Who will win the 2011 election?

[mashman]

An award from the Queen?


praps he'll get a Nobel Prize like his buddy Obama... albeit it for economics

[shrub]

and this is the crux of the matter for those that are not John Keys Fanboys. What did he achieve before applying for the Job of Prime Minister in NZ (until that time I have never even heard of the man) and more importantly WHAT has he achieved since he got to be prime minister?

And I am not talking about working as a Currency Trader, but as a Politician in NZ. Here at home, what has he achieved?

And for the next for years, what is he going to achieve then?

He's promised a lot, from getting the bodies out of Pike River to promising the quake victim's families that "nobody will be left to walk this journey alone (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/5400612/PM-sidesteps-quake-promise)". He's also promised aspirational leadership, a plan for growth and to close the wages gap with Australia, and all the sheep believe him because he has one hell of a nice smile and much better teeth than Helen Clark.

[Banditbandit]

Sorry, I don't speak Maori but I'll give it a guess....

"Bwhahahaha .. it's funny ... 'cos it's true" ???

Close ... "I laughed .. you're a funny man"

[Oscar]

He's promised a lot, from getting the bodies out of Pike River to promising the quake victim's families that "nobody will be left to walk this journey alone (http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/5400612/PM-sidesteps-quake-promise)". He's also promised aspirational leadership, a plan for growth and to close the wages gap with Australia, and all the sheep believe him because he has one hell of a nice smile and much better teeth than Helen Clark.

Your reference to "sheep" is not only quite childish and irritating, it spoils what are relatively balanced and thoughful posts. You're only impressing idiots like Mashman, you know.

[NighthawkNZ]

The aliems will win...

[oneofsix]

The aliems will win...

agreed but I thought the question was which group of aliems will win.

[Banditbandit]

agreed but I thought the question was which group of aliems will win.

OOOOoooooohhhh .. I hope it's the Aliems from Close Encounters .. not the very nasty ones from Aliens ..

[shrub]

Your reference to "sheep" is not only quite childish and irritating, it spoils what are relatively balanced and thoughful posts. You're only impressing idiots like Mashman, you know.

I'm sorry that my use of the term "sheep" annoyed you, but i couldn't think of a better way to describe the unquestioning way people accept whatever Key says as gospel because he comes across as a thoroughly decent guy with the common touch and a mastery of economics and commerce. I can't think of a better word to describe the kind of chatter from his supporters that so closely mirrors the language and ideology presented by the National party PR machine, and is often so much at such variance from what can be observed that I cannot seriously believe they have come to those opinions through a process of critical consideration.

Have you ever read Animal Farm? If you have, look at the way the sheep talk in that, and how they are manipulated to say what the pigs want them to say; often things that are diametricaly opposed to what they have said in the past. That's why I used the term sheep, not to impress anyone.

And if you don't like the term, can you find a better way of describing the behaviour concerned?

[oldrider]

I'm sorry that my use of the term "sheep" annoyed you, but i couldn't think of a better way to describe the unquestioning way people accept whatever Key says as gospel because he comes across as a thoroughly decent guy with the common touch and a mastery of economics and commerce. I can't think of a better word to describe the kind of chatter from his supporters that so closely mirrors the language and ideology presented by the National party PR machine, and is often so much at such variance from what can be observed that I cannot seriously believe they have come to those opinions through a process of critical consideration.

Have you ever read Animal Farm? If you have, look at the way the sheep talk in that, and how they are manipulated to say what the pigs want them to say; often things that are diametricaly opposed to what they have said in the past. That's why I used the term sheep, not to impress anyone.

And if you don't like the term, can you find a better way of describing the behaviour concerned?

Vivid description of the Labour party voters over 1984 - 1988 period!

They didn't know what they were voting for then and they still don't know "what" or "who" they are really voting for now!

Same applies to NZ electorate overall actually! :drinkup:

[NighthawkNZ]

agreed but I thought the question was which group of aliems will win.


ohhhh which group of aliems... thats easy..

the pigheaded ones... the ones that no listen, and no learn... you know the ones... the werid bunch... oh wait :blink::blink::blink:

[Oscar]

I'm sorry that my use of the term "sheep" annoyed you, but i couldn't think of a better way to describe the unquestioning way people accept whatever Key says as gospel because he comes across as a thoroughly decent guy with the common touch and a mastery of economics and commerce. I can't think of a better word to describe the kind of chatter from his supporters that so closely mirrors the language and ideology presented by the National party PR machine, and is often so much at such variance from what can be observed that I cannot seriously believe they have come to those opinions through a process of critical consideration.

Have you ever read Animal Farm? If you have, look at the way the sheep talk in that, and how they are manipulated to say what the pigs want them to say; often things that are diametricaly opposed to what they have said in the past. That's why I used the term sheep, not to impress anyone.

And if you don't like the term, can you find a better way of describing the behaviour concerned?


Human nature.‎

They see a man who appears decent, so they accept that appearance until something ‎comes along to contradict it. Perhaps the PR bods are cashing in on the trusting ‎nature of the electorate, but nothing I’ve seen from the National Party in my life leads ‎me to conclude that they are smart or devious enough to carry off the Orwellian plan ‎that you have outlined .‎

Notwithstanding that, the main thing the use of epithets like “sheep” does is to make the ‎user look elitist and condescending. At the moment, based on current polling, you’re ‎inferring that you know better than at least half of the electorate. And if you really ‎were that smart, you wouldn’t be using tired old clichés like Orwell’s sheep… ‎

[shrub]

Vivid description of the Labour party voters over 1984 - 1988 period!

They didn't know what they were voting for then and they still don't know "what" or "who" they are really voting for now!

Same applies to NZ electorate overall actually! :drinkup:

A pretty good point. I voted Labour in 84 and thought I was voting for a party that supported the working man (I was on the tools back then). The next few years, like a lot of people, I got swept up in 80s wank and traded my overalls for shiny suits, pink shirts and grey shoes and I thought Douglas et al were the messiah come again. Then I lost everything I owned and found myself driving a truck for minimum wage and I realised that the Labour party were neither the party of the working man nor the high flying suit. I think that's been Labour's problem ever since - they're not the party of the working man any more.

That's partly because the working man doesn't really exist any more the way he used to. The old school socialists used to be able to convince the working man that the bosses were his enemy and bleeding him dry by sitting on their arses profitting from his labour. The unions were his ally and the Labour party were his party, so when Wayne with the grouse Kingswood held forth at the pub with his jug in front of him, it was National, the bosses and the banks that were the enemy.

Over the last couple of decades it has all changed, especially since the property boom. Wayne found that his $120,000 house was worth $300,000 and he listened to the real estate agent and bought some investment properties and became a millionaire. He bought a better ute and became a businessman and now he has new enemies that suck his lifeblood presented to him by the National/Act spin doctors - lazy career beneficiaries earning $1000 a week and useless bureaucrats in Wellington making his life a misery, and both being paid by him from his taxes. Now he holds forth with his bottle of Stella in front of him and it's Labour, the unions, beneficiaries, bureaucrats and climate change he is against.

I wonder what next for our hero?

[Banditbandit]

At the moment, based on current polling, you’re ‎inferring that you know better than at least half of the electorate. ‎

Shit - anyone with political opinions thinks they know better than half the elctorate - if not all the electorate .

[Oscar]

Shit - anyone with political opinions thinks they know better than half the elctorate - if not all the electorate .

Yeah, but he thinks he knows better, when it's actually me that knows better...

[shrub]

Human nature.‎

They see a man who appears decent, so they accept that appearance until something ‎comes along to contradict it. Perhaps the PR bods are cashing in on the trusting ‎nature of the electorate, but nothing I’ve seen from the National Party in my life leads ‎me to conclude that they are smart or devious enough to carry off the Orwellian plan ‎that you have outlined.‎

Of course they are, one of the reasons Key got the job was because of how he came across, and I'm probably a little more cynical then you. National have some extremely clever people working for them in their PR - I know one of them quite well - and they are bloody good at manipulating public opinion. They're also bloody lucky to have Key because he is so popular he really cannot put a foot wrong right now. That will change in 2 - 3 years, but not before they pull the next election and probably the one after that.


Notwithstanding that, the main thing the use of epithets like “sheep” does is to make the ‎user look elitist and condescending. At the moment, based on current polling, you’re ‎inferring that you know better than at least half of the electorate. And if you really ‎were that smart, you wouldn’t be using tired old clichés like Orwell’s sheep… ‎

Actually I probably do know more than half the electorate - or at least I would hope I would given the huge amount of work I have put into gaining an education in political science, media and business. I know these days education is seen as being a bad thing, but I don't know a better way to gain specialist knowledge than through reading, researching, analysing and being taught by experts. There certainly isn't an easier way that actualy produces results or I would have used it.

And as I said before, can you think of a better way of describing the behaviour I'm talking about?

[oldrider]

A pretty good point. I voted Labour in 84 and thought I was voting for a party that supported the working man (I was on the tools back then). The next few years, like a lot of people, I got swept up in 80s wank and traded my overalls for shiny suits, pink shirts and grey shoes and I thought Douglas et al were the messiah come again. Then I lost everything I owned and found myself driving a truck for minimum wage and I realised that the Labour party were neither the party of the working man nor the high flying suit. I think that's been Labour's problem ever since - they're not the party of the working man any more.

That's partly because the working man doesn't really exist any more the way he used to. The old school socialists used to be able to convince the working man that the bosses were his enemy and bleeding him dry by sitting on their arses profitting from his labour. The unions were his ally and the Labour party were his party, so when Wayne with the grouse Kingswood held forth at the pub with his jug in front of him, it was National, the bosses and the banks that were the enemy.

Over the last couple of decades it has all changed, especially since the property boom. Wayne found that his $120,000 house was worth $300,000 and he listened to the real estate agent and bought some investment properties and became a millionaire. He bought a better ute and became a businessman and now he has new enemies that suck his lifeblood presented to him by the National/Act spin doctors - lazy career beneficiaries earning $1000 a week and useless bureaucrats in Wellington making his life a misery, and both being paid by him from his taxes. Now he holds forth with his bottle of Stella in front of him and it's Labour, the unions, beneficiaries, bureaucrats and climate change he is against.

I wonder what next for our hero?

Well, that just about sums it up! (a few biased sidetracks but close enough) Hey, I heard it's Wayne's shout, :drinkup: catch you later! :drinknsin

[mashman]

Your reference to "sheep" is not only quite childish and irritating, it spoils what are relatively balanced and thoughful posts.


Too close to the bone eh?



You're only impressing idiots like Mashman, you know.


You're correct though. I am an idiot, although coming from a (b)elitist (snigger rofl chortle snort) such as yourself, the slur carries absolutely no weight :tugger:

I am impressed with most of shrub's posts (as well as others here). If I could, I'd have his babies. It's great to see those with knowledge and a brain apply it for a purpose that doesn't involve taking advantage of those of us in the cheap seats. You highlight this with monotonous regularity and all I can offer you is my sympathy for your obvious insecurities and the need to resort to childish jibes to make yourself feel better.

I, as have many idiotic generations before me, have put my trust in those who are "trained" to do a job. In this case, it's to ensure that those around me (the whole country) are looked after in one fashion or another. Unfortunately those cut from the same cloth as yourself have decided to abuse that trust and have taken up the positions of power and "responsibility" for their own gain, and regularly shaft people... and all because they can. No other reason. Certainly not for the benefit of the country, otherwise it'd be running smoothly and idiots like myself wouldn't need to be concerned about the direction that you and the other (b)elitists are taking it.

Unfortunately you, and your ilk are stupid and ignorant. You rely on your command of language, superior knowledge and intellect to "rort" the systems and dismiss any person that does not meet with your high standards. I find it amusing, because you, and your ilk, do nothing but maintain a status quo, a facade that even a 7 year old can't reconcile as a logical way for humanity to move forwards (fortunately they are a minority and will eventually toe the line)... and when you and your ilk are caught being :tugger:'s, you drag out the old fall backs of Tall Poppy, Human Nature etc... :killingme

The status quo isn't working and you and your ilk are the problem, not me and my ilk. You take advantage because you are in positions to do so, and then you moan and bleat (coz you iz a sheep) that it's everyone elses fault that the country is in the state that it is. You and your ilk are the ones with the power to address this, or are you also blind as well as deaf and dumb?. Yet you, and your ilk, do nothing but point the finger at others. Up yer game!

To that end, you and your ilk are just another bunch of useless old cunts and indeed are the true idiots of the world. Have a nice day's herding.

[Oscar]

Too close to the bone eh?



You're correct though. I am an idiot, although coming from a (b)elitist (snigger rofl chortle snort) such as yourself, the slur carries absolutely no weight :tugger:

I am impressed with most of shrub's posts (as well as others here). If I could, I'd have his babies. It's great to see those with knowledge and a brain apply it for a purpose that doesn't involve taking advantage of those of us in the cheap seats. You highlight this with monotonous regularity and all I can offer you is my sympathy for your obvious insecurities and the need to resort to childish jibes to make yourself feel better.

I, as have many idiotic generations before me, have put my trust in those who are "trained" to do a job. In this case, it's to ensure that those around me (the whole country) are looked after in one fashion or another. Unfortunately those cut from the same cloth as yourself have decided to abuse that trust and have taken up the positions of power and "responsibility" for their own gain, and regularly shaft people... and all because they can. No other reason. Certainly not for the benefit of the country, otherwise it'd be running smoothly and idiots like myself wouldn't need to be concerned about the direction that you and the other (b)elitists are taking it.

Unfortunately you, and your ilk are stupid and ignorant. You rely on your command of language, superior knowledge and intellect to "rort" the systems and dismiss any person that does not meet with your high standards. I find it amusing, because you, and your ilk, do nothing but maintain a status quo, a facade that even a 7 year old can't reconcile as a logical way for humanity to move forwards (fortunately they are a minority and will eventually toe the line)... and when you and your ilk are caught being :tugger:'s, you drag out the old fall backs of Tall Poppy, Human Nature etc... :killingme

The status quo isn't working and you and your ilk are the problem, not me and my ilk. You take advantage because you are in positions to do so, and then you moan and bleat (coz you iz a sheep) that it's everyone elses fault that the country is in the state that it is. You and your ilk are the ones with the power to address this, or are you also blind as well as deaf and dumb?. Yet you, and your ilk, do nothing but point the finger at others. Up yer game!

To that end, you and your ilk are just another bunch of useless old cunts and indeed are the true idiots of the world. Have a nice day's herding.

I love that - the slur carries no weight, and yet you then launch into the longest post I've seen you write. I'm sorry if you take offense at my "childish jibes", but that seemed to be your preferred method of communication. As for stupid, everytime an ecomonic discussion is started, you crap on about an alternative system, and when asked to explain it, you refuse, because "..it's obvious.."

My ilk? You don't know me, you nothing about my situation, life or job - yet you assume that you do. How stupid is that?

If you'd like to up your game, perhaps we could have a reasoned debate.

[Oscar]

Actually I probably do know more than half the electorate - or at least I would hope I would given the huge amount of work I have put into gaining an education in political science, media and business. I know these days education is seen as being a bad thing, but I don't know a better way to gain specialist knowledge than through reading, researching, analysing and being taught by experts. There certainly isn't an easier way that actualy produces results or I would have used it.

And as I said before, can you think of a better way of describing the behaviour I'm talking about?

I'm sure you do know more than half the electorate, you seem to be an educated person. Perhaps that's why I was a little disappointed at the use of the word sheep, although I may have assumed that you were only describing right wing voters. Were you describing the whole population?

Anyway I think I'll stick to "human nature" as my description. Whereas the electorate does exhibit a certain mob behaviour similar to the woolly beasts, this does suggest that somewhere there's a farmer with a whistle and two dogs. As I said before, I just don't think that there's anyone smart enough or organised enough (certainly not the National Party or the Labour Party) to run a scam like that.

[mashman]

I love that - the slur carries no weight, and yet you then launch into the longest post I've seen you write. I'm sorry if you take offense at my "childish jibes", but that seemed to be your preferred method of communication. As for stupid, everytime an ecomonic discussion is started, you crap on about an alternative system, and when asked to explain it, you refuse, because "..it's obvious.."

My ilk? You don't know me, you nothing about my situation, life or job - yet you assume that you do. How stupid is that?

If you'd like to up your game, perhaps we could have a reasoned debate.

No offense taken... I answer every question asked about "my" alternative...

Pot kettle black much.

Impossible. Primarily because I don't have the knowledge level that YOU require, fo me to be allowed to take part in such a debate, and secondly you refuse to correct me with any knowledge that backs up your point of view, because "it's obvious". Hence thickos like me require the likes of yourself (and politicians) to up your game and use your obvious "talents" for the benefit of the whole country. Until then, you're about as useful, to me, as a forex trader.

[shrub]

I'm sure you do know more than half the electorate, you seem to be an educated person. Perhaps that's why I was a little disappointed at the use of the word sheep, although I may have assumed that you were only describing right wing voters. Were you describing the whole population?

Anyway I think I'll stick to "human nature" as my description. Whereas the electorate does exhibit a certain mob behaviour similar to the woolly beasts, this does suggest that somewhere there's a farmer with a whistle and two dogs. As I said before, I just don't think that there's anyone smart enough or organised enough (certainly not the National Party or the Labour Party) to run a scam like that.

Mate, I believe that there is no such thing as left or right wing any more, and the people who display the behaviour I'm talking about will follow whoever has the message they like and presents that message in a way they can relate to. At the moment they like the message give by honest John; state house boy made good, a master of economics and self made millionaire yet an ordinary man with the common touch who would be good company down at the pub. Probably even has a grouse ute. He could pretty much say or do anything right now, and he'd still give people a warm feeling.

[Oscar]

No offense taken... I answer every question asked about "my" alternative...

Pot kettle black much.

Impossible. Primarily because I don't have the knowledge level that YOU require, fo me to be allowed to take part in such a debate, and secondly you refuse to correct me with any knowledge that backs up your point of view, because "it's obvious". Hence thickos like me require the likes of yourself (and politicians) to up your game and use your obvious "talents" for the benefit of the whole country. Until then, you're about as useful, to me, as a forex trader.

I've asked you on several occasions about you alternative system and been told each time that you'd already been into it or somesuch. You have never answered directly.

Where have I ever answered that "it's obvious"????
If you hang around here making stupid comments like:

praps he'll get a Nobel Prize like his buddy Obama... albeit it for economics


I'm gonna reply in kind, but I certainly never ducked any questions.
As for the rest, I'm not a politician, I don't belong to a political party and I don't stand for anything except my family. I had my crack at changing the world (and a bunch of people tried to thank me cracking my skull) and I'm moderatley happy with the result.

So if you truly consider yourself a "thicko", and are waiting for someone else to come along and fix the system - you will probably be rewarded with all the effort that you obviously are prepared to expend.

[Oscar]

Mate, I believe that there is no such thing as left or right wing any more, and the people who display the behaviour I'm talking about will follow whoever has the message they like and presents that message in a way they can relate to. At the moment they like the message give by honest John; state house boy made good, a master of economics and self made millionaire yet an ordinary man with the common touch who would be good company down at the pub. Probably even has a grouse ute. He could pretty much say or do anything right now, and he'd still give people a warm feeling.

As much as I agree with that, you're in a Catch 22 situation.
By catergorising the public image as appealing to sheep, you're as guilty as the National Party in playing the man, not the issues.

[oneofsix]

Mate, I believe that there is no such thing as left or right wing any more, and the people who display the behaviour I'm talking about will follow whoever has the message they like and presents that message in a way they can relate to. At the moment they like the message give by honest John; state house boy made good, a master of economics and self made millionaire yet an ordinary man with the common touch who would be good company down at the pub. Probably even has a grouse ute. He could pretty much say or do anything right now, and he'd still give people a warm feeling.

As much as it upsets me I have to agree. Can't wait for those people to realise that the warm feeling is Honest John pissing on them but by then he will have stolen the family silver, smiling all the while.

[Oscar]

As much as it upsets me I have to agree. Can't wait for those people to realise that the warm feeling is Honest John pissing on them but by then he will have stolen the family silver, smiling all the while.

Family silver?
Isn't this a bit hackneyed, considering that both major parties have been open with the Govt. accounts for quite some time now? Hanging on to some of these assets (Air NZ for example) is akin to me having an Aston Martin on HP whilst failing to make mortgage payments.

Notwithstanding that, they're keeping a controlling interest.

And stolen? This isn't 1984, 1987 or 1991 where parties promised one thing and did another(because of "economic contingencies"). The Govt. is allowing the voters the chance to have their say.

[mashman]

I've asked you on several occasions about you alternative system and been told each time that you'd already been into it or somesuch. You have never answered directly.

Where have I ever answered that "it's obvious"????
If you hang around here making stupid comments like:


I have answered you every time to my knowledge... I'm not that impolite... and the flippent remark was meant as such... but it wouldn't surprise me if Key was honoured, something I don't believe he deserves.



I'm gonna reply in kind, but I certainly never ducked any questions.
As for the rest, I'm not a politician, I don't belong to a political party and I don't stand for anything except my family. I had my crack at changing the world (and a bunch of people tried to thank me cracking my skull) and I'm moderatley happy with the result.

So if you truly consider yourself a "thicko", and are waiting for someone else to come along and fix the system - you will probably be rewarded with all the effort that you obviously are prepared to expend.

I'd be interested to hear about what you did? (no sarcasm etc... genuine interest). I'm not trying to change the world, but I don't accept that this is the best humanity can do.

To that end, I am not equipped with the knowledge to play in the "arena" necessary to implement "my" economy. I do not have the finances to play there either and will not put my family through the ridicule that they would receive from my "extreme" views/actions.

I have been resigned to those facts for years... and will just have to wait until my family grows up before I can come out to play. Perhaps I will have grown up by then too.

[Banditbandit]

Yeah, but he thinks he knows better, when it's actually me that knows better...

Yeah .. old people always think they are right too

[oldrider]

Yeah .. old people always think they are right too

Hey .... I resemble that remark! :wari:

[Oscar]

I'd be interested to hear about what you did? (no sarcasm etc... genuine interest). I'm not trying to change the world, but I don't accept that this is the best humanity can do.



I was a student activist.
When the Nats kicked off their 1981 Election Campaign at the Founders Theatre, I was there with a banner that said "Muldoon Eats Babies" Me and my friend Dave stole a blue and white straw boater off the head of a Cabinet Minister as he was electioneering at a local fair (a laugh then, but you'd probably get shot by the DPS now).

Something that you'll probably find richly ironic is that in that election we supported a local lady on the basis that she was the best candidate...and her party?

Social Credit:facepalm:
How embarrassing....

I was a 1981 Springbok Tour protester.
We saw what happened in Hamilton and were at Eden Park for the last test.
Apart from that second when you know yer going to crash yer bike, I've never been that scared...

[puddytat]

At the risk of "appearing" to be stoopid for using emoticons for example....
this continual election cycle of Nats & Labs spouting dogma when they're both schisms of the same church,just fucks us around for another 3 years of the same with very little done to start solving the real issues facing us, whist they fondle our pockets & ego with simplistic knee jerk solutions to only the simple problems.
How much longer NZ? .Our reticince as a nation dumbfounds me....
You know what? I think the biggest problem is that we're as emotive as a dead parrot.
Do you know what? I think that what has been missing for far to fucking long is some EMOTION!!
Where are the politicians who show any of the most basic instinct of our species?
And before you say "No, emotions not allowed", well I think that is exactly the problem.
Some off the worlds greatest (& worst) leaders are reknown for their emotive rhetoric

Being all about dollars & scents doesnt seem to be solving anything to me.
When people get fucked off, its not cold reasoning, its emotion.
Why are the fucked off?Usually because they are offended by something that bothers thier Morals & Ethics.
Thats why brave fuckers standing in the middle of a Rugby ground changed things..
Why Woman got the vote
Why 40 thousand people marched about mining in Parks
Why the Yanks got egg in thier face & on their ships
Why Blacks got equality
Why we got a 40hr week
Why a Dome got deflated
Why we see the strengthening of the left in Sth America & Europe
Its not the politicians that get things done, ITS THE PEOPLE.
WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE ARE NOTHING.
:wait:

[Bald Eagle]

When people get fucked off, its not cold reasoning, its emotion.
Why are the fucked off?Usually because they are offended by something that bothers thier Morals & Ethics.
Thats why brave fuckers standing in the middle of a Rugby ground changed things..
Why Woman got the vote
Why 40 thousand people marched about mining in Parks
Why the Yanks got egg in thier face & on their ships
Why Blacks got equality
Why we got a 40hr week
Why a Dome got deflated
Why we see the strengthening of the left in Sth America & Europe
Its not the politicians that get things done, ITS THE PEOPLE.
WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE ARE NOTHING.
:wait:

Not sure they where all shining achievements.- but 'spose that depends on your moral/ethics/politics iykwim

[oldrider]

Most rugby tour protesters didn't really know what it was all about .... they just wanted to show black people that they cared ... in a very condescending flaky way! :confused:

[Bald Eagle]

Most rugby tour protesters didn't really know what it was all about .... they just wanted to show black people that they cared ... in a very condescending flaky way! :confused:
..and a lot of them couldn't have cared less, they just wanted to have a go at the :Police:

[Oscar]

Most rugby tour protesters didn't really know what it was all about .... they just wanted to show black people that they cared ... in a very condescending flaky way! :confused:

What the fuck would you know?

[Oscar]

..and a lot of them couldn't have cared less, they just wanted to have a go at the :Police:


A lot?
Did you count them?
Who are you tell us what we cared about?

[Bald Eagle]

A lot?
Did you count them?
Who are you tell us what we cared about?
I didn't have time to count the patched gang members and other renta demo types some of whose transport to venues was funded by a certain political party. :facepalm:

[SPman]

So- you were there and had an intimate knowledge of what it was about and how everyone felt?

[puddytat]

See, this is what I mean. If we wait for the politicians to do thier job we end up get pretty pissed off & then WE MAKE IT HAPPEN.And usually when "WE" get started on one thing then often because people are organised on one issue then its easier to take the "organisation" & focus on the next issue. See this is where the shit stirrers come into thier own.Rally the extremists first, then the rest will follow....& by extremists I dont mean the bomb builders but the ones who are at the front of the picket lines.

[mashman]

I was a student activist.
When the Nats kicked off their 1981 Election Campaign at the Founders Theatre, I was there with a banner that said "Muldoon Eats Babies" Me and my friend Dave stole a blue and white straw boater off the head of a Cabinet Minister as he was electioneering at a local fair (a laugh then, but you'd probably get shot by the DPS now).

Something that you'll probably find richly ironic is that in that election we supported a local lady on the basis that she was the best candidate...and her party?

Social Credit
How embarrassing....

I was a 1981 Springbok Tour protester.
We saw what happened in Hamilton and were at Eden Park for the last test.
Apart from that second when you know yer going to crash yer bike, I've never been that scared...

I tip my hat to you sir... I was listening, part listening, to a conversation between 2 people the other night (one the boss (old cunt, snigger)) and you could still see the passion in their faces as they discussed it... almost as if it was yesterday. They also shared your fears of having their brains smashed in... (some might say that that must have happened to the boss heh)

Why the irony? Don't you currently vote for what you see as the best candidate?

[Oscar]

I tip my hat to you sir... I was listening, part listening, to a conversation between 2 people the other night (one the boss (old cunt, snigger)) and you could still see the passion in their faces as they discussed it... almost as if it was yesterday. They also shared your fears of having their brains smashed in... (some might say that that must have happened to the boss heh)

Why the irony? Don't you currently vote for what you see as the best candidate?

I do, but Social Credit is now days considered to be economically and financial wacko.

The other problem I have is that I'm in one the longest seats - at the Northern edge of the Taranaki electorate, but I only live 15kms from Hamilton. I've never seen any of our candidates...

[Oscar]

I didn't have time to count the patched gang members and other renta demo types some of whose transport to venues was funded by a certain political party. :facepalm:

So patched gang members don't have a right to political expression?
Anyway, it's not my fault you're a slow counter - something like "one...., two...., ......three......., and another........., and another....."?

Funny thing was, I was at Hamilton and Eden Park, and all I recall are spotty students, earnest ordinary people and the odd clergyman.

[oldrider]

So- you were there and had an intimate knowledge of what it was about and how everyone felt?

To be honest, I spent most of that period out hunting real pigs and deer, I thought protesting was all a load of bollocks but to each his own!

South Africa is under new management now .... so what's really changed for the better? :scratch:

[Brian d marge]

I was a 1981 Springbok Tour protester.
We saw what happened in Hamilton and were at Eden Park for the last test.
Apart from that second when you know yer going to crash yer bike, I've never been that scared...

So was I , but I was only there for the Biff, because strange as it may seem even then I knew it was bollox

Much more fun , to be had in getting my 2c worth 。。。for the pain Mr plod had inflicted　on me ...as I did on him

No not sorry and I hope that fence in Lancaster park cost a shit load to repair , and that tit with the blond hair pissed himself at my awesome presence..... as I was at 16 ,,,,

There are some who are still fighting the good cause , there are others who.....got married

Stephen

[Banditbandit]

Ask the blacks in South Africa how much difference we made in 1981 ...

[mashman]

I do, but Social Credit is now days considered to be economically and financial wacko.


Too socialist (if so what aspects)? not enough exposure? noone likes to back a loser?

[Oscar]

Too socialist (if so what aspects)? not enough exposure? noone likes to back a loser?

Too wierd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit

[Banditbandit]

Yeah .. Social credit Were never socialist ... just used C.H Douglas' economic theories ... which just might have worked - but were generally regarded as "weird" ..

[Oscar]

Yeah .. Social credit Were never socialist ... just used C.H Douglas' economic theories ... which just might have worked - but were generally regarded as "weird" ..

Wierd, even....

[oldrider]

There was a choice, continue with "Social debt" (wars booms or busts) or progress with "Social credit"! (balanced production against consumption, interest free new money)

The electorate (foolishly) chose "Social debt" and look at the mess we are in with compounding intrest "debt" on new money!

So which one represents funny money now? :sick:

[mashman]

Too wierd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit

heh, as you may have guessed I don't fine anything truly wierd (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=wierd) about it really... other than it didn't take that extra step and ignore "finance" entirely. I guess the idea behind a controlled financial economy was realistic back in the 20's... then again, he did seem to note the dangers of money as a basis for value... these days though, naaaaaaaaaah, we need to go all the way or continue to suffer the consequences of a much more sophisticated version of the economic sabotage he was concerned with.

[puddytat]

Too wierd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit

Good read that, & goes a way to explain why the polled at around 28% back in the 80's?.....why have they fallen from grace?
Oh I know....greed plain & simple.
Amazing really, that back in the day NZers voted in those numbers in a FPP system,whereas now all the minor parties would struggle to make more than 15% of the vote.
Probably people were more idealistic back then & not so capatalistic as now & as paranoid about the left....
The weirdest thing is at the time of writing this, that on TVNZ7 news at 8 there was a report on plans to bring in a similar system to help protect the financial system in England from the Banks:weird:

[SPman]

Wierd, even....

Many thought it was more..... wyrd!

[mashman]

Good read that, & goes a way to explain why the polled at around 28% back in the 80's?.....why have they fallen from grace?
Oh I know....greed plain & simple.
Amazing really, that back in the day NZers voted in those numbers in a FPP system,whereas now all the minor parties would struggle to make more than 15% of the vote.
Probably people were more idealistic back then & not so capatalistic as now & as paranoid about the left....
The weirdest thing is at the time of writing this, that on TVNZ7 news at 8 there was a report on plans to bring in a similar system to help protect the financial system in England from the Banks:weird:

The world took off in a different direction and NZ has been trying to catch up since?

[Banditbandit]

Amazing really, that back in the day NZers voted in those numbers in a FPP system,whereas now all the minor parties would struggle to make more than 15% of the vote.
Probably people were more idealistic back then & not so capatalistic as now & as paranoid about the left....


Under FFP I think there was a large "protest vote" ... i.e. people voting for a minor party because it had no chance of getting in. That's the equivelent of a "no Confidence" vote .. which was not an available option ...

Now people are not "protest voting" in the same way ... because a minor paty MAY get in .. I think people are protest voting by voting for one of the major parties (National or Labour) not because they support the party they vote for, but because they do not want the other party to get into power ... "Vote Labour to keep the Nats out" or vice versa ..

Then there are the people who do actually support the minor party they vote for ...

[oldrider]

Under FFP I think there was a large "protest vote" ... i.e. people voting for a minor party because it had no chance of getting in. That's the equivelent of a "no Confidence" vote .. which was not an available option ...

Now people are not "protest voting" in the same way ... because a minor paty MAY get in .. I think people are protest voting by voting for one of the major parties (National or Labour) not because they support the party they vote for, but because they do not want the other party to get into power ... "Vote Labour to keep the Nats out" or vice versa ..

Then there are the people who do actually support the minor party they vote for ...

True!

I agree but the advent of Social Credit getting 21% of the vote (protest or otherwise) scared hell out of the status quo and Bob Jones New Zealand party was supported by them as an alternative protest to Social Credit!

Why?

Because Social Credit was going to kick arse their rice bowl!

(Meanwhile the financial overlords and their banking system still enjoy their monopoly position and political control.)

Bob Jones NZP was just going to be more of the same! (Social Debt)

Bob Jones verses Rob Muldoon scenario was just a distracting sideshow ... both faded into oblivion not long after.

Social Credit's flurry faded through poor publicity, the involvement of the inevitable crook and finally Bruce Beetham's untimely death!

Unfortunately the champions of "monetary reform" appear to have died with him!

MMP?

Like Henry Ford always said ... you can have any colour you like, so long as it's black! :facepalm:

Meanwhile .... The beat goes on lah di da di dah! :sick:

[Oscar]

(Meanwhile the financial overlords and their banking system still enjoy their monopoly position and political control.)



Could you explain this, please?
If NZ has (or had) a monopoly banking system, why would their "financial overlords" open it up to competition?

NZ has one of the most deregulated financial markets in the world (and lucky for us we did, the strenghth of the Australian Banks and the associated Aussie Govt. g'tee brought us through 2008 relatively unscathed). Also if it is really a monopoly, why did the Govt. start it's own bank in direct competition to the "financial overlords"?

Exactly how does anyone exert political control over four Aussie Banks, one British one, one from Hong Kong and a Govt owned bank all at the same time???

[mashman]

Exactly how does anyone exert political control over four Aussie Banks, one British one, one from Hong Kong and a Govt owned bank all at the same time???

Would you accept conditionalities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditionality)?

[Oscar]

Would you accept conditionalities (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditionality)?

Nope.
If that sort of pressure was being exerted from off-shore how do you explain the creation of Kiwi Bank and the new Heartland outfit? Why would our "financial overlords" accept competition from a Govt. they supposedly control?

[mashman]

Nope.
If that sort of pressure was being exerted from off-shore how do you explain the creation of Kiwi Bank and the new Heartland outfit? Why would our "financial overlords" accept competition from a Govt. they supposedly control?

There's no IF about it... just ask Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy etc... why their banks have failed and who is requiring that they put austerity measures in place. The banks perhaps? IMF?

:rofl:, Kiwi Bank, fear them and kneel before their financial power... otherwise "they" would be an open monopoly, something "they" do not allow in their free market economy... "they" probably underwrite the loans anyway.

[Oscar]

There's no IF about it... just ask Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy etc... why their banks have failed and who is requiring that they put austerity measures in place. The banks perhaps? IMF?

:rofl:, Kiwi Bank, fear them and kneel before their financial power... otherwise "they" would be an open monopoly, something "they" do not allow in their free market economy... "they" probably underwrite the loans anyway.

I fail to see how any of the above proves the "financial overlord" comment.
If there is some overarching international power controlling money markets, they’re ‎doing a piss poor job. ‎

To take Greece as an example, they're in the shit because they spend too much on shit they can't afford. They have some of the most generous Govt. pensions anywhere - for example, as a job with "high physical input", a chef or a hairdresser is allowed to retire at age 55.

If there really was an International Banking conspiracy, the IMF would have stepped in, the Hairdresser woul have to retire at 65, and the banks wouldn't be bleeding shitloads of cash...

As far as I'm aware, smaller banks like Kiwibank securitize their loans and sell them on the open market, hence the commonly used expression about Japanese Housewifes and Belgian Dentists underwiting the NZ housing market.

[oldrider]

Could you explain this, please?
If NZ has (or had) a monopoly banking system, why would their "financial overlords" open it up to competition?

NZ has one of the most deregulated financial markets in the world (and lucky for us we did, the strenghth of the Australian Banks and the associated Aussie Govt. g'tee brought us through 2008 relatively unscathed). Also if it is really a monopoly, why did the Govt. start it's own bank in direct competition to the "financial overlords"?

Exactly how does anyone exert political control over four Aussie Banks, one British one, one from Hong Kong and a Govt owned bank all at the same time???

Good question, NZ just toes the world banking line and operates exactly as it is told to.

Kiwi Bank is not in competition with other banks other than seeking a share of the pie, it is just another bank, doing what bank's do!

Like Henry Ford said ... any colour you like ... as long as it is "black"!

Banks create all new money as an intrest bearing debt, they use our collateral, which is the basis of a loan and create a loan of up to 9 times the value, simply as a book entry!

The only real wealth involved is the collateral and the interest the mortgagee pays to them!

It's a pretty good racket and nobody ever asks questions about it without they get denounced as a crackpot or something!

There is much evidence written and presented but .... ask yourself, do you believe the people that are trying to warn you?

No you don't! .... You laugh at them as "conspiracy theorists" just the way you are condition to react!

You are not stupid, I think you are intelligent, it is just that you have yet to see the wood for the trees!

It took me a fair while but one day the penny just dropped!

Why do I buy one house but pay for two or three and even then I don't own it?

It's because I am paying for the parasitic banking system as well! :stoogie:

[Oscar]

Good question, NZ just toes the world banking line and operates exactly as it is told to.

Kiwi Bank is not in competition with other banks other than seeking a share of the pie, it is just another bank, doing what bank's do!

Like Henry Ford said ... any colour you like ... as long as it is "black"!

Banks create all new money as an intrest bearing debt, they use our collateral, which is the basis of a loan and create a loan of up to 9 times the value, simply as a book entry!

The only real wealth involved is the collateral and the interest the mortgagee pays to them!

It's a pretty good racket and nobody ever asks questions about it without they get denounced as a crackpot or something!

There is much evidence written and presented but .... ask yourself, do you believe the people that are trying to warn you?

No you don't! .... You laugh at them as "conspiracy theorists" just the way you are condition to react!

You are not stupid, I think you are intelligent, it is just that you have yet to see the wood for the trees!

It took me a fair while but one day the penny just dropped!

Why do I buy one house but pay for two or three and even then I don't own it?

It's because I am paying for the parasitic banking system as well! :stoogie:


Parasitic banking system? You're tuning yourself to a standstill here with nonsense propaganda.

Let's review the facts:

The only reason for you are paying for two or three houses is that your repayments are stretched over twenty five years. Did someone hold a gun to your head? You could rent, but I have no doubt you have a line about parasitic landlords.

The bank isn't printing the money - they need to pay their depositors interest on the money. At the other end of the equation are other people who are relying on deposit income to live - would you have little old ladies starve so you can pay your mortgage off quicker?

The one year fixed rate is currently 5.95%. Based on amount of $250,000, this is only 1.5% over what the bank would pay for funds on the local market, and maybe 2% or 3% over what they would pay on the bond market.

[oldrider]

Parasitic banking system? You're tuning yourself to a standstill here with nonsense propaganda.

Let's review the facts:

The only reason for you are paying for two or three houses is that your repayments are stretched over twenty five years. Did someone hold a gun to your head? You could rent, but I have no doubt you have a line about parasitic landlords.

The bank isn't printing the money - they need to pay their depositors interest on the money. At the other end of the equation are other people who are relying on deposit income to live - would you have little old ladies starve so you can pay your mortgage off quicker?

The one year fixed rate is currently 5.95%. Based on amount of $250,000, this is only 1.5% over what the bank would pay for funds on the local market, and maybe 2% or 3% over what they would pay on the bond market.

The banking system in it's self is well organised and efficient, the area of dispute is their god given right to create "new money" and charge exorbitant intrest for the privilege.

If GDP is 100 and GNI is 75 there is a shortfall of 25 .... 75 can not consume 100 ... 25 new ones have to be created and issued to achieve that!

Monetary reformists say create it interest free! (social credit)

Banks create it at ?%! (social debt)

Same problem but a bigger problem due to the intrest charge, that initial 25 just keeps getting bigger and bigger until we have a depression, followed by a war, followed by a boom period!

Then after a reshuffle it all starts over again. Take a look at history!

The new money should be created circulated and when it has done it's work it should be cancelled!

That wouldn't actually happen because the demand and economic growth would increase the demand for more "new money"!

Every other transaction is just legitimate borrowing and lending business! (real money)

[Vacquer0]

origin:
1350–1400; earlier morgage, Middle English < Old French mortgage, equivalent to mort dead (< Latin mortuus ) + gage pledge, gage1

Death Contract

[mashman]

I fail to see how any of the above proves the "financial overlord" comment.

Who approves the creation of money?



If there is some overarching international power controlling money markets, they’re ‎doing a piss poor job. ‎


They are. But then that's their job as they believe in the same value system that you do... irrespective of the obvious flaws.



To take Greece as an example, they're in the shit because they spend too much on shit they can't afford. They have some of the most generous Govt. pensions anywhere - for example, as a job with "high physical input", a chef or a hairdresser is allowed to retire at age 55.

If there really was an International Banking conspiracy, the IMF would have stepped in, the Hairdresser woul have to retire at 65, and the banks wouldn't be bleeding shitloads of cash...


Who spends too much money on what? It would be easier to manage if the pensions were all of equal value... but as they're all valued differently, those with higher paid jobs receive higher pensions and it is those people who are causing the most drain on the economy... and most can probably afford to live without a pension. (

And back on topic... NZ politicianssssss life perks after 12 years of "service", :killingme :facepalm...

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but pretty much every developed country is looking to extend the pensionable age because they can't afford it.



As far as I'm aware, smaller banks like Kiwibank securitize their loans and sell them on the open market, hence the commonly used expression about Japanese Housewifes and Belgian Dentists underwiting the NZ housing market.

commonly used :blink:... never heard of it... belitists party joke perhaps? How do they securitize the loans?

[Oscar]

The banking system in it's self is well organised and efficient, the area of dispute is their god given right to create "new money" and charge exorbitant intrest for the privilege.

If GDP is 100 and GNI is 75 there is a shortfall of 25 .... 75 can not consume 100 ... 25 new ones have to be created and issued to achieve that!

Monetary reformists say create it interest free! (social credit)

Banks create it at ?%! (social debt)

Same problem but a bigger problem due to the intrest charge, that initial 25 just keeps getting bigger and bigger until we have a depression, followed by a war, followed by a boom period!

Then after a reshuffle it all starts over again. Take a look at history!

The new money should be created circulated and when it has done it's work it should be cancelled!

That wouldn't actually happen because the demand and economic growth would increase the demand for more "new money"!

Every other transaction is just legitimate borrowing and lending business! (real money)

Er - that equation only works if the GDP stays at its benchmark.
It doesn't.

[Oscar]

Who approves the creation of money?



Where?
In NZ?
The Treasury, what’s your point? ‎



They are. But then that's their job as they believe in the same value system that you do... irrespective of the obvious flaws.



Who spends too much money on what? It would be easier to manage if the pensions were all of equal value... but as they're all valued differently, those with higher paid jobs receive higher pensions and it is those people who are causing the most drain on the economy... and most can probably afford to live without a pension. (


The pensions in question are of equal value, they are just paid earlier.
The higher pension you are referring to are superannuation savings.



Perhaps you haven't noticed, but pretty much every developed country is looking to extend the pensionable age because they can't afford it.



So what? People are living longer.
My point was that Greece got into trouble in part because of the unrealistcally early age they pay the pension.



commonly used :blink:... never heard of it... belitists party joke perhaps? How do they securitize the loans?

Securitising loans is where the underlying debt is sold (usually offshore) as bonds. I'll bet there are lots of commonly used financial expressions that you don't know, but that doesn't make it elitist, it's merely a reflection of your education.

[oldrider]

Er - that equation only works if the GDP stays at its benchmark.
It doesn't.

Not meant to be fixed, it's just a discussion example ... oh well, nice chat. :yes:

[mashman]

Where?
In NZ?
The Treasury, what’s your point? ‎


Then why don't the treasury create some new money and buy the SOE's?



The pensions in question are of equal value, they are just paid earlier.
The higher pension you are referring to are superannuation savings.


How long do you get to claim the higher level pension? Is there a time limit?



So what? People are living longer.
My point was that Greece got into trouble in part because of the unrealistcally early age they pay the pension.

Why didn't Greece get their treasury to print more money? Then people living longer could put more into the pension funds.



Securitising loans is where the underlying debt is sold (usually offshore) as bonds. I'll bet there are lots of commonly used financial expressions that you don't know, but that doesn't make it elitist, it's merely a reflection of your education.

You said commonly used expression, not financial expression :)... but you're correct, my education is exceptionally low in just about every field of study there is, even my own... that's why I have no option but to trust those who speako the lingo. Seems like they really suck at their jobs. I would have thought the bright sparks in the beehave woulda dealt with that by now.

[Zedder]

Then why don't the treasury create some new money and buy the SOE's?



How long do you get to claim the higher level pension? Is there a time limit?



Why didn't Greece get their treasury to print more money? Then people living longer could put more into the pension funds.



You said commonly used expression, not financial expression :)... but you're correct, my education is exceptionally low in just about every field of study there is, even my own... that's why I have no option but to trust those who speako the lingo. Seems like they really suck at their jobs. I would have thought the bright sparks in the beehave woulda dealt with that by now.

To cut a long story short: Unfortunately it's not as easy as printing more money because it would just create massive inflation and there'd be a barrow load of money to buy a loaf of bread scenario.

You're bang on about having no option but to trust those who speako the lingo etc.

Most of us have no option but to trust them and they (banks, the financial sector, and government) stuff it up big time regularly.

[Oscar]

You said commonly used expression, not financial expression :)... but you're correct, my education is exceptionally low in just about every field of study there is, even my own... that's why I have no option but to trust those who speako the lingo. Seems like they really suck at their jobs. I would have thought the bright sparks in the beehave woulda dealt with that by now.

It is a commonly used expression.
So how come you know these people suck at their jobs yet you admit that your "education is exceptionally low"?

[mashman]

To cut a long story short: Unfortunately it's not as easy as printing more money because it would just create massive inflation and there'd be a barrow load of money to buy a loaf of bread scenario.


Why? (short version will do :rofl:)


It is a commonly used expression.
So how come you know these people suck at their jobs yet you admit that your "education is exceptionally low"?

I'll remember to slip that one into conversation someday.
Coz it don't take a rocket scientist to be able to see that people around the globe are dying or are in serious poverty, even with a food surplus. ... despite arguably one of the most powerful groups on the face of the planet having set MDG's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Development_Goals) over 10 years ago (they have 3.5 years left to deliver, Aunty Hels in #3 isn't she?)... and that's with just about any and every resource at their disposal. They suck at their jobs.

Also if anyone knows the answer to this I'd appreciate it. How long do you get to claim the higher level pension (superannuation)? Is there a time limit?

[Zedder]

Why? (short version will do :rofl:)



I'll remember to slip that one into conversation someday.
Coz it don't take a rocket scientist to be able to see that people around the globe are dying or are in serious poverty, even with a food surplus. ... despite arguably one of the most powerful groups on the face of the planet having set MDG's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Development_Goals) over 10 years ago (they have 3.5 years left to deliver, Aunty Hels in #3 isn't she?)... and that's with just about any and every resource at their disposal. They suck at their jobs.

Also if anyone knows the answer to this I'd appreciate it. How long do you get to claim the higher level pension (superannuation)? Is there a time limit?

Short version: Google it.

[Oscar]

Also if anyone knows the answer to this I'd appreciate it. How long do you get to claim the higher level pension (superannuation)? Is there a time limit?

What are you talking of?

National Super?
There is only one level.

[oldrider]

It is a commonly used expression.
So how come you know these people suck at their jobs yet you admit that your "education is exceptionally low"?

He is qualified, he has a degree in the "School of Hard knocks", most successful education system ever created!

Podium finish :first::second::third: in life.

[mashman]

Short version: Google it.

:rofl: bagga. I would prefer to read something in engrish... I get the principle, but never understood the causes of hyperinflation... other than money lenders seeing it as unfair that is.

anyhoo...

The left wanna scrap National Standards (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10258523/labour-would-scrap-national-standards/)... meh, I'm not too fussed either way.

aaaaand the right are still sacking people and giving "grants" to businesses that want to catch water for irrigation (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10258342/irrigation-joins-a-fresh-start-for-water/) (something they should be paying for themselves, not me)

[mashman]

What are you talking of?

National Super?
There is only one level.

So nothing special for couples or based on tax codes? Is it means tested?
The personal one? Are you limited by the value in the account i.e. $X will last you Y years?

[Ocean1]

Is it means tested?

No. Because everyone knows that if they did that I'd track down every bastard that had ever uttered the suggestion and remove their face.

[Clockwork]

Why? (short version will do :rofl:)\

The more money you print the less it is worth, hence the term worthless. Like any commoditty its value is in its scarcity.

National Super is paid at one rate for singles and another rate for couples.

Personal Super, is money repaid to you by an insurance company after you first give them a lump sum. How much you get depends on how much you gave them in the first instance, how old you are, what gender you are... It's basically a bet between you and the insurance company that you will out live the lump sum!



No. Because everyone knows that if they did that I'd track down every bastard that had ever uttered the suggestion and remove their face.

Face facts, it's inevitable. Else what they will do is freeze it at present levels then provide a means tested benefit available to top it up to a livable amount.

[puddytat]

The more money you print the less it is worth, hence the term worthless. Like any commoditty its value is in its scarcity.
.

Yeah ,you'd think so but what about the U.S $?
Oh thats right, they've China buying up their Govt. bonds to keep their own currency exchange rate artificially low....
What a fucked system.

[Clockwork]

That and the fact that at the moment the worlds benchmark currency of trade is USD, so lucky them.

Actually I put some credence to the theory that Bush only invaded Iraq because Sadam threatend to start selling his oil for Euro's. If the USD lost its benchmark status, the US would not simply be able to print its way out of debt!

[mashman]

No. Because everyone knows that if they did that I'd track down every bastard that had ever uttered the suggestion and remove their face.

Ouchy... damn I hope they bring it in soon :shifty:



The more money you print the less it is worth, hence the term worthless. Like any commoditty its value is in its scarcity.

National Super is paid at one rate for singles and another rate for couples.

Personal Super, is money repaid to you by an insurance company after you first give them a lump sum. How much you get depends on how much you gave them in the first instance, how old you are, what gender you are... It's basically a bet between you and the insurance company that you will out live the lump sum!


Merci buckets that man. How's about "balancing" the printing of money with 1 million unemployed? Pay off the debt of the country, then create jobs the following year? Inflation neutral?

[Banditbandit]

The more money you print the less it is worth, hence the term worthless. Like any commoditty its value is in its scarcity.



In Relation to what? Used to be the gold standard but that is long gone ..

In relation to other currencies? Shit .. that fluctuates so much and only the currency traders profit ... and has little connection to how most people use money ...

In relation to what the money can purchase? That's how most people would see it if they thought about it ... Go down that path and you get into Douglas Credit ... and there is no reason NOT to print more money ...

In relation to the total value of the country? Probably a better idea .. but again that's a foundational concept of Douglas Credit ..

The current value of money is based on what people believe it is worth .. now and in the future ..

[mashman]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_kedSHCpc2GQ/SU2jy4RBMNI/AAAAAAAAAdU/yoSR5PXiMHA/s400/MikeMoreuACC.jpg

[Winston001]

The Economist for a laugh established the Big Mac Index as a more down to earth way of measuring purchasing power across nations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index

It actually provides a serious comparison when you go through the numbers. Illuminating.

[puddytat]

Man, If you want an alternative view of NZ politics then I cant recommend Bomber Bradbury enough....he cuts thru all the spin & tells it like it is...a fucking joke!
When I can learn how to link his blogg, I will!!
Wake up people!!

[Winston001]

Yeah? I only know Bomber Bradbury from Jim Mora's afternoon Nat Radio panel and I thought he was a bit of a wally. Intelligent and amusing granted. Each to their own. :D

http://pundit.co.nz/content/tariana-turia-tries-to-lure-national-voters

[Winston001]

Yeah? I only know Bomber Bradbury from Jim Mora's afternoon Nat Radio panel and I thought he was a bit of a wally. Intelligent and amusing granted. Each to their own. :D
His blogs are on Tumeke

http://tumeke.blogspot.com/

[puddytat]

His latest on tumeke ( I watch him on stratos) I found to be very witty & right on the money in relation to the railway drama on opening night as well as other things....but youre right each to their own....some prefer Cameron Slater eh:yes:

[puddytat]

I see the Pirate Party has won 8.9 percent of the vote & got all its candidates elected in the Berlin State elections.....
I'd link ya if I could:facepalm:
Surely Mashman has seen this & could link the New York Times article?
Shows you what even a few organised folk with enough conviction can achieve....

[mashman]

I see the Pirate Party has won 8.9 percent of the vote & got all its candidates elected in the Berlin State elections.....
I'd link ya if I could:facepalm:
Surely Mashman has seen this & could link the New York Times article?
Shows you what even a few organised folk with enough conviction can achieve....

heh... nope, hadn't seen it. But here it is (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/world/europe/in-berlin-pirates-win-8-9-percent-of-vote-in-regional-races.html)

[Maha]

Has the Election date been decided yet?

Edit: Saturday 26th Nov'...

[oldrider]

Has the Election date been decided yet?

It's not really an election, just a poll to give the politicians "permission" to form a government among themselves!

The leader of the dominant permission holders becomes the prime minister? What a joke!

And they have the affront to claim they are "elected" .... Tui anyone!

Democracy ... New Zealand style! :facepalm:

[mashman]

Has the Election date been decided yet?


Here's a calendar of events (http://www.elections.org.nz/elections/2011-general-election-and-referendum/election-date-announcement-and-key-dates.html)


It's not really an election, just a poll to give the politicians "permission" to form a government among themselves!

The leader of the dominant permission holders becomes the prime minister? What a joke!

And they have the affront to claim they are "elected" .... Tui anyone!

Democracy ... New Zealand style! :facepalm:

Praps they should follow the Lotto/World Cup draw models, followed by cage fighting for the top spot. T'would certainly make it more interesting. Maybe the Miss World model... :sick: at the thought of budgy smugglers and swimsuits... and we know that they'd mean it when they say that they'd wish for world peace, after all that's why they're there in the first place.

[Oscar]

It's not really an election, just a poll to give the politicians "permission" to form a government among themselves!

The leader of the dominant permission holders becomes the prime minister? What a joke!

And they have the affront to claim they are "elected" .... Tui anyone!

Democracy ... New Zealand style! :facepalm:

Get a better system?

[mashman]

Get a better system?

Now we're talkin... what did you have in mind?

[oldrider]

Get a better system?

Well, something where the politicians are accountable to the electorate, rather than to each other!

I thought STV was preferable to MMP, for that reason but I am not sure whether they have tinkered that to become too complicated now!

Anything but FPP and MMP has got to be worth a look as long as they "don't" go back to FPP.

[rainman]

Well, something where the politicians are accountable to the electorate, rather than to each other!

When has this ever really been the case?

[Oscar]

Well, something where the politicians are accountable to the electorate, rather than to each other!

I thought STV was preferable to MMP, for that reason but I am not sure whether they have tinkered that to become too complicated now!

Anything but FPP and MMP has got to be worth a look as long as they "don't" go back to FPP.

You're contradicting yourself now - you complained about the ability for politicians to form a Govt. amongst themselves and STV does just that.

If that's your complaint, then the only thing that's going to satisfy you is Direct Democracy, which is somewhat unwieldy - you'll be complaining about how long takes to get anything done.

I think you might just have to accept that a representative system is just that - you vote for someone to represent you and that in a democracy the fact that your side doesn't win, doesn't make it a bad system.

[oldrider]

When has this ever really been the case?

I really don't know but we can live in hope ... can't we?


You're contradicting yourself now - you complained about the ability for politicians to form a Govt. amongst themselves and STV does just that.

If that's your complaint, then the only thing that's going to satisfy you is Direct Democracy, which is somewhat unwieldy - you'll be complaining about how long takes to get anything done.

I think you might just have to accept that a representative system is just that - you vote for someone to represent you and that in a democracy the fact that your side doesn't win, doesn't make it a bad system.

I think STV is more likely to make the politician keep his eyes and ears more focussed on what their voters want, in order to get their support.

Why do you think otherwise?

Actually it is the party vote that is probably the most impersonal and collectively boring!

"My side"? ... heavens above, you know more than I do! :rolleyes:

[rainman]

I really don't know but we can live in hope ... can't we?

Goodness me, idealism's the last thing I expected from a cynical old bugger like you. :innocent:

[oldrider]

Goodness me, idealism's the last thing I expected from a cynical old bugger like you. :innocent:

True but I am in a good mood tonight! :lol:

[Swoop]

With the election "graffiti collection boards" going up around town, it is nice to see that a bunch of idiots have objected to this advertising sign.:facepalm:
247440

[mashman]

sooo today, what's on the political menu:

Some form of sense from Mana if the figures he quotes are correct (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10339095/mana-party-wants-to-impose-new-tax/)

Labour believing that they can entice more people into Kiwisaver with better incentives (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10339015/labour-to-tinker-with-kiwisaver-scheme/) because we can all afford to pay more.

Aaaaaaand JK saying he may not have the votes for his surveillance bill changes (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10339030/govt-may-not-have-numbers-for-surveillance-bill/), but they've been working on it all weekend (what a fuckin waste of time and money) but he's confident he'll be able to change peoples minds (how, I can only guess)

[mashman]

National ignoring what those affected by their changes want, again (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10344492/protesting-students-scuffle-with-police/)

Aaaaaaaaaand yet more sense from Mana (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10342235/mana-supports-auckland-uni-students/)

[puddytat]

[QUOTE=mashman;1130162008]sooo today, what's on the political menu:

Some form of sense from Mana if the figures he quotes are correct (http://http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10339095/mana-party-wants-to-impose-new-tax/)

thees linky no worky Honky ....

(it'll be the the SIS:yes:)

[mashman]

[QUOTE=mashman;1130162008]sooo today, what's on the political menu:

Some form of sense from Mana if the figures he quotes are correct (http://http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10339095/mana-party-wants-to-impose-new-tax/)

thees linky no worky Honky ....

(it'll be the the SIS:yes:)

:rofl: same linky, should worky (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/10339095/mana-party-wants-to-impose-new-tax/)

[puddytat]

Awww cheers Bro,pretty fly for a white guy:yes:

Could it be that simple?


Hey how come your nom de plume has a small white crosshair next to it in the other users browsing box?

[mashman]

Awww cheers Bro,pretty fly for a white guy:yes:

Could it be that simple?


Hey how come your nom de plume has a small white crosshair next to it in the other users browsing box?

:rofl: coz we're fwiends... or they're targets and we're fucked

[mashman]

ha ha ha haaaaaaaa... Young people not signing up to vote (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/10351457/young-people-not-signing-up-to-vote/#)... you have to enrol, if you don't enrol we'll fine you. Why should anyone enrol if they aren't going to vote? aye, we're living in a democratically run free society alright... where you are forced to register. I hope they get a resounding fuck off from the young people... once they've hunted them down so that they can fine them that is :facepalm:

[puddytat]

Well on the News the Greens are polling at 10%,a high for them.
Was also good to see Norman & Jones with some fellas who were showing them their Electric motorbikes which looked great,anyone know who they were?

Politic wise, Duncan Garner pointed out some interesting stats from the polls which showed that the majority of those polled from both the Greens & Nats supported the 2 parties working together.....63% of Nats,58% from the Greens
The 2 leaders thought otherwise.....

[rainman]

Well if this election was judged on the quality of the campaign opening videos National would be packing it's bags. What a fucking horrible boring lecture with Key looking like a reanimated corpse.

And 10/10 to Labour for a great video. Greens a close-ish second.

[oldrider]

Well if this election was judged on the quality of the campaign opening videos National would be packing it's bags. What a fucking horrible boring lecture with Key looking like a reanimated corpse.

And 10/10 to Labour for a great video. Greens a close-ish second.

Rose coloured spectacles and all .... as if you were looking for something positive in John Key and National ... were you disappointed then? :rolleyes:

[rainman]

Rose coloured spectacles and all .... as if you were looking for something positive in John Key and National ... were you disappointed then? :rolleyes:

That's a bit unfair, you should know by now I'm no ideologue. I'm not even a Labour voter as a general thing (although it is crossing my mind for this time tbh). I was simply making the observation that Labour had a cracker of a campaign video tightly linked to their values, and with a very solid, Kiwi-as feel and a good team performance. National's had Key looking like a reanimated corpse with a bored audience, and wasn't even on the party site but rather Key's - says it all. I hate celebrity politics. The Greens, my "traditional" party were a bit off the boil but not horrible. Haven't seen the other smaller parties yet except those moonbats, um, Act - and that had Banks and Brash in so I felt a wee bit unwell as a result. Quite normal, considering.

In normal circumstances (closeish race between National/Labour, no major policy threats like asset sales, easier economic and environmental conditions), I'd be one tick green and one tick anyone but McCully, but not too fussed about who wins the main race as long as the Greens got a good show. This time I absolutely do not want another term of the Nats and Key because they will fuck the country up good and proper. They're also just not very good at the job.

Did you see the campaign openings, and did you think National's was any good? If so, why?

[oldrider]

Did you see the campaign openings, and did you think National's was any good? If so, why?

No I didn't.

My only real incentive to go to a polling booth this election is to participate in the referendum on the voting system!

FPP should not be an option, that was voted out and should not be included as an option. My opinion only of course.

STV is still my preference because I think it makes the candidate more accountable or concious of the needs of the electorate.

The downside is that we will still get a coalition which gives the elected members a reason to cosy up to each other rather than to the electorate!

STV should be less of a lucky dip government than we get with MMP which really results in Clayton's governments that nobody really wanted! (or even knew about)

Politicians need to be accountable and responsible to the people that elect them rather than to each other! IMO! MMP does not support this!

So far my electorate vote looks destined to go to Jacqui Dean who just happens to be a National candidate, don't know yet where my party vote will be going!

MMP stinks in my opinion!

National and Labour are another Clayton's coalition IMO because despite screaming opposite "policies" eventually everything they do ends up the same!

It's just that the electorate believes their bullshit that they are different .... any colour you like, as long as it is still red and blue in the end! :facepalm:

[rainman]

My only real incentive to go to a polling booth this election is to participate in the referendum on the voting system!

FPP should not be an option, that was voted out and should not be included as an option. My opinion only of course.

STV is still my preference because I think it makes the candidate more accountable or concious of the needs of the electorate.
...

So far my electorate vote looks destined to go to Jacqui Dean who just happens to be a National candidate, don't know yet where my party vote will be going!


I quite like STV too but it's often written off as too complicated for people to understand. An alternative would be a modified MMP that addresses some of the obvious problems with it. Agree FPP is out. I suspect this referendum will be MMP vs FPP in drag, though.

I had a look at your electorate choices and you may have a point! I still think party vote Nat would be suicidal though.

[shrub]

This time I absolutely do not want another term of the Nats and Key because they will fuck the country up good and proper. They're also just not very good at the job.

I agree, I genuinely had high expectations of the current government in 08, but all they have done in the last 3 years is a cut funding to government departments, few flaccid tax cuts, raise GST and make Auckland a super city. Their only answers to creating a brighter future are to partially privatise the few assets left in state hands and lay off civil servants - can we really afford them, no matter how nice a chap John is?

BTW anyone who has ever had to deal with a government department and been frustrated with poor service has experienced what happens when you cut their resources. As a fiscal strategy it only works when a civil service has been allowed to grow beyond need. The NZ civil service grew under Labour because it had been stripped back under National and was unable to deliver the services it is required to and was probably only just at the level required for a society like ours to function effectively.

Sadly NZ is probably fairly fucked now, and another 3 years of Key and his clowns will bring us to the point where I doubt many of us are young enough to see things ever come right.

[MisterD]

I agree, I genuinely had high expectations of the current government in 08, but all they have done in the last 3 years is a cut funding to government departments, few flaccid tax cuts, raise GST and make Auckland a super city. Their only answers to creating a brighter future are to partially privatise the few assets left in state hands and lay off civil servants - can we really afford them, no matter how nice a chap John is?

BTW anyone who has ever had to deal with a government department and been frustrated with poor service has experienced what happens when you cut their resources. As a fiscal strategy it only works when a civil service has been allowed to grow beyond need. The NZ civil service grew under Labour because it had been stripped back under National and was unable to deliver the services it is required to and was probably only just at the level required for a society like ours to function effectively.

Sadly NZ is probably fairly fucked now, and another 3 years of Key and his clowns will bring us to the point where I doubt many of us are young enough to see things ever come right.


The civil service balooned under labour becuase it's the old money-go-round: More civil servants = more PSA members = more money back to the Labour Party. I guess you missed the bit (as one example) where elective surgery numbers are continuing to rise?

Do you think that the asset mix that the government owns at the moment is perfect? What would you say if the country was to sell stakes in assets now, get debt down and then at a future point in time buy a significant holding in Chorus (I'll bet anything you like the next Labour Govt in 2017 does just that)? The Labour / Green "No Asset Sales" line is as trite and idiotic as "No GST on Fresh veg (but you'll still pay it on frozen peas)".

The biggest problem we have right now is our major markets in the US and Europe playing "Who can debase their currency the most" and no government we elect has any control over that.

[shrub]

The civil service balooned under labour becuase it's the old money-go-round: More civil servants = more PSA members = more money back to the Labour Party. I guess you missed the bit (as one example) where elective surgery numbers are continuing to rise?

Ah, the conspiracy theorists are back with silly arguments. Here's one for you: Librarians are frequently members of the PSA and vote Labour, therefore the more librarians the better for Labour. Educated people are statistically more likely to use libraries, and the interest free student loans were a strategy to get more people in education and using libraries, therefore there would be more librarians and more Labour supporters.

Has it ever dawned on you that a highly developed western society requires substantial infrastructure to function? And that infrastructure requires skilled people to operate it? Or are you so caught up in the spin?



Do you think that the asset mix that the government owns at the moment is perfect? What would you say if the country was to sell stakes in assets now, get debt down and then at a future point in time buy a significant holding in Chorus (I'll bet anything you like the next Labour Govt in 2017 does just that)?

No, the current asset mix is not perfect, but a key component is energy companies that are highly profitable and critical to business. And when you consider that energy prices are rising rapidly (and will continue to do so) because global demand for energy, especially clean energy, is beginning to go through the roof it seems silly to sell those assets now. Kind of like selling Microsoft shares just before Windows 95 was launched.


The Labour / Green "No Asset Sales" line is as trite and idiotic as "No GST on Fresh veg (but you'll still pay it on frozen peas)".

Wrong. No asset sales just makes good long term economic sense, especially when you look at the assets that will be sold. The only problem is that based on the last 3 years National do not have a long term view and certainly don't have any ideas to deal with the current economic crisis.


The biggest problem we have right now is our major markets in the US and Europe playing "Who can debase their currency the most" and no government we elect has any control over that.

Wrong again. Personally I don't like the idea of being a victim of circumstance, and the problems we are all about to experience can be managed by some simple strategies: Diversify exports, increase productivity, decrease private debt, increase the tax take by a CGT, increase the savings pool which in turn provides capital for investment in business. Only problem is none of those are election winners, so none of them will ever be done.

[SPman]

the country was to sell stakes in assets now, get debt downBut - ShonKey has said he wants to use the assett sales to pay for things like education...! Basic core government spending that should come out of taxation.....sort of like selling your car to pay for the weeks groceries......

[Usarka]

But - ShonKey has said he wants to use the assett sales to pay for things like education...! Basic core government spending that should come out of taxation.....sort of like selling your car to pay for the weeks groceries......

Waaiiiiit a minute, I thought the asset sales were to reduce debt. :sherlock:

[Banditbandit]

Waaiiiiit a minute, I thought the asset sales were to reduce debt. :sherlock:

Yeah .. if they don't dell assets to pay for our edumackashun then they wil have to borrow money to pay for it ...

[Maha]

Waaiiiiit a minute, I thought the asset sales were to reduce debt. :sherlock:

That was the original idea...and what we (the voting public) were told before National tacked to starboard and headed for the bouy.

[Usarka]

Yeah .. if they don't dell assets to pay for our edumackashun then they wil have to borrow money to pay for it ...

So what were the tax cuts for?

[Banditbandit]

So what were the tax cuts for?

A thank you payment for the rich fuckers who vited for them last time ..

[Oscar]

A thank you payment for the rich fuckers who vited for them last time ..

I got tax cut, but I didn't vite for them.

[riffer]

Y'all need to catch up. Things have changed. Now the assets sales are to capitalise Kiwibank so it can be sold off along with ACC.

[Oscar]

Y'all need to catch up. Things have changed. Now the assets sales are to capitalise Kiwibank so it can be sold off along with ACC.

Y'all need to put down the bong...:woohoo:

[riffer]

Y'all need to put down the bong...:woohoo:

Okay, I'll bite. What makes you think I'm raving?

Please explain exactly why the need for a massive capitalisation of Kiwibank paid for by sales of other NZ assets?

[Oscar]

Okay, I'll bite. What makes you think I'm raving?

Please explain exactly why the need for a massive capitalisation of Kiwibank paid for by sales of other NZ assets?

The main reason was the sale of ACC.
Why would you open it up to competition and then sell it?
Selling ACC would make private ventures into workers comp. even more unattractive than it is now.

Also why put money in Kiwi Bank just to sell it?
It's perfectly saleable now.

[riffer]

The main reason was the sale of ACC.
Why would you open it up to competition and then sell it?
Selling ACC would make private ventures into workers comp. even more unattractive than it is now.

Also why put money in Kiwi Bank just to sell it?
It's perfectly saleable now.

National have already stated that the workers account is to be sold off next term.
They've announced today that they are to heavily capitalise Kiwibank. Bill English has stated that Kiwibank will sold.

I suggest you take up the bong.

[Big Dave]

Then who vited 'em in, C?

[Oscar]

National have already stated that the workers account is to be sold off next term.

I suggest you take up the bong.

Selling off the workers account?
Opening it up to outside competition - it's a different thing entirely.

As for Kiwibank, I had been avoiding election news, it bores me.
So yeah, pass the bong:yes:

[oldrider]

A thank you payment for the rich fuckers who vited for them last time ..

Doesn't stack up, with the 1% ... 99% complaints ... how can the 1% vite in a government that the other 99% don't want?

The media have begun their mischief and we will have the government of their choice, as always!

Who will win the 2011 election? .... "The media"! :yes:

[puddytat]

Gosh, its a bit of a worry aint it.....
Firstly with asset sales & especially with power generation there are two reasons why they want to sell IMO. The cost of energy in one form or another is predicted to skyrocket over time & so I think its a bit of get in while its cheap 'cause the profits will be better in the future for the overseas investors......they dont need to pay tax on any dividend unlike Ma & Pa here in NZ.
Secondly, they wont be in power forever & they will no doubt call in a few favours when they get the boot:yes:And apart from the odd one I cant see any of them in the future doing much in the way of philanthropy or worrying themselves particularly about You & I.
Selling shit thats making money to pay off debt that enables us to borrow more, is just dumd.And selling assets will raise your credit rating? FFS how fucked is that.You know & I know we could sell the whole Country over time & the majority will still be broke.
We need to be patient.The World will be coming to us for more & more ......its simple supply & demand,& if you think that the problems weve got now are that bad....crikey are we in for a rough few decades ahead.IMO



Thirdly, there are a other issues that arnt on the agenda at the moment becuse our dear leader has pulled the pin on legal actions & RMA rulings....thereby removing them from the media.....outta sight outta mind. The case in mind that Im alluding to is the Govt. plans for Hydroelectric generation in the Sth Isle.Orders have come down from above to not continue with appeals over the Mokihinui Dam project
UNTIL after the Election. 'Tis terribly bad for ones image see?
The Govt has been fighting DOC hard on this to the tune of over $11 million dollars in Lawyers fees......effectively fighting itself.
If this asset shit goes ahead, well it wont be just about Your's & My power that we have now. It'll effectively allow them to allow any future dam to also be this 49/51% bullshit. Personally I feel the odds are more likely to be stacked 50/60 to their benefit.
This also raises the question of Free trade agreements & WTO rules:facepalm:Do we allow overseas corporations to own so much of our stategic assets? When Ma & Pa Kiwi have sold off thier last shares for a loaf of Bread or packet of chewing gum & MisterDodgey
from NewYork feels hard done by because we wont let him have his way , he then takes us to the WTO? Or do a Comalco & threaten us with pulling out if we ask them to pay a tad more than 18 CENTS/KW they pay now, or perhaps some fucking tax on their profits, I'd've told 'em "See ya, thanks for the Smelter":bye: Nationalise it & away WE go...
Nah, Im not on the bong, the dak tin is full of seeds at the mo.

TIP OF THE DAY....
If you want to see something a bit more politically hard hitting & definitely more entertaining than Campbell & Sainsbury check out iPREDICT
on Stratos at 7pm weekdays.

I thought Donkey looked like the Hollow puppet that he is.

[SPman]

Nothing to do with the NZ elections (or does it?), but this comment on the Oakland OWS Police Riot caught my fancy....
We will see more, much more of this. You can smell the fear in the boardrooms (and in their bought-and-paid-for extensions, the government offices) around the world, as our mighty statesfolk flail at the global economic meltdown their own policies have unleashed -- with no other answer than to keep imposing "austerity" measures, one after another, destroying the societies they've feasted upon for so long. And has there even been such a gaggle of fourth-rate poltroons, of shallow, witless, gormless goobers as the leaders of the "developed" world these days? Sarkozy, Cameron, Merkel, Berlusconi, Obama ....? It's like the last tribal council on Easter Island. All they have left are lies, delusions -- and brutality.

[imdying]

I thought we were selling assets to reduce public debt. But now we're putting it into schools? Or in to KiwiBank? Or maybe somewhere else?

National, Labour, doesn't really matter who we vote in, they'll fuck it up. I'm only voting so I have a right to bitch about the result; I expect to get screwed either way.

[puddytat]

Nothing to do with the NZ elections (or does it?), but this comment on the Oakland OWS Police Riot caught my fancy....
Aint that the truth.


I was just reading that the assets planned for sale have returned on average over the last 5 years........17-22%
So selling that so you can borrow at 4-5% is good logic?

[shrub]

I thought we were selling assets to reduce public debt. But now we're putting it into schools? Or in to KiwiBank? Or maybe somewhere else?.


You forget that National are a party of astute and successful businesspeople and entrepreneurs like Jerry Brownlee and Bill English, so don't question their expertise. Selling a high yield asset that is almost certainly going to become extremely valuable in the near future to pay for an asset that increases operating costs (like a school) when you're running at a deficit is just plain good business sense - it must be or National wouldn't be doing it.

If you get confused and begin to doubt just listen to Wayne down at the pub. He has a grouse Holden ute and a smokin hot missus, so ya gotta take a guy like that seriously.:yes:

[Indiana_Jones]

Vote for everyone!

-Indy

[imdying]

You forget that National are a party of astute and successful businesspeople and entrepreneurs like Jerry Brownlee and Bill English, so don't question their expertise.The problem is, Labour have nothing better to offer.

[Swoop]

The problem is, Labour have nothing better to offer.
Apart from being able to retire later in life?:rolleyes:

[Ocean1]

Apart from being able to retire later in life?:rolleyes:

Yeah. If they're going to fuck with that they need to tell me now.

So I can cash up all my assets and blow whatever cash I can't hide before I get there.

'Cause I'll be fucked if I'll sit still for a bunch of poor pricks retiring on pensions I'm not "entitled" to.

[shrub]

The problem is, Labour have nothing better to offer.

Agreed, but at least people don't have the bizarre idea that Labour pollies are switched on people who understand business and are experienced and successful businesspeople in their own right whereas (at least if you read the threads on KB) there is this common perception that National MPs are such visionary leaders.

But I would rather a career politician who has devoted their life to mastering politics running my country than someone who is a bloody clever builder or accountant in the same way I would rather I had someone who has spent their lives working in medicine cutting me up than someone who was an oustanding architect and took up medicine because it was a challenge. That's one of the reasons I like the list system of MMP - you don't just get people in government who are smooth and convincing baby kissers; you also get people who know all about law, economics, diplomacy etc.

Going back to my motorcycle analogies, if you staffed a bike shop the way a FPP government was, everyone would be a salesman whereas I'd rather the guy out the back was hired because he was a mechanical genius than because he remembered my name and how I liked my coffee.

[mashman]

Apart from being able to retire later in life?:rolleyes:

starting in 2020 and stretched over a 12 year period :blink:... I reckon the Nats will raise the retirement age way before 2020... I really don't see why this is an election issue for so many. Sounds more like a media beat up because there's nothing else to pick on

[imdying]

But I would rather a career politician who has devoted their life to mastering politics running my countryI would prefer that too, but the big two only offer us career trough snouters. I don't blame them for that though, those same politicians also know how to get elected (and thus their party).

FPTP and MMP are basically a different means to the same ends. Does let the plebs think they're getting a say though which is always nice.

[Swoop]

So.
We have established several things:
1: National will be the next government.
2: Labour will get a new leader after this election.
3: Winnie will have to get his Gold Card out, to ride the bus back home after the election.

[oldrider]

If you get confused and begin to doubt just listen to Wayne down at the pub. He has a grouse Holden ute and a smokin hot missus, so ya gotta take a guy like that seriously.:yes:

What? ... I thought his name was "shrub" and he hangs out on KB! :lol: (Sorry, couldn't resist that, no malice intended!)

[shrub]

What? ... I thought his name was "shrub" and he hangs out on KB! :lol: (Sorry, couldn't resist that, no malice intended!)

Nah mate, I've got a $500.00 Nissan Bluebird. Bought it 5 years ago and it's cost me tyres, oil and a new battery in that time. Best car ever built.

[Banditbandit]

Nah mate, I've got a $500.00 Nissan Bluebird. Bought it 5 years ago and it's cost me tyres, oil and a new battery in that time. Best car ever built.

And the smokin' hot missus??? Pix if possible ..

[rainman]

I really don't see why this is an election issue for so many.

Likewise. The probability of me retiring at 65 is zero, not because I'm a workaholic, but because economic and other circumstances will obtain that make it essential for All Sensible Governments to raise the retirement age before then anyway. Anyone in their 40's or younger who doesn't accept this as self-evident is smoking crack.

Sure there will be various subsidies and special cases and all, but it has to happen before long.

(And that's the good outcome. You don't want to know about the bad outcome).


Nah mate, I've got a $500.00 Nissan Bluebird. Bought it 5 years ago and it's cost me tyres, oil and a new battery in that time. Best car ever built.

Next time I buy a car I'll hire you to do it for me. I'm about 50/50 buying really good cheap cars and nightmare lemons from hell. I really fucking hate buying cars. I'd rather buy shoes, and I fucking hate buying shoes.

And your motorcycle shop analogy up above is sheer brilliance. Kudos and bling to you.

[mashman]

Likewise. The probability of me retiring at 65 is zero, not because I'm a workaholic, but because economic and other circumstances will obtain that make it essential for All Sensible Governments to raise the retirement age before then anyway. Anyone in their 40's or younger who doesn't accept this as self-evident is smoking crack.

Sure there will be various subsidies and special cases and all, but it has to happen before long.

(And that's the good outcome. You don't want to know about the bad outcome).


Aye, very true. I assume the bad outcome you're referring is that there will be no pension "system" at all? I'm half keeping an eye on the U.S. as they're really in the shit in regards to "state" retirement funds... amongst other things.

[rainman]

I assume the bad outcome you're referring is that there will be no pension "system" at all?

The bad outcome is there is no system at all. :)

[mashman]

The bad outcome is there is no system at all. :)

heh... now yer just teasin me :drool:

[SPman]

Sounds more like a media beat up because there's nothing else to pick on......and isn't that a sad comment on the state of main stream media in NZ at the moment...:facepalm:

[oldrider]

......and isn't that a sad comment on the state of main stream media in NZ at the moment...:facepalm:

Unhappy but true! :facepalm:

[mashman]

......and isn't that a sad comment on the state of main stream media in NZ at the moment...:facepalm:

heh, if only it were only NZ :(... shame not many really give a shit

[Indiana_Jones]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't labour proposing a rolling change to 67? Only had a quick glance in the paper the other day. But it seems like it will mean the baby boomers will still get to retire at 65, well most of them. Doesn't that defeat the point?

-Indy

[Ocean1]

Doesn't that defeat the point?

The point isn't to fix the problem, it's to be SEEN to be fixing the problem. It's election year for chrisake it matters not that they're three decades late addressing the issue!

And yes, boomers are generally accepted as being those born from the mid 40's to the early 60's, they started retiring a year or two ago.

There's two major economic changes at work, there. The cost of pensions and the loss of tax from the highest income demographic.

Public focus seems to be on the first, I thought the second was the bigger hit...

Wiki:
Baby Boomers control over 80% of personal financial assets and more than 50% of discretionary spending power., July 2011 They are responsible for more than half of all consumer spending, buy 77% of all prescription drugs, 61% of OTC medication and 80% of all leisure travel.
This lot leaving the workforce is a huge economic brake.

[shrub]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't labour proposing a rolling change to 67? Only had a quick glance in the paper the other day. But it seems like it will mean the baby boomers will still get to retire at 65, well most of them. Doesn't that defeat the point?

-Indy

Bad news mate, us baby boomers run the show at the moment so we'll be retiring at 65 come what may. The reality is most people working now will face a choice of retiring later and/or retiring on less. The only variable is when. The two main political parties have behaved true to form on this: Labour have come in half arsed and populist while National have stuck to their winning formula of hiding behind John Key's lovely smile while doing nothing and hoping the problem goes away.

Out of the two approaches Labour's is slightly better because in 20 years time John's smile won't count for jack, but they need to be bolder and stronger. They needed to make the increases start in 5- 10 years, but offer people the choice of retiring at 65 on a slightly lower rate. Labour won't win this election unless John Key announces that he and Bill English are gay lovers and are retiring to grow dope and run a brothel, which gives them the perfect chance to set themselves up for 2014 by coming out with strong, visionary and radical policies. They'll scare the nervous and ignorant, but most of them are voting National anyway, so they won't lose much and they may even get a few people thinking "hmmm.. these guys have ideas that might just work". Then in 2014 they can come back and show how their policies would have impacted on NZ if they had won in 2011.

National may win in 2014, but to be honest I doubt it. Very little of what they have done in the last 3 years or intend to do in the next 3 years will do anything to make NZ a better place or make you and I richer, and looking at global trends I get the feeling we will all be noticeably worse off in 2014. They may be able to get away with their flaccid incompetence by blaming external events again, and our fucking quake will be a good excuse for a long time, but I doubt many people are that gullible. So Labour needs to use this election and the next 3 years to regroup and set themselves up, but I can't see that happening because they only have slightly more balls than National, and they don't have a strong and gutsy leader in the ranks.

Interesting times...

[Banditbandit]

Interesting times...

Chinese curse ...

[shrub]

Chinese curse ...

May you come to the attention of powerful people and may your wishes be granted.

[Winston001]

That's one of the reasons I like the list system of MMP - you don't just get people in government who are smooth and convincing baby kissers; you also get people who know all about law, economics, diplomacy etc.

Going back to my motorcycle analogies, if you staffed a bike shop the way a FPP government was, everyone would be a salesman whereas I'd rather the guy out the back was hired because he was a mechanical genius...

Nicely put. Regrettably a huge swathe of the electorate think every MP should be elected because nobody makes your points loudly enough to make them think a bit deeper.

[Winston001]

Out of the two approaches Labour's is slightly better because in 20 years time John's smile won't count for jack, but they need to be bolder and stronger.

National may win in 2014, but to be honest I doubt it. Very little of what they have done in the last 3 years or intend to do in the next 3 years will do anything to make NZ a better place or make you and I richer, and looking at global trends I get the feeling we will all be noticeably worse off in 2014.

Or could it be that "steady as she goes, light handed government" as under National is exactly the right balance. MPs don't invent new products, game breaking technologies, or discover new markets. For example a Northland business is now exporting avocado pulp in ready to use packets. Simple idea but its working.

By contrast the single impression I get from Labour is they want to take take take. More taxes, new taxes, strip savings. People get sick of the attitude that what they earn, save, build up over a lifetime must be diminished by government.

[Spearfish]

I think the 9 years Labour was at at the helm has been forgotten?
List the experts in that bunch starting with Cullen.......the attorney-general with a Ph.D. in Social and Economic History. Law maker expert of the highest degree
Next...
And...


then there are the dark Greens that are the sidekicks of the Pinkos
Suet Bradford selected by the NZ harold as the Poly of the year in 2000!
Next...
And....

Yeah MMP works at bringing in the experts (especially the ones on the lists nobody votes for).
I think it needs tweaking a plenty.

The real Question of this election is how long will Phil Goff be in the top money after the election or will he be asking aunty Helen for a office junior job pushing socialism at the UN?

Perhaps Ian Wishart is is hoping NZers cant cope with running their own lives and ask for the return of mother Labour to take over the reigns again. Absolute Power Two, the Goffs years and the punishment of the ungrateful flock.

[oldrider]

(especially the ones on the lists nobody votes for).

Hmmmm.

Often quoted is that list politicians are not voted in! ...... Is that not what our "party vote" does? votes the list members in! :yes:

That is the vote that I am more careful with, if I use it, I don't really know exactly who it is supporting into parliament! :facepalm:

Stupid MMP system always presents us with a lucky dip government of god knows who! :confused:

[shrub]

Stupid MMP system always presents us with a lucky dip government of god knows who! :confused:

not necessarily. You'll find that all of the parties have disclosed their list MPs and their ranking well before election date, so if you don't like people on a party's list - don't vote for that party. As for it being a lucky dip, the same could be said about the electoral seats and FPP. National could stand a donkey in somewhere like Ilam (Jerry Brownlee's seat - maybe they have?) and that member would get voted in. Then look at what's happening in Epsom and Oharia Belmont - it is likely that they will vote in John Banks in Epsom and Peter Dunne in OB - why? Because National aren't seriously contesting those seats. If Banks and Dunne get in, it will have nothing to do with the policies of Act or United Future are and everything to do with National giving their chums seats in parliament. Personally I think that is a cynical and corrupt manipulation of the eclectoral system.

[Bald Eagle]

Personally I think that is a cynical and corrupt manipulation of the eclectoral system.

No that's the way it's supposed to work. :clap:

[Banditbandit]

Stupid MMP system always presents us with a lucky dip government of god knows who! :confused:



Isn't that true of any electoral system???

[shrub]

No that's the way it's supposed to work. :clap:

No, more a way that it can be made to work because people's behaviour is ultimately predictable. Most of the people who live in Epsom/Ilam/Oharia Belmot will only vote for someone who is right wing, regardless of how flaky the policies their party espouses - and yes, I know the same could be said about people in predominantly left wing electorates. Therefore National are capitalising on the sheep-like behaviour to get their chums (and maybe one or 2 extra list MPs) in. I was interested/appalled to hear a recent poll about Epsom where most people preferred the National candidate but would vote for Banks and Act if John Key told them to.

Baaaa.... baaaaa.... baaaa....:facepalm:

[Oscar]

No, more a way that it can be made to work because people's behaviour is ultimately predictable. Most of the people who live in Epsom/Ilam/Oharia Belmot will only vote for someone who is right wing, regardless of how flaky the policies their party espouses - and yes, I know the same could be said about people in predominantly left wing electorates. Therefore National are capitalising on the sheep-like behaviour to get their chums (and maybe one or 2 extra list MPs) in. I was interested/appalled to hear a recent poll about Epsom where most people preferred the National candidate but would vote for Banks and Act if John Key told them to.

Baaaa.... baaaaa.... baaaa....:facepalm:


Au contraire - it's not sheep like behavour at all.
It's actually very sophisticated strategic voting (although I'll believe it when I see it).
Having said that, I personally think that the standard of ACT candidates is problematic and their policy too populist, so I wouldn't do it.

[shrub]

Au contraire - it's not sheep like behavour at all.
It's actually very sophisticated strategic voting (although I'll believe it when I see it).
Having said that, I personally think that the standard of ACT candidates is problematic and their policy too populist, so I wouldn't do it.

Really? To me sophisticated voting behaviour is voting for the candidate that is best suited to represent you and for the party that has the best policies for New Zealand now. It involves assessing the policies of all relevant parties, at least attending public forums but ideally personally meeting the candidates. Then it involves making a balanced and rational decision based on all information to hand. Personally I don't consider voting for a candidate you don't like just because John Key told you to, or voting for a party because they are "right wing" or "left wing", and that's what you are to be the slightest bit sophisticated.

[Oscar]

Really? To me sophisticated voting behaviour is voting for the candidate that is best suited to represent you and for the party that has the best policies for New Zealand now. It involves assessing the policies of all relevant parties, at least attending public forums but ideally personally meeting the candidates. Then it involves making a balanced and rational decision based on all information to hand. Personally I don't consider voting for a candidate you don't like just because John Key told you to, or voting for a party because they are "right wing" or "left wing", and that's what you are to be the slightest bit sophisticated.


If it was the difference between having the party with the most support in Government by avoiding the potential loss of evey single vote for ACT wasted, it's quite sophisticated. You may not get the candidate best suited to you, but you get the party you want in Government.

[shrub]

If it was the difference between having the party with the most support in Government by avoiding the potential loss of evey single vote for ACT wasted, it's quite sophisticated. You may not get the candidate best suited to you, but you get the party you want in Government.

if you want National in government, then vote for them. It's clever manipulation of the political system by National to capitalise on the fact that a lot of people put less thought into choosing who to run the country than they do which petrol to buy and will vote for the party that "people like me vote for".

[Oscar]

if you want National in government, then vote for them. It's clever manipulation of the political system by National to capitalise on the fact that a lot of people put less thought into choosing who to run the country than they do which petrol to buy and will vote for the party that "people like me vote for".

It can also be construed as avoiding a situation where ACT get 4.9% of the vote and National gets ousted because it can't find a coailition partner (and a significant number of votes are wasted). Personlly, I kinda agree with you as I can't see ACT making the 5%, or winning a seat - so the Nats should be saying "vote for us if you want your vote to count".

Notwithstanding that, if National can make people vote strategically, good on them. If those people grasp that process, they are proving you wrong by putting at least some thought into voting.

[shrub]

It can also be construed as avoiding a situation where ACT get 4.9% of the vote and National gets ousted because it can't find a coailition partner (and a significant number of votes are wasted). Personlly, I kinda agree with you as I can't see ACT making the 5%, or winning a seat - so the Nats should be saying "vote for us if you want your vote to count".

Notwithstanding that, if National can make people vote strategically, good on them. If those people grasp that process, they are proving you wrong by putting at least some thought into voting.

The odds of Act getting even 2% are pretty slim and I would say that getting them back in parliament, or even worse, government would either be a strategically stupid or smart move. It would be stupid because based on history Act are pretty well a loose cannon, and the whole debacle over Brash and legalising cannabis suggests that not much has changed. In fact I'd go as far as to say having Don Brash in parliament will guarantee embarrassment for Act and National. However National may well be using them as a scapegoat - let them introduce potentially risky and unpopular policies, then Key can put on his "who, me?" face and let them take the blame.

As for Peter Dunne, he's harmless and a little silly. Kind of like Jim Anderton.

[Oscar]

The odds of Act getting even 2% are pretty slim and I would say that getting them back in parliament, or even worse, government would either be a strategically stupid or smart move. It would be stupid because based on history Act are pretty well a loose cannon, and the whole debacle over Brash and legalising cannabis suggests that not much has changed. In fact I'd go as far as to say having Don Brash in parliament will guarantee embarrassment for Act and National. However National may well be using them as a scapegoat - let them introduce potentially risky and unpopular policies, then Key can put on his "who, me?" face and let them take the blame.

As for Peter Dunne, he's harmless and a little silly. Kind of like Jim Anderton.

The Maori Party (even with Hone), was a far better partner than ACT.
ACT had a shot with John Banks in Epsom, but Brash has shot the party repeatedly in its electoral foot.

[shrub]

The Maori Party (even with Hone), was a far better partner than ACT.
ACT had a shot with John Banks in Epsom, but Brash has shot the party repeatedly in its electoral foot.

They're a fairly crazy and out of control lot really, especially considering they originally positioned themselves as pro-business and personal responsibility for people who don't need to be told how to live their lives. They're all for smaller government - maybe they're trying to demonstrate the message: "you really don't want people like us running the show, so the less of us in government the better".

[shrub]

DOes anyone in Act know what anyone else is doing? Has it ever dawned on them to be a little careful about what they say publicly? Is anyone silly enough to vote for them?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/campaign-trail/5919090/Key-urged-to-pull-candidate-from-Epsom

[Oscar]

They're all for smaller government - maybe they're trying to demonstrate the message: "you really don't want people like us running the show, so the less of us in government the better".

:rofl::rofl::rofl:
Best summation of ACT so far.

[Winston001]

I was interested/appalled to hear a recent poll about Epsom where most people preferred the National candidate but would vote for Banks and Act if John Key told them to.

Baaaa.... baaaaa.... baaaa....:facepalm:

But isn't that an example of intelligent tactical voting? The voter thinks about the most favourable result and makes an informed decision. It's the opposite of sheeplike behaviour. Its irrelevant who (John Key or a journalist) tells people how to vote effectively.

Incidentally Key is very cool towards ACT and Banks is the only one explaining tactical voting. I think ACT are gone.

[shrub]

But isn't that an example of intelligent tactical voting? The voter thinks about the most favourable result and makes an informed decision. It's the opposite of sheeplike behaviour. Its irrelevant who (John Key or a journalist) tells people how to vote effectively.

Incidentally Key is very cool towards ACT and Banks is the only one explaining tactical voting. I think ACT are gone.


Yeah, you're probably right on both counts. The outburst from the guy in New Plymouth signed Acts death knell because if Key endorses Banks it will look (at least in part) that he is doing what he is told by Act, and Key won't do that. I'd lay hard cold drinking cash that Act is gone by lunchtime.

[oldrider]

Yeah, you're probably right on both counts. The outburst from the guy in New Plymouth signed Acts death knell because if Key endorses Banks it will look (at least in part) that he is doing what he is told by Act, and Key won't do that. I'd lay hard cold drinking cash that Act is gone by lunchtime.

Simply "wanting something to be a fact" doesn't quite make it fact .... all will be revealed when the fat lady takes her final bow! :wait:

[oneofsix]

Simply "wanting something to be a fact" doesn't quite make it fact .... all will be revealed when the fat lady takes her final bow! :wait:

not if she is wearing a full length high necked gown ;)

back to the subject

interestingly everyone seems to rule Winny and NZ First out and yet they got a larger share of the vote last time around than Act did. Nz First only missed the threshold by less than a percentage point, Act missed it by more than that putting Act in much the same group as United and Progressive but now possibly without the leader that wins the seat.

[Banditbandit]

It can also be construed as avoiding a situation where ACT get 4.9% of the vote and National gets ousted because it can't find a coailition partner (and a significant number of votes are wasted). Personlly, I kinda agree with you as I can't see ACT making the 5%, or winning a seat - so the Nats should be saying "vote for us if you want your vote to count".

Notwithstanding that, if National can make people vote strategically, good on them. If those people grasp that process, they are proving you wrong by putting at least some thought into voting.


But isn't that an example of intelligent tactical voting? The voter thinks about the most favourable result and makes an informed decision. It's the opposite of sheeplike behaviour. Its irrelevant who (John Key or a journalist) tells people how to vote effectively.

Incidentally Key is very cool towards ACT and Banks is the only one explaining tactical voting. I think ACT are gone.



But now, apparently, John Key has said he doesn't want ACT as a coalition partner ... rather ironic .. give them Epsom in exchange for New Plymouth ... then leave ACT in Opposition. So much for "Tactical Voting"

[Banditbandit]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zhlgdfVAPk8/Tgt6bj4MgjI/AAAAAAAAH3Y/x3RDfIfxb6A/s1600/Diapers%2BAnd%2BPoliticians%2BShould%2BBe%2BChange d%2BOften%2BBoth%2BFor%2BThe%2BSame%2BReason.jpg

[mashman]

Amazing how far a smile and some sheep will get ya these days (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/11470760/not-a-brighter-future-at-all-goff/)...

[shrub]

But now, apparently, John Key has said he doesn't want ACT as a coalition partner ... rather ironic .. give them Epsom in exchange for New Plymouth ... then leave ACT in Opposition. So much for "Tactical Voting"

Or could it be it's a way to get rid of Act for once and for all? Act are kind of the default National coalition partner in the same way Jim Anderton was a default Labour partner, but unlike Jim, Act are bloody embarrassing and are probably even more of a loose cannon than dear old Hone and Mana. If Act are in parliament I think Key would feel obliged to offer them a ministerial post of some form, and while Key is a bit of a bimbo, he's clever enough to know Act would almost certainly be a source of embarrassment to him and National. So he's milking Act by letting them skip the Naki and while he hasn't come out and said "People of Epsom, vote National", and has hinted he'll have a cuppa with dear old Banksie, he's fallen a long way short of supporting Act. Especially when you consider National have put Katrina Shanks in Ohariu Belmont, and she is damn near asleep, so they have pretty well given that seat to Dunne.

[SMOKEU]

I still don't know who I'm going to vote for. Certainly not National because John Key is a jew. Look at how well that turned out (not).

[rainman]

I'd lay hard cold drinking cash that Act is gone by lunchtime.

I'll drink to that! :laugh:

[Banditbandit]

I still don't know who I'm going to vote for. Certainly not National because John Key is a jew. Look at how well that turned out (not).

So was Adolf Hitler .... and look how well that turned out ...

"Hitler's father was the illegitimate child of a cook named (Maria Anna) Schicklegruber. This cook, the grandmother of Adolf Hitler, was working for a Jewish family named Frankenberger, when she became pregnant. Frankenberger paid Schicklegruber, a paternity allowance from the time of the child's birth up to his fourteenth year."

From a secret report by the Nazi Hans Frank. Written in 1930


(From http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/adolf_hitler.htm )

[oldrider]

I'll drink to that! :laugh:

Ahh .... the strangled cry of the alcohol inflicted! :confused: What is it that alcohol does to brain cells? :wacko:

[rainman]

In answer to the original question, the following article may,sadly, have some relevance.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718

I (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718)t's also a shining example of what is wrong with both NZ politics and the NZ media, in a handy one page format.

[oldrider]

In answer to the original question, the following article may,sadly, have some relevance.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718

I (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718)t's also a shining example of what is wrong with both NZ politics and the NZ media, in a handy one page format.

Well, I'll drink to that! :niceone:

[SMOKEU]

So was Adolf Hitler .... and look how well that turned out ...

"Hitler's father was the illegitimate child of a cook named (Maria Anna) Schicklegruber. This cook, the grandmother of Adolf Hitler, was working for a Jewish family named Frankenberger, when she became pregnant. Frankenberger paid Schicklegruber, a paternity allowance from the time of the child's birth up to his fourteenth year."

From a secret report by the Nazi Hans Frank. Written in 1930


(From http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/adolf_hitler.htm )

Cheers for the link. It made a very interesting read.


In answer to the original question, the following article may,sadly, have some relevance.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718

I (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718)t's also a shining example of what is wrong with both NZ politics and the NZ media, in a handy one page format.

What's wrong with NZ politics is that it's largely made up of left wing communists. The NZ public are all too happy to bend over and blindly follow the government propaganda like sheep. People seem to think that the government always knows what is best for them as they have been brought up with a mentality where they believe they shouldn't think for themselves about political issues. The mass immigration policies are designed to spread third world filth into NZ, diluting this countries culture and turning it into a third world slum, slowly, year by year.

[rainman]

What's wrong with NZ politics is that it's largely made up of left wing communists.

Pfft - you wouldn't know a communist if one bit you. They're in short supply in most places, NZ no exception. Perhaps you should change what you're smoking.


The NZ public are all too happy to bend over and blindly follow the government propaganda like sheep.

Now, there you may have a point.
(The rest of your post was racist drivel).

[oldrider]

The polls and the media are there to ensure the continuation of the National / Labour coalition by default.

They were never intended to be there for the people!

When ACT left Labour Helen Clark and her cohorts turned the Labour's agenda into homosexual reform and other social engineering.

Labour is slowly disintegrating and real Labour voters are now beginning to flow on over to the Green Party!

Green is the true new socialist left and despite the polls and the media efforts to stifle it the Green's are the real new Labour party.

National will win this time but are only going to last one more term, there are no other so called right wing contenders to take their place.

ACT has been slowly disintegrating since Rodney Hide became the leader, Brash and Banks have supercharged the destruction!

Maori in one form or another will continue to rise in their influence on the politics of the country but the direction is not currently clear.

The electorate is tired of the bullshit Labour and National have been dishing out and despite the normally benign apathetic attitude by New Zealanders in the past, the new generation is being pushed into a corner and they will have no choice but to react!

Goodbye New Zealand as we have known it, good luck kids and sorry my generation fucked it up for you!

[oneofsix]

The polls and the media are there to ensure the continuation of the National / Labour coalition by default.

They were never intended to be there for the people!

When ACT left Labour Helen Clark and her cohorts turned the Labour's agenda into homosexual reform and other social engineering.

Labour is slowly disintegrating and real Labour voters are now beginning to flow on over to the Green Party!

Green is the true new socialist left and despite the polls and the media efforts to stifle it the Green's are the real new Labour party.

National will win this time but are only going to last one more term, there are no other so called right wing contenders to take their place.

ACT has been slowly disintegrating since Rodney Hide became the leader, Brash and Banks have supercharged the destruction!

Maori in one form or another will continue to rise in their influence on the politics of the country but the direction is not currently clear.

The electorate is tired of the bullshit Labour and National have been dishing out and despite the normally benign apathetic attitude by New Zealanders in the past, the new generation is being pushed into a corner and they will have no choice but to react!

Goodbye New Zealand as we have known it, good luck kids and sorry my generation fucked it up for you!

You take too much of the blame. It was the greed is good generation that came up through the 80s that fucked it up.
Labour disintegration started with the ACT party core when they sneaked into power under the guise of the old Labour. Helen did attempt to redress some of their excesses but spent too much time on social engineering. Don't forget a lot of the social engineering was at the Green insistence, you will have notice how much serious child abuse has reduced since the Green sponsored anti-discipline law was passed. :whistle:

[Maha]

The New Zealand economy has not as bad as it is today since the 1930's..
Possibly explains why so many (100,000) have left NZ in recent times.
On the other hand...its quite probable that the same amount (if not more) have immigrated here during the same period so it evens itself out.

[Swoop]

We have established several things:

2: Labour will get a new leader after this election.
Looks like the Harold is seeing this happening as well.


nzhpoll4500–4550 votes
Who is the best choice to be next Labour leader?
Shane Jones (13%)David Parker (7%)David Cunliffe (19%)Andrew Little (7%)Annette King (9%)Somebody else (45%)

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764722
Labour MP Kelvin Davis has endorsed fellow Labour and Maori MP Shane Jones as a future Labour leader in the middle of an election campaign.



So... another wanker in charge of labour then? (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3796622/Shane-Jones-Minister-of-Pornography)

[Banditbandit]

When ACT left Labour Helen Clark and her cohorts turned the Labour's agenda into homosexual reform and other social engineering.



I hate to be pedantic .. but the Labour Government repealled the anti-homosexual laws in 1986 and I believe David Lange was Prime Minister ... ACT was founded in 1993 .. and many members, such as Roger Douglas and Richard Prebble were Cabinet Ministers in the Labour Government which pushed the "homosexual reform and other social engineering" changes ...

[Rhubarb]

The New Zealand economy has not as bad as it is today since the 1930's.

Not just the New Zealand economy - the 'world' economy.

Regardless who has governed NZ in the last three years they can't be blamed for the 'world' economy.

Larger, richer and more resourceful countries are in a worse position than NZ.

[rainman]

I hate to be pedantic .. but the Labour Government repealled the anti-homosexual laws in 1986 and I believe David Lange was Prime Minister ... ACT was founded in 1993 .. and many members, such as Roger Douglas and Richard Prebble were Cabinet Ministers in the Labour Government which pushed the "homosexual reform and other social engineering" changes ...

I suspect many ACToids are quite socially liberal - it's entirely consistent with libertarianism - but that they lie when required to in order to keep the conservatives happy. Mr Magoo vs Banksie on drugs recently, for example. Magoo's just too dumb to stay on message, which is why they packed him off to England for a while not too long ago, I suspect.


Not just the New Zealand economy - the 'world' economy.

Regardless who has governed NZ in the last three years they can't be blamed for the 'world' economy.

Larger, richer and more resourceful countries are in a worse position than NZ.

I disagree. They can and should be blamed. It's called accountability. If Johnnie K and Billy E say their tax cuts will be fiscally neutral and stimulate growth, and they aren't and they don't, they should be held to account. It would happen in a business environment - they'd have their arses handed to them. Useless fuckers like Nick Smith or Murray McCully would be restructured out of harms way, not rewarded with ministerial privilege and fancy cars.

We aren't electing the world government, we're picking who will be best to deal with the shit we have now and the more shit that is coming. In that, past performance is a pretty good indication of what is ahead. The Nats like laissez-faire, low touch, cut-taxes-and-slash-spending policies, with a side order of asset sales, as they always have. These don't work and never have, particularly in recessions, and defo not in depressions. As I've explained elsewhere, partial asset-sales in a resource-shortage-driven depression are the stupidest of all possible plans. The mythology behind the Nat policy thinking has been discredited over and over by serious economists and academics. Also, the Nats always perform worse in terms of economic growth compared to Labour (not that I think they have all of the answers, mind you) - irrespective of global economic conditions. Yet most of us won't think too hard about this, and just elect "that nice Mr Key". Which would be fine if we were prepared to admit we're venal, stupid and suicidal, but that isn't often the case.

The question we really need to be asking ourselves is who is best placed to serve the interests of the enterprise that is NZ, in the medium to long term - not who will give us individually the best tax cuts, or increase in WfF, or benefit cuts for the people we love to hate, or interest free student loan or whatever. Certainly not who is more "bloke-ish" and who has the best kitten/racetrack socialite celebrity photo-ops.

Ordinarily it doesn't matter too much who wins. Given the world context, this election will have a disproportionate impact on our future. My concern is we're generally too dumb to understand the question we are being asked on 26/11.

[Winston001]

Enough with the moaning for pitys sake! We live in a paradise compared with most countries. Open spaces, long empty beaches, clean air and water, food enough that its thrown away after the best by date. Heat pumps, cheap airfares to the Gold Coast, modern motorcycles and cars, internet most places, smart phones, good roads, sports grounds, social welfare, free healthcare, the list goes on.

If you don't believe me check out India, southern China, and most of Africa. And South America. And Central Asia.

Our "problems" are non-existant. Give thanks for living in such a blessed country.

[SPman]

Two weeks ago, John Key told us that the money from selling off assets would be funnelled into schools and hospitals. Now, he says its going to help farmers by funding their irrigation schemes.! Sell public assets to benefit private infrastructure? Ho kay.....

I wish he'd make his fucking mind up.

Perhaps he reckons a moving target is harder to hit........


Our "problems" are non-existant. Give thanks for living in such a blessed country.

So? - We aren't voting on a tourist package......or, maybe we are........

[Banditbandit]

John Key .....

I wish he'd make his fucking mind up.



He has a mind??? I thought Don Key was a grinning glove puppet operated by Jerry Brownlie ... (Big dodgey bastard always lurking behind Don Key)

[Ocean1]

The New Zealand economy has not as bad as it is today since the 1930's..
Possibly explains why so many (100,000) have left NZ in recent times.
On the other hand...its quite probable that the same amount (if not more) have immigrated here during the same period so it evens itself out.

Are we not losing profesionals that represent economic growth assets and gaining uneducated third world economic liabilities?

'Cause eventually that would cause some economic deterioration, wouldn't it?






Oh wait...

[Ocean1]

The question we really need to be asking ourselves is who is best placed to serve the interests of the enterprise that is NZ, in the medium to long term -

Those who produce marketable product? Yes?

So we orta encourage them eh?




Fuck that was easy, NEXT!!!

[short-circuit]

Amazing how far a smile and some sheep will get ya these days (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/11470760/not-a-brighter-future-at-all-goff/)...


In answer to the original question, the following article may,sadly, have some relevance.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718

I (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10764718)t's also a shining example of what is wrong with both NZ politics and the NZ media, in a handy one page format.



http://tiny.cc/5d7mw

[Scouse]

The New Zealand economy has not as bad as it is today since the 1930's..
Possibly explains why so many (100,000) have left NZ in recent times.
On the other hand...its quite probable that the same amount (if not more) have immigrated here during the same period so it evens itself out.Yes but the problem with that is that the we loose kiwi's unfortuneatly the the people that take their place are punjabi's

[SMOKEU]

Yes but the problem with that is that the we loose kiwi's unfortuneatly the the people that take their place are punjabi's

Exactly. Do we really want people who live like this in NZ? http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_z9pk2QhSxmc/TObaDcKKSmI/AAAAAAAAAGs/2Wtf65afYm0/s1600/man+swimming+by+slum.jpg

[Indiana_Jones]

Yes but the problem with that is that the we loose kiwi's unfortuneatly the the people that take their place are punjabi's

It would be funny if it wasn't true.

I donno which useless cunt delivers the junk mail on my street is as they put it in my letter box even though it says "NO JUNK MAIL"....it's funny how many hoops we had to jump through to get into the country, but yet some people here can't even read :shifty:

-Indy

[rainman]

Those who produce marketable product? Yes?

Only half right, but a common mistake. You're spot on that building our export industries would be a great thing to do (it's a big job that will take more than tax fiddling) - but I meant enterprise in an economic, environment and social sense - what we are, how we are perceived, how we work together, how we grow into a better NZ (not just in economic terms), how badly we mess the place up while we do... the whole damn shooting match.


http://tiny.cc/5d7mw

Now that was quite funny.

[rainman]

Exactly. Do we really want people who live like this in NZ?

Are you racist and stupid enough to suggest that they live that way by choice?

[SMOKEU]

Are you racist and stupid enough to suggest that they live that way by choice?

I have seen third world poverty first hand and know that these people do not live like that by choice. I've spent 7 years living in South Africa and I have been to the slums on several occasions where people don't even have electricity or running water.

So if we keep importing these people, when does it end? Where do we 'draw the line'? Have you thought about the huge cost, both monetary and to society of having people such as this in NZ? NZ has enough problems of its own (for a developed country), and we don't need any more people adding to it.

[mashman]

So if we keep importing these people, when does it end? Where do we 'draw the line'? Have you thought about the huge cost, both monetary and to society of having people such as this in NZ? NZ has enough problems of its own (for a developed country), and we don't need any more people adding to it.

like women, they'll work for less than the male NZ'er, which is good for business ka-ching

[SMOKEU]

like women, they'll work for less than the male NZ'er, which is good for business ka-ching

There is a huge shortage of jobs, even at the minimum wage level. Even if they're prepared to work for $2/hour, that doesn't mean that there will be a job for them.

[blue rider]

like women, they'll work for less than the male NZ'er, which is good for business ka-ching


and this is one of the saddest statements on this whole thread.....but hey its good for business, so whats not to like about it.

[mashman]

There is a huge shortage of jobs, even at the minimum wage level. Even if they're prepared to work for $2/hour, that doesn't mean that there will be a job for them.

true. The country isn't like a club or a car park, one in when one leaves. Would you begrudge anyone a benefit because they can't get a job on the basis that they weren't natively born in NZ? Or should we just export those that haven't reached the "you've put in enough tax to get some out" threshold when they come to claim? I highly doubt they'll start a "shanty" town.

[rainman]

I have seen third world poverty first hand and know that these people do not live like that by choice. I've spent 7 years living in South Africa and I have been to the slums on several occasions where people don't even have electricity or running water.

So if we keep importing these people, when does it end? Where do we 'draw the line'? Have you thought about the huge cost, both monetary and to society of having people such as this in NZ? NZ has enough problems of its own (for a developed country), and we don't need any more people adding to it.

You're missing the point. The way they live is an extrinsic attribute of the people, not an intrinsic one. You could import a "people like that", provide a good environment, access to health and education services, and they might well thrive.

Think of all the wasted human potential living in those third-world slums, doomed to a mundane life through lack of education, health, adequate nutrition, opportunity... and all because of the first world's colonial insistence on access to resources for bling.

[SMOKEU]

true. The country isn't like a club or a car park, one in when one leaves. Would you begrudge anyone a benefit because they can't get a job on the basis that they weren't natively born in NZ? Or should we just export those that haven't reached the "you've put in enough tax to get some out" threshold when they come to claim? I highly doubt they'll start a "shanty" town.

I'm an immigrant and I was on the unemployment benefit for several months. I'm not saying that we should throw people out of NZ just because they can't find a job, because it can be extremely difficult to find work for people who don't have the right qualifications or skills.

What I am trying to say is that with NZ being in the current financial trouble that it's in, we don't need any more third world immigrants who are a further drain on government funds, nor do we need more immigrants who dilute and attempt to corrupt NZ culture (especially terrorists). Once we allow "these" people in, more and more of them will want to flood into NZ to take advantage of our (comparatively) prosperous and civilized nation. Do you really want NZ to turn into a giant shithole? This is exactly what is going to happen if the mass immigration encouraged by several left wing political parties continues.

[SMOKEU]

The way they live is an extrinsic attribute of the people, not an intrinsic one. You could import a "people like that", provide a good environment, access to health and education services, and they might well thrive.

Think of all the wasted human potential living in those third-world slums, doomed to a mundane life through lack of education, health, adequate nutrition, opportunity... and all because of the first world's colonial insistence on access to resources for bling.

You're completely right. But like I said, where do we draw the line at "welcome to our country" compared to "fuck off back to India/Iraq/Sudan/{insert name of poor country here})?

[mashman]

I'm an immigrant and I was on the unemployment benefit for several months. I'm not saying that we should throw people out of NZ just because they can't find a job, because it can be extremely difficult to find work for people who don't have the right qualifications or skills.

What I am trying to say is that with NZ being in the current financial trouble that it's in, we don't need any more third world immigrants who are a further drain on government funds, nor do we need more immigrants who dilute and attempt to corrupt NZ culture (especially terrorists). Once we allow "these" people in, more and more of them will want to flood into NZ to take advantage of our (comparatively) prosperous and civilized nation.

They have to come in through immigration. If there's a requirement I guess they'll open up the doors for what's required, fooked if I know how the bar is set... similar to Indy, I had to jump through hoops and spend a small fortune to get in... pwned by the UK or not.


Do you really want NZ to turn into a giant shithole? This is exactly what is going to happen if the mass immigration encouraged by several left wing political parties continues.

As agent Smith would say, it is inevitable... given where we are and our population etc... it may be 30 - 40 years away and left and right won't matter as we'll have our quota of refugees to fill.

[SMOKEU]

They have to come in through immigration. If there's a requirement I guess they'll open up the doors for what's required, fooked if I know how the bar is set... similar to Indy, I had to jump through hoops and spend a small fortune to get in... pwned by the UK or not.



As agent Smith would say, it is inevitable... given where we are and our population etc... it may be 30 - 40 years away and left and right won't matter as we'll have our quota of refugees to fill.

I don't have a problem with white immigrants, it's just black immigrants that we don't need any more of in NZ. I challenge you to name me 1 civilized black majority country which isn't poor and corrupt. The whole Islam world is seriously f***ed, as is Africa. Many Asian countries are the same (with the exception of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and a few others).

[rainman]

...mass immigration encouraged by several left wing political parties continues.

Actually in my experience it's the ACToids and Nats who are keen on immigration to increase the size of the economy, and as others have pointed out, drive down wages. Works in agriculture with seasonal immigrant workers...


But like I said, where do we draw the line at "welcome to our country" compared to "fuck off back to India/Iraq/Sudan/{insert name of poor country here})?

Still missing the point. The poor country isn't what you're importing - it's extrinsic to the person. Of course how you import the good motivated people and decline the no-hopers, considering you'd need a sliding scale of achievement to reflect the environments they are coming from, that's a bigger question. But to insist all Sudanese or Indians are no good because they come from Sudan or India is just racist bullshit.

Back to the election though - who are you going to vote for to get your version of Fortress NZ implemented? Winnie?

[SMOKEU]

Back to the election though - who are you going to vote for to get your version of Fortress NZ implemented? Winnie?

Upon advice given to me by various people, I'll probably vote NZ First. Winston Peters actually seems like a very intelligent person, and he has distanced himself from Maori affairs compared to the likes of old Hone and other members of the Maori party.
I would vote for National Front, but that turned to shit after Kyle Chapman left so they're not running for parliament any more.

[mashman]

I don't have a problem with white immigrants, it's just black immigrants that we don't need any more of in NZ. I challenge you to name me 1 civilized black majority country which isn't poor and corrupt. The whole Islam world is seriously f***ed, as is Africa. Many Asian countries are the same (with the exception of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and a few others).

That's just silly. A person is a person, t'was, tis, the white man who views them differently. Similar to women, "those" groups have only recently (last 100 ish years for women, last 50ish for "blacks") been given rights, and those rights were given by the white folk. Farkin pathetic, and we wonder why there's racism in the world. Tis the white mans creation, not the other way around.

[SMOKEU]

That's just silly. A person is a person, t'was, tis, the white man who views them differently. Similar to women, "those" groups have only recently (last 100 ish years for women, last 50ish for "blacks") been given rights, and those rights were given by the white folk. Farkin pathetic, and we wonder why there's racism in the world. Tis the white mans creation, not the other way around.

If your theory is true, then STATISTICALLY why do blacks commit more crime on average than whites? Why do blacks tend to abuse their children more often? Why do blacks tend to be more poor than whites? I'm not saying that every white is a saint, as there are plenty of blacks who are highly educated, honest people, and there are plenty of whites who are child molesters, murderers etc.

Why are there more Maori people in prison (per capita) than whites? Why is the GDP per capita generally lower in black majority countries than in white majority countries?

Australia was a penal colony in a big desert surrounded by ocean. Why has that prospered, while black majority countries in Africa have not?

[short-circuit]

If your theory is true, then STATISTICALLY why do blacks commit more crime on average than whites? Why do blacks tend to abuse their children more often? Why do blacks tend to be more poor than whites? I'm not saying that every white is a saint, as there are plenty of blacks who are highly educated, honest people, and there are plenty of whites who are child molesters, murderers etc.

Why are there more Maori people in prison (per capita) than whites? Why is the GDP per capita generally lower in black majority countries than in white majority countries?

Australia was a penal colony in a big desert surrounded by ocean. Why has that prospered, while black majority countries in Africa have not?


Tit. How about limiting immigration using an IQ threshold?

[SMOKEU]

Tit. How about limiting immigration using an IQ threshold?

That could work.

[Banditbandit]

Are we not losing profesionals that represent economic growth assets and gaining uneducated third world economic liabilities?

'Cause eventually that would cause some economic deterioration, wouldn't it?






Oh wait...

Maybe .. maybe not .. the last figurs I saw showed it was the unqualified and unskilled which was the biggest group who were leaving ... Yes, plenty of people are leaving - bt the idea of a "brain drain" is a bit of a myth ..

[Banditbandit]

That could work.

And you would not have been allowed in ...

[short-circuit]

And you would not have been allowed in ...

Thanks for helping him to join the dots. Sometimes subtlety is misplaced round here

[Ocean1]

Maybe .. maybe not .. the last figurs I saw showed it was the unqualified and unskilled which was the biggest group who were leaving ... Yes, plenty of people are leaving - bt the idea of a "brain drain" is a bit of a myth ..

Is it now?

If you added up the total income of those that've left and compared it to that of immigrents for the same timescale you'd see a significant drop.

[mashman]

If your theory is true, then STATISTICALLY why do blacks commit more crime on average than whites? Why do blacks tend to abuse their children more often? Why do blacks tend to be more poor than whites? I'm not saying that every white is a saint, as there are plenty of blacks who are highly educated, honest people, and there are plenty of whites who are child molesters, murderers etc.

Why are there more Maori people in prison (per capita) than whites? Why is the GDP per capita generally lower in black majority countries than in white majority countries?

Australia was a penal colony in a big desert surrounded by ocean. Why has that prospered, while black majority countries in Africa have not?

Fuck the large post, here's the crux. It all comes down to money. Per capita measurements of anything are flawed. Poor areas produce "overt" criminals black and white... and vice versa for richer areas.

Oz v Africa. One 200 years old with 25 million people v's a really really old country with 1+ billion people and only just stepping out of the shadow of the white mans "oppression" rights wise and carrying a debt that will never be paid off whilst the white mans corps own the minerals, because it goes part way to paying off the debt.

[SMOKEU]

Fuck the large post, here's the crux. It all comes down to money. Per capita measurements of anything are flawed. Poor areas produce "overt" criminals black and white... and vice versa for richer areas.

Oz v Africa. One 200 years old with 25 million people v's a really really old country with 1+ billion people and only just stepping out of the shadow of the white mans "oppression" rights wise and carrying a debt that will never be paid off whilst the white mans corps own the minerals, because it goes part way to paying off the debt.

What white mans oppression? These countries are run by blacks. The fact remains that blacks in general are unable to work together for a common (good) cause, such as forming a stable government. Whenever you get such a situation occurring, corruption is almost always rife.

Look at the fact that there is always war in the Middle East. This is because these uncivilized animals are let loose to roam freely. If you don't believe me then I can provide links to videos which will show you how bad these people really are. In order to preserve NZ culture and heritage we need to keep these people out.

1488

[mashman]

What white mans oppression?

This white mans oppression.

Congo independence from Belgium 1960
Algerian independence from France 1962
Here's a few South African PM's up til 1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_South_Africa) Notice anything about them?
Equatorial Guinea independence from Spain 1968
Nigeria independence from UK 1960
Egypt independence from UK 1922
Niger independence from France 1960
Angola independence from Portugal 1975
Namibia independence from South Africa 1990
Mozambique independence from Portugal 1975
Zambia independence from UK 1964
Algeria independence from France 1962
Sierra Leone independence from UK 1961
Zimbabwe independence from UK 1980
Côte d'Ivoire independence from France 1960
Burkina Faso independence from France 1960
Uganda independence from UK 1962
Ghana independence from UK 1960
Senegal independence from France 1960

Talk about pulling the rug out from underneath the feet of a continent and leaving behind a shitstorm...

I'm guessing there are a few others too, but it's late and I'm tired... nighty night

[SMOKEU]

This white mans oppression.

Congo independence from Belgium 1960
Algerian independence from France 1962
Here's a few South African PM's up til 1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_South_Africa) Notice anything about them?
Equatorial Guinea independence from Spain 1968
Nigeria independence from UK 1960
Egypt independence from UK 1922
Niger independence from France 1960
Angola independence from Portugal 1975
Namibia independence from South Africa 1990
Mozambique independence from Portugal 1975
Zambia independence from UK 1964
Algeria independence from France 1962
Sierra Leone independence from UK 1961
Zimbabwe independence from UK 1980
Côte d'Ivoire independence from France 1960
Burkina Faso independence from France 1960
Uganda independence from UK 1962
Ghana independence from UK 1960
Senegal independence from France 1960

Talk about pulling the rug out from underneath the feet of a continent and leaving behind a shitstorm...

I'm guessing there are a few others too, but it's late and I'm tired... nighty night

You've certainly done your research.

[ellipsis]

Maybe .. maybe not .. the last figurs I saw showed it was the unqualified and unskilled which was the biggest group who were leaving ... Yes, plenty of people are leaving - bt the idea of a "brain drain" is a bit of a myth ..

...myth indeed...thats why Jesus wasn't born a KIWI...they couldnt find three wise men and a virgin...and that was yonks ago...

[JATZ]

This white mans oppression.

Congo independence from Belgium 1960
Algerian independence from France 1962
Here's a few South African PM's up til 1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister_of_South_Africa) Notice anything about them?
Equatorial Guinea independence from Spain 1968
Nigeria independence from UK 1960
Egypt independence from UK 1922
Niger independence from France 1960
Angola independence from Portugal 1975
Namibia independence from South Africa 1990
Mozambique independence from Portugal 1975
Zambia independence from UK 1964
Algeria independence from France 1962
Sierra Leone independence from UK 1961
Zimbabwe independence from UK 1980
Côte d'Ivoire independence from France 1960
Burkina Faso independence from France 1960
Uganda independence from UK 1962
Ghana independence from UK 1960
Senegal independence from France 1960

Talk about pulling the rug out from underneath the feet of a continent and leaving behind a shitstorm...

I'm guessing there are a few others too, but it's late and I'm tired... nighty night

Question.... What state do you think those country's would be if they hadn't been "oppressed" by the white man ? And what would happen if N.Z. was left to the native population who were here when whitey arrived ?

[Ocean1]

It all comes down to money. Per capita measurements of anything are flawed. Poor areas produce "overt" criminals black and white... and vice versa for richer areas.

So, you've found two factors and a relationship between them.

It wasn't so long ago that a certain health minister was laughed out of a lecture hall for claiming that low income causes poor health.

Which one causes the other?

If you'd bothered looking there's a bunch of other variables related to low income, health, longevity, educational level, drug use... it's a rather long list.

Now, is there, in fact a third variable that drives all of them?

[mashman]

You've certainly done your research.

:rofl:, 20 odd minutes on google. All I knew is that there were some African countries that weren't run by the "locals", stood to reason that at least some of the rest would be like that. Similar to all of the colonies I guess. Once the "rulers" leave, so does the money and the expertise on how to live in that particular way i.e. using world economics and world politics.



Question.... What state do you think those country's would be if they hadn't been "oppressed" by the white man ? And what would happen if N.Z. was left to the native population who were here when whitey arrived ?


I reckon NZ would have been an absolute "haven". A relatively peaceful nation that did things for their people that worked as a co-operative for the most part. Coulda been a slaughter house too I spose. Dunno really, but war certainly seems to be a white mans game, conquest for $$$. Dreamin maybe, but I dunno, but from the little I know of the Maori, the accommodated whitey and were summarily fucked over, or at least hoodwinked in exactly the same way as every other white colonised nation. Meh.

[mashman]

So, you've found two factors and a relationship between them.

It wasn't so long ago that a certain health minister was laughed out of a lecture hall for claiming that low income causes poor health.

Which one causes the other?

If you'd bothered looking there's a bunch of other variables related to low income, health, longevity, educational level, drug use... it's a rather long list.

Now, is there, in fact a third variable that drives all of them?

Heh, I know it's not that simple, but the simple fact of life is that if you have next to no money you'll end up living amongst others with next to no money and deprived areas and their associated problems are born. Not an awful lot of $$$ around for investment opportunities :innocent:

As for a third variable, a shitty attitude, or at least a different attitude to the norm that we individually expect/demand of our fellow man :laugh:

[SMOKEU]

I reckon NZ would have been an absolute "haven". A relatively peaceful nation that did things for their people that worked as a co-operative for the most part. Coulda been a slaughter house too I spose. Dunno really, but war certainly seems to be a white mans game, conquest for $$$. Dreamin maybe, but I dunno, but from the little I know of the Maori, the accommodated whitey and were summarily fucked over, or at least hoodwinked in exactly the same way as every other white colonised nation. Meh.

If the white people didn't come to NZ, then the Maoris would still be running around killing and eating one another.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/archived-stuff-sections/archived-national-sections/korero/565552/Tales-of-Maori-cannibalism-told-in-new-book

http://www.google.co.nz/search?gcx=c&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=maori+cannabalism#hl=en&safe=off&sa=X&ei=UVK8Tt_XKNLJiQLdxKzBAw&ved=0CBsQvwUoAQ&q=maori+cannibalism&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=95f0a8d51e9026f&biw=1920&bih=955

[Dean]

I'm not saying that every white is a saint, as there are plenty of blacks who are highly educated, honest people, and there are plenty of whites who are child molesters, murderers etc.


There is goodcunts and there is fuckwits, period.

[oldrider]

I reckon NZ would have been an absolute "haven". A relatively peaceful nation that did things for their people that worked as a co-operative for the most part. Coulda been a slaughter house too I spose. Dunno really, but war certainly seems to be a white mans game, conquest for $$$. Dreamin maybe, but I dunno, but from the little I know of the Maori, the accommodated whitey and were summarily fucked over, or at least hoodwinked in exactly the same way as every other white colonised nation. Meh.

Get a grip mashman, this place was no Utopia before or after the Pakeha arrived here, it was a savage lawless shithole and life was fucking hard! :confused:

Considering where it's come from, it's a credit to the "whole" nation that it has advanced this far in such a short period. :niceone:

One can only "hope" the progress will continue! :shifty:

[mashman]

If the white people didn't come to NZ, then the Maoris would still be running around killing and eating one another.


I'm sure they would have been complete and utter animals 24/7 and with the above things being so prevalent, I'm surprised that there were any Maori left at all.



Get a grip mashman, this place was no Utopia before or after the Pakeha arrived here, it was a savage lawless shithole and life was fucking hard!

Considering where it's come from, it's a credit to the "whole" nation that it has advanced this far in such a short period.

One can only "hope" the progress will continue!

I did say relatively peaceful. Savage lawless shithole? Really? Is that all they did, run around bludgeoning each other to death on a daily basis, only stopping for a wee snooze before taking up arms again and killing everyone that wasn't their tribe? I find that ever so slightly hard to believe. Yes manual labour most likely existed. Does manual labor exist today?

define advanced? Coz I have a serious doubt that I'll agree with you. On the grounds that kids learn what's available to learn, all very capable and knowing what every other nation knows takes the blink of an eye. I don't see NZ as being any more advanced than any other country on the planet.

Considering we're going backwards in sooooo many ways, imho, I wouldn't say we're progressing.

[oneofsix]

Does manual labor exist today?


Yes in the good ol' US of A, he is most likely the Mexican gardener
:bleh:
:msn-wink:
Me of all people picking on spelling - really :eek:

[Swoop]

I'm sure they would have been complete and utter animals 24/7 and with the above things being so prevalent, I'm surprised that there were any Maori left at all.

I did say relatively peaceful. Savage lawless shithole? Really?
Have you read or studied up on Kororareka? It was called the "Hell Hole of the Pacific" for a reason.

[oldrider]

I did say relatively peaceful. Savage lawless shithole? Really? Is that all they did, run around bludgeoning each other to death on a daily basis, only stopping for a wee snooze before taking up arms again and killing everyone that wasn't their tribe? I find that ever so slightly hard to believe. Yes manual labour most likely existed. Does manual labor exist today?

define advanced? Coz I have a serious doubt that I'll agree with you. On the grounds that kids learn what's available to learn, all very capable and knowing what every other nation knows takes the blink of an eye. I don't see NZ as being any more advanced than any other country on the planet.

Considering we're going backwards in sooooo many ways, imho, I wouldn't say we're progressing.

Mm, I don't think you really read my post and thought about it. :no: