to stay on the dole because they could make more money. I wouldn't have called them lazy, just "worked" smarter :). That extra 57 mill, :facepalm: tis your future! can't sugar coat it any more than that :blink:

I think that had more to do with the caliber of the people on the dole.

Potentially, but I wouldn't say it was the rule that you believe it to be. There is a system to be abused. If yer smart enough, you can abuse it, make a decent living and not have to get out of bed til 10. Personal preference. From my point of view, the calibre of "those" people that I knew, was fuckin excellent. They would help anyone out in a jam, they just screwed the system... didn't make them any less human with any less of a mental capacity than you or I.

Swoop

2nd May 2011, 09:10

Fair enough. But that's not how everyone saw it. Unfortunately same shit, different "employer". I understand the idea behind the apprenticeship and truly believe that it was hijacked (forcing people into jobs that didn't want to be there, were others who did could have had the place), and damaged, by the YTS.

If people do not "see" the difference between the two, they need to do some research.

An employer does not take on an apprentice to do bugger-all. They are employed to learn progress and be a productive member of the company.

If an employer wants a monkey to sweep the floor and make the tea, then a YTS person would be better, especially with the government paying part of the wages. If a good person shows up under that scheme, then that person would be watched and encouraged for a period of time, with the possibility of going on into an apprenticeship being possible the next time the employer takes on an apprentice (normally at the beginning of the year).

An apprentice is "signed up" for up to 5 years, so an employer wants to pick the most suitable person they can!

mashman

2nd May 2011, 09:35

If people do not "see" the difference between the two, they need to do some research.

I agree. Not everyone gives a shit at that age. Not everyone can be made to give a shit at that age either.

They need to care first. If you go for an apprenticeship because it pays more money, and it's not because it's for your future and a YTS position pops up that pays more... hmmm, I wonder what will happen, contract of employment or not. Some will stay, some will go. YTS or apprenticeship just does not matter to plenty/?most? "kids" in that position, especially the ones who just love to have fun... I worked in supermarkets, on fishing boats, in a boat yard, in a grocery shop, on a shellfish farm, as adhoc labor etc... to fund that life, others took the secure cash flow option :shit:, some took apprenticeships (some didn't last long), some worked for the council :shifty:... not everyone cares about the difference.

Swoop

2nd May 2011, 09:43

Agree with your post.

If you go for an apprenticeship because it pays more money
Sometimes it didn't pay too well! The starting wage was above the minimum, but not by much (at times). As you progressed it did get better!

mashman

2nd May 2011, 10:20

Sometimes it didn't pay too well! The starting wage was above the minimum, but not by much (at times). As you progressed it did get better!

heh, not good enough for the now now now generation eh, and teens :) and I see no new policies addressing that issue.

Winston001

2nd May 2011, 19:43

True, depending on how you view it, an apprenticeship is a career move, or a way to earn money in the short term... although I know those who chose to stay on the dole because they could make more money. I wouldn't have called them lazy, just "worked" smarter.

Sorry but with respect - smarter? Really? Avoiding having something meaningful to do each day? Working alongside and enjoying other people? Trying to get a better life in the future?

Staying on the dole doesn't sound too smart to me.

Besides, heaps of people train and study, then earn low wages until they finally get to grips with their trade. I didn't get up to the average wage until I was over 30 and that's with a professional degree. Gotta take the longterm view.

Medical specialists are closer to 40 before they are assessed as competent and fully qualified.

mashman

2nd May 2011, 20:30

Sorry but with respect - smarter? Really? Avoiding having something meaningful to do each day? Working alongside and enjoying other people? Trying to get a better life in the future?

Staying on the dole doesn't sound too smart to me.

Besides, heaps of people train and study, then earn low wages until they finally get to grips with their trade. I didn't get up to the average wage until I was over 30 and that's with a professional degree. Gotta take the longterm view.

Medical specialists are closer to 40 before they are assessed as competent and fully qualified.

Sorry, I chortled just a little. Yes, smarter. What do you think "they" do all day? stay at home alone doing nothing until the next time they have to go out and thieve something? I'm curious. Who says they aren't working alongside people? They can organise things as a community too ya know. I have no doubt that there's an Anti-Winston amongst them :yes: just as smart, just uses the smarts in a different way. They have what they need and get on with it, goals in life achieved. I coulda stayed there forever, but I was one of the ones that wanted the "better" life. To this day I'm still not really sure wether i'm happier now, or wether I was happier then :yes:.

They do, We are proof that most people want more money to buy more stuff. There is also proof that some people would rather live their lives than work for a living. So, I think they work smarter to get what they want. They put in less hours doing the actual work, but that gives them more free time to do with what they want.

The price of becoming a doctor I guess.