Congratulations 48%

[Brian d marge]

Fill yer boots, mate. As for a social convention? dunno, probably just me, I can't be fukt wasting my time with people who bleat like fuck and do nothing constructive about it.

and what have you done? me I fought and paid for , the arrest of the student loan , been into the beehive , meeting with the then pollies ,, lunch or two at Bellamys , all out of my own pocket , for nearly two years , before I realized d that KIWIS were apathetic

finished my degree , sold the house and left ......

lovely country ruined by the people , well done ,,,a big pat on the back all round

[SPman]

Bummer for yer sister.She's over it. She's sick and tired of fucking moaning, stupid, people who do nothing to help themselves, expect a government dept. to bail them out, despite their stupidity, then scream like hell, when they don't get what they want despite others in greater need than themselves....a bit like KB, really......
. Sorry to see that you see things as left and right wing stereotypes. I don't actually see things in left or right stereotypes - I actually see things in what works for the betterment of the bulk of the populace.
I don't want empathy from my govt, I want sense that benefits everyone, not just those who work, or those who are unemployed, or those who have businesses, or those who exist in a salary bracket, or whatever label is chosen to separate 2 groups. We're just people with different skills and levels of intelligence. Seems a waste to fight against each other instead of for each other... more so where it comes to running a country. Hey ho.
.
Without empathy, how do you get sense that is applicable. All sense has empathy applied to the problem....in a social scenario, which a government is meant to be, no empathy means the sort of mechanistic, business-like, solutions, that create more problems than they solve. Regardless of what people say, particularly businessmen, Government for the people, is not, and can not be, run purely as a business! Doing so has produced the results we now have.

[mashman]

She's over it. She's sick and tired of fucking moaning, stupid, people who do nothing to help themselves, expect a government dept. to bail them out, despite their stupidity, then scream like hell, when they don't get what they want despite others in greater need than themselves....a bit like KB, really......


C'est la vie... or so them tell me.



I don't actually see things in left or right stereotypes - I actually see things in what works for the betterment of the bulk of the populace.


Sorry, I must have misread the post.



.
Without empathy, how do you get sense that is applicable. All sense has empathy applied to the problem....in a social scenario, which a government is meant to be, no empathy means the sort of mechanistic, business-like, solutions, that create more problems than they solve. Regardless of what people say, particularly businessmen, Government for the people, is not, and can not be, run purely as a business! Doing so has produced the results we now have.

All True. But from a business point of view, keeping your employees happy doesn't necessarily require empathy does it? Putting in a pool table isn't really empathising, ringing the beer bell at 4 of a friday isn't really empathising, providing subsidised this and that to keep the experience and knowledge that a dept has doesn't strictly require empathy to keep your employees productive and engaged? Granted you could argue that keeping your staff happy is empathising, but it could be a cold hard business decision too... Perhaps empathy is required in lieu of "friendly" business practice? Dunno, but that's kinda where I was going in regards to not wanting empathy from my govt. Granted it would go a long way, but then I guess the hardliners won't allow emotion in business, it's not personal apparantly, and as it would seem that they don't have "friendly" business practices, I guess as you say, we've got what we have. Is it empathy that's missing? I'm not overly convinced.

[avgas]

I have a sister who works in the EQC (not on earthquakes). Prior to Christchurch, the main workforce was a tight-knit group of about 25 people, all skilled and competent,who all enjoyed their work. After ChCh.....the place has ballooned to over 1200 people! Reams of Business Analysts, an HR division, managers being appointed all over the place..people being transferred in from ACC and WINZ, complete with attitudes...the "core" 25 being marginalised and pushed to one side as "corporate climber" types scrabble about trying to build their little empires! Half the original skilled core have now left......
On the flip side of this.
Remember when there was a Ministry of Works
They had a "Department of Mines"
They had a dozen or so mines inspectors.

Now its all on one poor sod. And we have more mines/tunnels.

Asked the old man if he would consider the job, his response was "Why the fuck would I take a role at half the pay for twice the work".

Seems to me we like to pay people in NZ more to do nothing, or to cover someone else's arse, more than doing a good honest job.
Polly's are no exception. We pay them, and let the get back into govt regardless of whether they do a good job.

Kinda sad really. No one else gets such a flexible boss.

[swbarnett]

All True. But from a business point of view, keeping your employees happy doesn't necessarily require empathy does it?
Unless you empathise with your workforce how do you know what will keep them happy? Putting in a pool table might work for most but it won't work for all.

[mashman]

Unless you empathise with your workforce how do you know what will keep them happy? Putting in a pool table might work for most but it won't work for all.

I agree, I really do. I'm just saying that I can see how a business would be able to make a non-emotional decision and achieve it's aims... yet too many place don't even go that far... I guess it's classed as a waste of money.

[FROSTY]

My view is perhaps a little simplistic. If we Grow,package,manufacture as much product as possible ourselves. If rather than paying people to sit on their backsides on the dole we paid them to do SOMETHING. If we protect our manufacturing industry and so doing protect the jobs that they sustain then the country can afford the social safety net we have in place to protect those genuinely in need.
Fof gosh dsake isn't that just basic economics 101 Earn more than you spend --Or at the very least earn as much as you spend.

[Crasherfromwayback]

. If we protect our manufacturing industry and so doing protect the jobs that they sustain then the country can afford the social safety net we have in place to protect those genuinely in need.
.

Like FFM helmets? So then with the horrendous sales duty put on Shoeis....every cunt buys them off the net instead of in bike shops sort of thing?

[steve_t]

Like FFM helmets? So then with the horrendous sales duty put on Shoeis....every cunt buys them off the net instead of in bike shops sort of thing?

I got my Shoei from Scott at Mr Motorcycles. I don't recall it being that much cheaper from overseas but then again, I don't think I looked that hard... Anyway, Scott was awesome to deal with :niceone:

[Crasherfromwayback]

I got my Shoei from Scott at Mr Motorcycles. I don't recall it being that much cheaper from overseas but then again, I don't think I looked that hard... Anyway, Scott was awesome to deal with :niceone:

That's because Scott's a GC that knows his stuff and does indeed look after people. The gap has closed up a bit, but good helmets should be cheaper here in NZ. Cost ACC a lot less in sickness benificary payments for brain injuries if everyone wore good skid lids.

[FROSTY]

Like FFM helmets? So then with the horrendous sales duty put on Shoeis....every cunt buys them off the net instead of in bike shops sort of thing?
Like wet weather gear and work boots and shoes and trains and busses.washing machines. ALL stuff where NZ companies have either folded up or transfered maufacturing overseas.
The number of REAL jobs that have dissapeared is just rediculous.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Like wet weather gear and work boots and shoes and trains and busses.washing machines. ALL stuff where NZ companies have either folded up or transfered maufacturing overseas.
The number of REAL jobs that have dissapeared is just rediculous.

Yeah but it's a tough one mate. We want the min wage put up to $15.00, but trains made in China can be purchased for 1/2 the price, as they pay the fuckers a bowl of rice a week. What do you do??

[scumdog]

Yeah but it's a tough one mate. We want the min wage put up to $15.00, but trains made in China can be purchased for 1/2 the price, as they pay the fuckers a bowl of rice a week. What do you do??

WE get poorer and THEY get richer.

And that's what is happening all over the world.

The third world countries are on the climb and the developed ones are on the slide.

But we like the cheap stuff from the climbing countries.

[Crasherfromwayback]

WE get poorer and THEY get richer.

And that's what is happening all over the world.

The third world countries are on the climb and the developed ones are on the slide.

But we like the cheap stuff from the climbing countries.

Yeah the country its self is getting richer, but the gap between rich and poor is way bigger than ever. And the Labour voters moan about the gap here!

[FROSTY]

Ok again I aint no fancy scientific type but it seems to me that when costing up things like these cheap trains from china that ALL factors be taken into account. By that I mean that by not employing kiwis for the countrys infastructure that we end up paying the now unemployed workers anyway in dole payments or reeducation programs.

[Kickaha]

Like wet weather gear and work boots and shoes and trains and busses.washing machines. ALL stuff where NZ companies have either folded up or transfered maufacturing overseas.
The number of REAL jobs that have dissapeared is just rediculous.

They folded because people don't give a shit where it's made or who it employs they just want "Cheap"

[flyingcrocodile46]

As opposed to the highly enlightened left-leaning voters electing a government in a global recession that was going to spend, spend, spend and reduce their tax base by taking GST off fresh fruit and vegetables? If indeed those same enlightened and erudite left-leaning folks could have been bothered going to vote.

I'm amazed at the fucked up logic that was used by labour in stating that we shouldn't be selling assets to make our lives easier today, as we were somehow robbing the next generation of those assets.

The stupidity of the voters who listened to them and thought it a much better idea to borrow, borrow, borrow and put that same (next) generation in debt up to their eyeballs before they are even old enough to vote absolutely astounds me.

People should have to demonstrate that they have an IQ over 80 before they are allowed to vote. That would likely see the Labour party disappear completely. Fucktards the lot of them:bleh:

[FROSTY]

They folded because people don't give a shit where it's made or who it employs they just want "Cheap"
But the gubbiment ALLOWED imported products to become cheaper than locally made. Why NOT susidise F and P or John bull or any of the other now gone offshore companies? better subsidies that pay it anyway in dole payments

[blue rider]

But the gubbiment ALLOWED imported products to become cheaper than locally made. Why NOT susidise F and P or John bull or any of the other now gone offshore companies? better subsidies that pay it anyway in dole payments

because that would be socialism, and that is wrong.

but its capitalism to offshore to cheap labour countries to increase share holder revenue and that is good.
everyone else just has to try harder, and quit whining and whinging, and stop being lazy.....

[Brian d marge]

Hows those schools, Didn’t tell ya during the campaign, and the second thing they do , is to open them up for privatization .....


Go John Go ..... not even a week The darling boy of the monetary fund ...... Yeeehaaaaaa

Stephen

[flyingcrocodile46]

But the gubbiment ALLOWED imported products to become cheaper than locally made. Why NOT susidise F and P or John bull or any of the other now gone offshore companies? better subsidies that pay it anyway in dole payments

The taxpayer subsidised and/or protected NZ businesses by way of import tariffs for decades to little good effect. The local prices were pumped up so high compared to overseas products that what ever benifit taxpayers got by way of wages was taken back from all of us tenfold in the prices we were forced to pay. Hell! We even subsidised the exports of these companies.
Have you ever seen F&P, Fletchers, Winstones, CHH, Tasman, the Apple & Pear board, Fontera etc etc giving the tax payers any discounts or dividends. Hell no! Even our own milk, fruit and vege are too dear for some families to provide for their kids.

All of the above companies became stinking rich by fucking us over (via the business round table and our politicians) Fuck them.

We should be confiscating all of them and selling them to pay our debts.

[rainman]

Hows those schools, Didn’t tell ya during the campaign, and the second thing they do , is to open them up for privatization .....


Go John Go ..... not even a week The darling boy of the monetary fund ...... Yeeehaaaaaa

Yeah, amazing, eh. One of the benefits of not putting up many policies during the campaign and being voted in by a bunch of tribal loyalists is you can do whatever the fuck you want afterwards and the stupid idiots will probably make excuses for you all the while, no matter what you do. And you get good money, great perks, and beemer company cars... Nice work if you can get it.

Oh well, at least the economy will grow strongly... oh, wait (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10771103). Seems they were mistaken, after all.

[superman]

Hows those schools, Didn’t tell ya during the campaign, and the second thing they do , is to open them up for privatization .....


Go John Go ..... not even a week The darling boy of the monetary fund ...... Yeeehaaaaaa

Stephen

Privatised things are just soooo scary. :yeah:

It's a right-wing government, right-wing likes privatisation, woop-di-fucking-doo. Anyone who voted right should know that national could pave the way to privatise all sorts. Absolutely no way this government'll end up privatising schools though, especially such a centre-right one. They're getting a hounding for selling 3% of state assets for goodness sake so I hardly think that they'll push it further unless their little plan works out well.

[Brian d marge]

Privatised things are just soooo scary. :yeah:

It's a right-wing government, right-wing likes privatisation, woop-di-fucking-doo. Anyone who voted right should know that national could pave the way to privatise all sorts. Absolutely no way this government'll end up privatising schools though, especially such a centre-right one. They're getting a hounding for selling 3% of state assets for goodness sake so I hardly think that they'll push it further unless their little plan works out well.

You have no Idea of what you are talking about

Stephen

[superman]

You have no Idea of what you are talking about

Stephen

:niceone: I'll keep my mouth shut then.

[short-circuit]

:niceone: I'll keep my mouth shut then.

Watch and learn sonny boy

[scumdog]

Yeah, amazing, eh. One of the benefits of not putting up many policies during the campaign and being voted in by a bunch of tribal loyalists is you can do whatever the fuck you want afterwards and the stupid idiots will probably make excuses for you all the while, no matter what you do. And you get good money, great perks, and beemer company cars... Nice work if you can get it.

Oh well, at least the economy will grow strongly... oh, wait (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10771103). Seems they were mistaken, after all.

Quite right!
ANY one of the other parties would have done SO much better if they had been voted in eh!:rolleyes:
(Tuis moment here in case you believe shit like that)

[BoristheBiter]

You have no Idea of what you are talking about

Stephen

Neither do you, it is an ACT policy for a start.

[imdying]

You have no Idea of what you are talking about

StephenYeah but at least I can understand what he's typing.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Yeah, amazing, eh. One of the benefits of not putting up many policies during the campaign and being voted in by a bunch of tribal loyalists is you can do whatever the fuck you want afterwards and the stupid idiots will probably make excuses for you all the while, no matter what you do. And you get good money, great perks, and beemer company cars... Nice work if you can get it.

Oh well, at least the economy will grow strongly... oh, wait (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10771103). Seems they were mistaken, after all.

The funniest thing is what sore losers you guys are.

[Oscar]

Hows those schools, Didn’t tell ya during the campaign, and the second thing they do , is to open them up for privatization .....


Go John Go ..... not even a week The darling boy of the monetary fund ...... Yeeehaaaaaa

Stephen

You were told.
You should have paid attention during the campaign - it's an ACT policy (as Key said "..that's MMP for you..").
Notwithstanding that, it's very similar to the intergrated private school model now operating.

[steve_t]

Oh well, at least the economy will grow strongly... oh, wait (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10771103). Seems they were mistaken, after all.

Funny that you reference an article but ignore the very first sentence of it :msn-wink:

[superman]

You were told.
You should have paid attention during the campaign - it's an ACT policy (as Key said "..that's MMP for you..").
Notwithstanding that, it's very similar to the intergrated private school model now operating.

They had a lovely Stanford University women on Radio NZ this morning talking about these charter schools and their benefits in the USA. They seem to have a larger spread of performance coming out of those schools than regular state schools (mostly due to different laws state by state), but where they have high accountability it really benefits those in poverty.

And these schools are publicly funded, so why on earth are people banging on about privatised schools... <_<

As stated, NZ does have some very close to being defined as charter schools. COPY PASTE:

Well before American charter schools, New Zealand went much further in granting power to individual schools by abolishing all regional school boards and making each public school independent, with local parent and teacher involvement in decision making. Although not called charter schools, each school does have a charter under which it operates with a board of trustees and has a high degree of autonomy.
While since 1989 there is also provision for Designated Special Character schools, thus far only two have been created. (These are not to be confused with 'state integrated' schools—mostly Catholic, and formerly private—that are "integrated" into the public school system, while retaining their proprietor—which are required to have a "special character" in their integration agreement with the Crown that would be preserved by the school's continuance.)

[avgas]

They folded because people don't give a shit where it's made or who it employs they just want "Cheap"
For now.

I used to do lots of freelance work (NZ term is "cashies"), but now my customers are outsourcing to India and Pakistan.
Friend of mine whom did similar noticed the same about a year ago (He is in US). Told me not to worry.
After 12 months the projects were still outstanding, and people suddenly understand the meaning of the term "Quality".

So not the whole world it cheap. And those that are cheap either find quality in what they are buying or buy something else.

I certainly found quality in my KBC that I had not experienced in my Shoei. And I found a lack of quality in Shark........ but I guess everyone is different.

[Brian d marge]

:niceone: I'll keep my mouth shut then.

no , just tell me "why" its so scary , the pros and cons etc

Stephen

[superman]

no , just tell me "why" its so scary , the pros and cons etc

Stephen

"Privatised things are just soooo scary." (sarcasm)

I always forget how necessary it can be point out sarcasm online. :weird:

[Brian d marge]

You were told.
You should have paid attention during the campaign - it's an ACT policy (as Key said "..that's MMP for you..").
Notwithstanding that, it's very similar to the intergrated private school model now operating.

I wasn’t, it did indeed sneak past , ( which is what others have said) , and considering im not in NZ .......

and yes while act and national are bed fellows , I "Should" should of expected it , the fact remain , that the new zealand government(s) are doing exactly what the IMF expect of them ( as stated by the IMF themselves openly on the website )

Remember of course that America , has the majority vote etc etc ( and has bullied the other members since its inception just after ( and during ) the Breton woods agreement)

Privatization has some good point , but when there is no , or little competition , and / or subsidization then the business model collapses .

evidence;

Electricity
Roading
Trains
Mines
and this list is pre coffee and off the top of my head , and clear examples of the intent of private money .

While the schools maybe "good" and excellent schools, 2 problems , you will create an "us and them" education system and the costs WILL go up , which may ( most likely ) drag the costs of the other state schools up as they try to compete

We need to get back to an egalitarian NZ , remove the American influence on NZ , NZ is NZ NOT America.

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

"Privatised things are just soooo scary." (sarcasm)

I always forget how necessary it can be point out sarcasm online. :weird:

yes you do as mind reading isnt taught in Schools these days, ( its also not an excuse for typing something silly )

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

Yeah but at least I can understand what he's typing.


Well , the "new charter school" is your Savior then , slap a few hundred down , and you be caught up in no time !

Stephen

[MisterD]

We need to get back to an egalitarian NZ , remove the American influence on NZ , NZ is NZ NOT America.


But, but, but...you lefties are always holding up Scandinavia in general, and Sweden in particular, as societies we should emulate. This policy looks awfully much like the Swedish "free school" model...

[Brian d marge]

But, but, but...you lefties are always holding up Scandinavia in general, and Sweden in particular, as societies we should emulate. This policy looks awfully much like the Swedish "free school" model...

I’m not a lefty and never have used the Nordic states as an example , I’m just anti greed and wish better for the common man .

Stephen

http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3746,en_21571361_44315115_49166760_1_1_1_1,00.ht ml

[BoristheBiter]

But, but, but...you lefties are always holding up Scandinavia in general, and Sweden in particular, as societies we should emulate. This policy looks awfully much like the Swedish "free school" model...

And don't forget the model country Canada.

[oldrider]

Yeah, amazing, eh. One of the benefits of not putting up many policies during the campaign and being voted in by a bunch of tribal loyalists is you can do whatever the fuck you want afterwards and the stupid idiots will probably make excuses for you all the while, no matter what you do. And you get good money, great perks, and beemer company cars... Nice work if you can get it.

1984 election won by Labour and the nation got ACT ... which was re elected again next term by the tribal loyalists that you speak of! :confused:

1984 also saw the worst "socialist" prime minister (Muldoon) thrown out of office by socialist Labour tribal loyalists! :confused:

Are You trying to tell us that this political behaviour is something new? :hitcher: ... Well, it ain't! :oi-grr:

It works for them because of the ignorance of the tribal loyalists who vote religiously for their "party" blindly!

Unfortunately (IMHO) MMP allows them (politicians) to indulge themselves and only be accountable to each other at the expense of the electorate!

Finally they hope the electorate will just roll over and submit! :thud:

[avgas]

http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3746,en_21571361_44315115_49166760_1_1_1_1,00.ht ml

Lets copy france and greece. They seem to have it right :devil2:

[SPman]

The stupidity of the voters who listened to them and thought it a much better idea to borrow, borrow, borrow and put that same (next) generation in debt up to their eyeballs before they are even old enough to vote absolutely astounds me. This would be John Key and co. that you're talking about?.......

Never mind, New Zealand is again a world leader! Our gap between rich and poor widened more than in any other developed country in the past twenty years: Figures from the OECE show the income of the richest 10 per cent of Kiwis is now more than 10 times that of the poorest 10 per cent. This is up from a ratio of around six-to-one in the 1980s and higher than the average income gap in developed nations of nine-to-one

[Brian d marge]

Lets copy france and greece. They seem to have it right :devil2: Yeeehaaaaa red team go .......

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

This would be John Key and co. that you're talking about?.......

Never mind, New Zealand is again a world leader! Our gap between rich and poor widened more than in any other developed country in the past twenty years: Figures from the OECE show the income of the richest 10 per cent of Kiwis is now more than 10 times that of the poorest 10 per cent. This is up from a ratio of around six-to-one in the 1980s and higher than the average income gap in developed nations of nine-to-one

The question is , WHY do we want an egalitarian society , I don't care if someone rich , but I sure as hell don't like living in the mess left behind, caused by the " disenfranchised "

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

This would be John Key and co. that you're talking about?.......

Never mind, New Zealand is again a world leader! Our gap between rich and poor widened more than in any other developed country in the past twenty years: Figures from the OECE show the income of the richest 10 per cent of Kiwis is now more than 10 times that of the poorest 10 per cent. This is up from a ratio of around six-to-one in the 1980s and higher than the average income gap in developed nations of nine-to-one

So basically the poor have done fuck all to make themselves better off is what that says.

[Crasherfromwayback]

This would be John Key and co. that you're talking about?.......

Never mind, New Zealand is again a world leader! Our gap between rich and poor widened more than in any other developed country in the past twenty years: Figures from the OECE show the income of the richest 10 per cent of Kiwis is now more than 10 times that of the poorest 10 per cent. This is up from a ratio of around six-to-one in the 1980s and higher than the average income gap in developed nations of nine-to-one

As a country, China is the fastest growing economy is it not? Does it not also have the greatest gap between rich and poor?

[Crasherfromwayback]

So basically the poor have done fuck all to make themselves better off is what that says.

And will always look for an excuse and blame those better off than themselves, rather than take a long hard look in a fucking mirror.

[Brian d marge]

As a country, China is the fastest growing economy is it not? Does it not also have the greatest gap between rich and poor?

there might be a reason why ...and not what you think, the gap is a result of the growth, and most people say china is an overheating economy

Stephen

[mashman]

So basically the poor have done fuck all to make themselves better off is what that says.



And will always look for an excuse and blame those better off than themselves, rather than take a long hard look in a fucking mirror.

It is known that to control inflation you need to have a percentage of your population unemployed. You should be paying the unemployed more for living on shit wages and suffering the barrage of crap that people such as yourselves pluck out of yaw arses, safe in the knowledge that you don't need to give a shit, because it's their fault for not having jobs that aren't there and that the govt has absolutely no chance in hell of creating or allowing to be created because it would drive inflation up and make your money worth less than it currently is, potentially putting so called smart business men out of business.

OR (my personal fave)

Stop paying them for being unemployed. Let's get this shit over and done with.

[Brian d marge]

So basically the poor have done fuck all to make themselves better off is what that says.

Have you not made the link yet , that the mess you are living in now , is a direct result of this kind of economy?

next time your tv is nicked, by some scrote , have a think about the cause

Stephen

[Crasherfromwayback]

. You should be paying the unemployed more for living on shit wages and suffering the barrage of crap that people such as yourselves pluck out of yaw arses, safe in the knowledge that you don't need to give a shit, because it's their fault for not having jobs that aren't there .

I'd be very surprised if the unemployed didn't have exactly the same chances I had at getting a job. Odd how there are jobs out there for me, but not them eh? How do you explain that Einstein?

[mashman]

I'd be very surprised if the unemployed didn't have exactly the same chances I had at getting a job. Odd how there are jobs out there for me, but not them eh? How do you explain that Einstein?

How many people went for the job you did? And how many people got that job?

[Crasherfromwayback]

How many people went for the job you did? And how many people got that job?

I haven't had to apply for the last five jobs I've had. Because I worked hard to get good at what I do. I earnt $90.00 a week as an apprentice mechanic and went from there. I've never in my 45 years been unemployed, and I don't have any real schooling qualifications.

That old excuse of there being no jobs out there for them doesn't fly with me sorry.

[mashman]

I haven't had to apply for the last five jobs I've had. Because I worked hard to get good at what I do. I earnt $90.00 a week as an apprentice mechanic and went from there. I've never in my 45 years been unemployed, and I don't have any real schooling qualifications.

That old excuse of there being no jobs out there for them doesn't fly with me sorry.

Good on ya, that must be a first in the history of the world. I'm sure there's a few thousand looking for jobs at the moment with a similar story.

Ooooooooook. And the need to have a certain percentage of your population unemployed to control inflation is just an excuse too? Do you think one of the controls for that would be not having enough jobs available?

[Brian d marge]

waaayyyy heeyyyyyyyy


more ......

National has been accused of privatising welfare after announcing plans to contract out employment services.

When will the fun ever stop

ACT again????

Stephen

[scumdog]

I haven't had to apply for the last five jobs I've had. Because I worked hard to get good at what I do. I earnt $90.00 a week as an apprentice mechanic and went from there. I've never in my 45 years been unemployed, and I don't have any real schooling qualifications.

That old excuse of there being no jobs out there for them doesn't fly with me sorry.

Hmmmm, kinda sums up my act too.

When laid off when a freezing works went belly-up in '94 was the first time in my life I was out of a job.

That lasted a total of four working days as I went from one temp job to another for a couple of months...I've worked ever since.

Of course it wasn't all beer'n'skittles, one calender month I got $536 in the hand for that month.:woohoo:

[mashman]

waaayyyy heeyyyyyyyy


more ......

National has been accused of privatising welfare after announcing plans to contract out employment services.

When will the fun ever stop

ACT again????

Stephen

ahhhhhhh, the open purse that is capex.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Good on ya, that must be a first in the history of the world. I'm sure there's a few thousand looking for jobs at the moment with a similar story.

Ooooooooook. And the need to have a certain percentage of your population unemployed to control inflation is just an excuse too? Do you think one of the controls for that would be not having enough jobs available?

Because it's so blindingly obvious you have the answer to all things political, why don't you run for PM? No doubt you could save NZ in your first term.

[mashman]

Because it's so blindingly obvious you have the answer to all things political, why don't you run for PM? No doubt you could save NZ in your first term.

I probably could sort it all in one term... but you'd have to elect me and then do as you're told or face a stern public spanking...

[Edbear]

Hmmmm, kinda sums up my act too.

When laid off when a freezing works went belly-up in '94 was the first time in my life I was out of a job.

That lasted a total of four working days as I went from one temp job to another for a couple of months...I've worked ever since.

Of course it wasn't all beer'n'skittles, one calender month I got $536 in the hand for that month.:woohoo:

I haven't been on the dole for about 32 years. I've been off work for sickness and injury, but always found something to do. With my accident last year meaning I am no longer able to work more than 20hrs a week at a sedentary job, according to the Docs and Specialists, I started my own business while in hospital and have slowly worked away at it while recuperating and living on the pittance I was paid by ACC. ACC finished on 7th Sept. and now my business has to make up the difference. As for a "regular" job, no-one wants to know me, either for full or part-time work in any of the different occupations I've tried. (Everything from management roles to pumping gas to weighing refuse trucks...I wasn't fussy.) My physical limitations would otherwise see me permanently on a sickness benefit were it not for my determination to support myself and allow my wife to give up her full-time job and do something a bit easier on her aging bod...:Oi: Next year, she will look for another job that pays more but is easier to do, as she has the qualifications to do that.

I am planning that in due course the business will support us both in the lifestyle we have become accustomed to. So I work hard, more than I am supposed to, and have put my all into the business. Qualifications? Nup! Experience? In spades. Was I fit enough I could be employed in a "regular" job but I'm having much more fun doing this!

Oh, Government? Not an issue, doesn't matter to me who's running the country it's never made any difference in my whole working life over the past 40 years...:cool:

[Robert Taylor]

I'd be very surprised if the unemployed didn't have exactly the same chances I had at getting a job. Odd how there are jobs out there for me, but not them eh? How do you explain that Einstein?

I turned up in the UK in 81 when there were 3 million unemployed. When I went for a job I got it, sure I had skills and qualifications but its also about a willingness to work and work hard.

[Robert Taylor]

Because it's so blindingly obvious you have the answer to all things political, why don't you run for PM? No doubt you could save NZ in your first term.

JFK ''Its not what your country can do for you, its what you can do for your country'' It seems so many people expect the Government to be their keeper and to dip into a bottomless pit.

[SPman]

The stupidity of the voters who listened to them and thought it a much better idea to borrow, borrow, borrow and put that same (next) generation in debt up to their eyeballs before they are even old enough to vote absolutely astounds me.

Being that National has managed to more than double our total government debt, could somebody please explain why they're borrowing so heavily?

The OECD’s Statistical Annex predicts New Zealand’s General government gross financial liabilities as a percentage of GDP is set to grow from 28.9% in 2008 to 50% in 2013.

No doubt someone will say under any other mob it would be worse.......


It's interesting that private debt suddenly started to decrease in 2008 while government debt immediately started to increase. Between September 2008 and June 2011 government debt grew by $23.5 billion while private debt fell by $41 billion. This makes National's accounting look decidedly fishy.[/QUOTE]

[Crasherfromwayback]

I'll say it again. Why don't you whining wankers form your own party...or join the one you so love, and show us how fucking good you are. That...or simply shut the fuck up and piss off. Oh that's right, you're experts in every single fucking field known to mankind.

Let's start a new thread. How much difference have you moaning know all cunts made to mankind and this earth we all share?

[mashman]

I'll say it again. Why don't you whining wankers form your own party...or join the one you so love, and show us how fucking good you are. That...or simply shut the fuck up and piss off. Oh that's right, you're experts in every single fucking field known to mankind.

Let's start a new thread. How much difference have you moaning know all cunts made to mankind and this earth we all share?

Don't go hatin on the know alls... are you offering support and funding?

Is that difference to be positive or negative? Coz I haven't killed you all yet, which is both a positive and a negative... as is me not coming into POWER... I would have invented irrigation if someone hadn't beaten me to it... and roads... probably the aqueduct too.

[rainman]

Quite right!
ANY one of the other parties would have done SO much better if they had been voted in eh!:rolleyes:
(Tuis moment here in case you believe shit like that)

All a matter of opinion, innit? Personally I'm pretty sure Anything But National would be a better choice in these troubled times. They have no discernible economic plan, are mainly composed of long term seatwarmers (and those are the good ones), have performed poorly even considering the context, have a tendency to do dumb things like implement ideological policy that increases our deficit, and can't do long term planning for shit.


The funniest thing is what sore losers you guys are.

Hey, I didn't lose. The party I voted for returned it's best result so far, with more MPs than ever.


Funny that you reference an article but ignore the very first sentence of it :msn-wink:

What, "it's someone else's fault, waah waah..?"


Are You trying to tell us that this political behaviour is something new? :hitcher: ... Well, it ain't! :oi-grr:

Sadly, you're quite right there. I'd hope we'd learn, though. Ah well, back to being a grumpy old cynic, I suppose.


So basically the poor have done fuck all to make themselves better off is what that says.

And what that says is that you're a fucking idiot.

[Brian d marge]

I'll say it again. Why don't you whining wankers form your own party...or join the one you so love, and show us how fucking good you are. That...or simply shut the fuck up and piss off. Oh that's right, you're experts in every single fucking field known to mankind.

Let's start a new thread. How much difference have you moaning know all cunts made to mankind and this earth we all share?

I did , buggered off , faced with too much stupidity , and a future Loads of it. I took the only sensible course a young man could . I buggered off. ( oh and I did my fair share before buggering off so there ! )

No , with a glass in one hand and me cock in the other , I can sit back and take pot shots at the natives .....

Time for a spot of Tiffing, me thinks

Stephen

[flyingcrocodile46]

with a glass in one hand and me cock in the other , I can sit back and take pot shots at the natives .....

and amuse them no end with your drinking habits when you forget which hand is holding what. :laugh:

[scott411]

Being that National has managed to more than double our total government debt, could somebody please explain why they're borrowing so heavily?

The OECD’s Statistical Annex predicts New Zealand’s General government gross financial liabilities as a percentage of GDP is set to grow from 28.9% in 2008 to 50% in 2013.

No doubt someone will say under any other mob it would be worse.......

It's interesting that private debt suddenly started to decrease in 2008 while government debt immediately started to increase. Between September 2008 and June 2011 government debt grew by $23.5 billion while private debt fell by $41 billion. This makes National's accounting look decidedly fishy.[/QUOTE]

Because they are not being a true right wing goverment and cutting goverment spending down to a level where the current tax take is at, the only party that really wanted to do that was Act, and they are all but sunk,

[Brian d marge]

and amuse them no end with your drinking habits when you forget which hand is holding what. :laugh:

:eek::doh:

integral of 8 between the limits of 5 and 3 and the subtraction of 6 .

Stephen

[Robert Taylor]

Because they are not being a true right wing goverment and cutting goverment spending down to a level where the current tax take is at, the only party that really wanted to do that was Act, and they are all but sunk,[/QUOTE]

Well done Scott in stating the obvious. The hypocrisy is that while everyone would like the deficit reduced they still want to have their cake and eat it too. No-one wants any pain. Look at especially the Greeks, been living beyond their means for years and now that the parties over they are getting very violent about it all.
The previous NZ Government had golden economic weather and squandered 9 years of opportunity to move the country forward, the current Government 2008 on ( whoever it was ) has had to contend with costly disasters and a basically bankrupt world economy.
Of course the socialists who always infuriatingly self proclaim the moral high ground would in their opinion have done a lot better.
In the end event we are all hypocrites because we get what we collectively vote for. Act is basically correct, back to core services.

[davebullet]

It simply boils down to this. You can't have cheap TVs and cheap milk. Choose your poison.

[oneofsix]

It simply boils down to this. You can't have cheap TVs and cheap milk. Choose your poison.

Why not? If the asians want to sell us TV's cheap we will take them, they re still even cheaper in the country of manufacture, however our milk, which we provide tax breaks etc for cost more here than when it is exported.

[MisterD]

Being that National has managed to more than double our total government debt, could somebody please explain why they're borrowing so heavily?

Because a) they're hopeless Keynsian muppets and b) they're not prepared to risk the political fall-out of cutting government spending as tax revenues fall.

[shrub]

I'll say it again. Why don't you whining wankers form your own party...or join the one you so love, and show us how fucking good you are. That...or simply shut the fuck up and piss off. Oh that's right, you're experts in every single fucking field known to mankind.

Let's start a new thread. How much difference have you moaning know all cunts made to mankind and this earth we all share?

Hmmm... allow me to interpret your little rant. You disagree with what those of us on the left say, but because your opinion isn't based on anything substantive and you lack the ability to construct and defend a logical and compelling argument in support of your position you want people who don't agree with you to go away and stop making your head spin.

Muppets, too funny!:clap::clap:

[Winston001]

Why not? If the asians want to sell us TV's cheap we will take them, they re still even cheaper in the country of manufacture, however our milk, which we provide tax breaks etc for cost more here than when it is exported.

I'm not aware of any tax breaks or subsidies for the dairy industry - our competitors such as the USA would jump on the World Trade Organisation if that was true.

There is a general misunderstanding about milk. The fresh white liquid (mostly water) we buy in our supermarkets is not what we export to the world. Instead we export concentrates in the forms of dried milk powder, butter, cheese, casein, ice-cream etc. The importing countries reconstitute some by adding water but it certainly isn't the fresh stuff we enjoy here.

Carrying and processing fresh milk is much more expensive than dealing with concentrated milk powder.

Just to get a sense of proportion, NZ produces 2% of the worlds dairy products - the United States produces 12%.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Hmmm... allow me to interpret your little rant. You disagree with what those of us on the left say, but because your opinion isn't based on anything substantive and you lack the ability to construct and defend a logical and compelling argument in support of your position you want people who don't agree with you to go away and stop making your head spin.

Muppets, too funny!:clap::clap:

Yeah you got it in one. People like you are just so much more intelligent than I could ever hope to be, I simply can't fathom what you're saying. You're awesome. Can't understand why you're not the PM. Perhaps you earn too much as a nuclear physicist? Funny that those of you on the left (as clever as you obviously are), are the minority though eh. That must do your head in. Explain that one.

[Oscar]

Hmmm... allow me to interpret your little rant. You disagree with what those of us on the left say, but because your opinion isn't based on anything substantive and you lack the ability to construct and defend a logical and compelling argument in support of your position you want people who don't agree with you to go away and stop making your head spin.

Muppets, too funny!:clap::clap:

My interpretation is somewhat different. He appears to be sick of supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectuals who confuse personal attacks with cogent ‎argument. ‎

Pompous cunts, too funny...:clap::clap:

[Crasherfromwayback]

My interpretation is somewhat different. He appears to be sick of supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectuals who confuse personal attacks with cogent ‎argument. ‎

Pompous cunts, too funny...:clap::clap:

Thanks Oscar. Saved me saying it!

Bet he writes letters to the editor of his local paper on a daily basis too.

[shrub]

The hypocrisy is that while everyone would like the deficit reduced they still want to have their cake and eat it too. No-one wants any pain.

Or everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die. The neoliberalist doctrine holds that economic success comes from cutting taxes and reducing government expenditure through allowing the private sector to provide all but the most fundamental of what government's used to supply. The theory is that lower taxes give citizens more money which they can then spend on what their taxes used to cover. Fundamental to the success of this concept is the idea that privately owned businesses operating in a competitive free market are more efficient and competitive than state run enterprises with no competition.

Unfortunately worldwide experience has shown that the free market model generally offers more expensive services than the state, usually with few advantages. Therefore the services we depend on are either still being paid for by the state from a reduced tax take, or are more expensive which means most people (including businesses) have less money.

The neoliberal answer to that problem is to call for tax cuts, and over the last 25 years we have had a steady stream of tax cuts and most western governments have been spending far more than they have been earning and borrowing to fill the gap. The neoliberal solution to these huge deficits is to cut government spending, and while there were incredible efficiencies made 25 years ago, all the low hanging fruit have been picked and the only way to reduce government spending is to cut what are now increasingly essential services.

Why not just bite the bullet and raise taxes? I wouldn't have a problem if my tax rate was increased if it meant that we'd avoid going bankrupt just as a clever businessman will reduce drawings if the business is in a slump. We're all in the shit which means everyone needs to "cut their cloth", not just low income earners and beneficiaries.




The previous NZ Government had golden economic weather and squandered 9 years of opportunity to move the country forward.

So was it a bad idea to pay off government debt and rebuild the stripped infrastructure? Would it have been better if they had have given us all tax cuts so we could buy more TVs?

[BoristheBiter]

So was it a bad idea to pay off government debt and rebuild the stripped infrastructure? Would it have been better if they had have given us all tax cuts so we could buy more TVs?

What stripped infrastructure? they brought back Kiwirail at a loss and in worse condition then when it was sold.

Good economic sense (insert Tui add here)

[Crasherfromwayback]

. The neoliberalist doctrine

The neoliberal answer


The neoliberal solution




Until today, salubrious was my favourite word.

[shrub]

I'm not aware of any tax breaks or subsidies for the dairy industry - our competitors such as the USA would jump on the World Trade Organisation if that was true. .

It's all a little more discreet than simple subsidies or tax breaks. A key raw material used by the modern NZ dairy industry is water because dairy has moved from the traditional areas with good rainfall (Waikato etc) to places like the Canterbury Plains and Central Otago that need irrigation. The water to do that costs the farmer nothing despite that water being a finite resource. If I run a factory and i have waste materials, I pay someone to take those wastes away and put them in a landfill, whereas a farmer doesn't have that problem. When his cow pisses or shits (waste product from his business) that waste usually finds it's way into the water system which is why so many of our rivers and lakes are fucked. Who pays to clean those lakes? The taxpayer who is subsidising the farmer. And if a factory emits carbon they pay for that carbon, whereas a farmer doesn't.

[Swoop]

And don't forget the model country Canada.
An interesting point. Making the south islanders speak french would be entertaining.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Making the south islanders speak french would be entertaining.

What language do they speak way down South? Sure as hell doesn't sound like English.

[Swoop]

What language do they speak way down South? Sure as hell doesn't sound like English.
Even more reasons to make them speak an internationally used language.:blip:

[BoristheBiter]

It's all a little more discreet than simple subsidies or tax breaks. A key raw material used by the modern NZ dairy industry is water because dairy has moved from the traditional areas with good rainfall (Waikato etc) to places like the Canterbury Plains and Central Otago that need irrigation. The water to do that costs the farmer nothing despite that water being a finite resource. If I run a factory and i have waste materials, I pay someone to take those wastes away and put them in a landfill, whereas a farmer doesn't have that problem. When his cow pisses or shits (waste product from his business) that waste usually finds it's way into the water system which is why so many of our rivers and lakes are fucked. Who pays to clean those lakes? The taxpayer who is subsidising the farmer. And if a factory emits carbon they pay for that carbon, whereas a farmer doesn't.

Proves how little you know.

[mashman]

What stripped infrastructure? they brought back Kiwirail at a loss and in worse condition then when it was sold.

Good economic sense (insert Tui add here)

What would you have done? Let the rail network be rendered unusable? What would that have done to the economy? And when it was bought back, why couldn't we buy it back for $1 if it was in such a bad condition?

[BoristheBiter]

What would you have done? Let the rail network be rendered unusable? What would that have done to the economy? And when it was bought back, why couldn't we buy it back for $1 if it was in such a bad condition?

Like you said i would have brought it back for a dollar, at the most paid scrape value.
As to why they didn't, well only Helen will know that one.

[shrub]

My interpretation is somewhat different. He appears to be sick of supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectuals who confuse personal attacks with cogent ‎argument. ‎

Pompous cunts, too funny...:clap::clap:

I prefer arrogant to pompous, but then I also prefer big boned to fat and high forehead to bald.

If he is sick of "supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectuals who confuse personal attacks with cogent ‎argument", then why doesn't he present a cogent argument to support his position or challenge what us "pseudo-intellectuals" say? And yes, I called him a muppet (hard not to really), but apart from that if you look at my posts almost every single one of them presents a reasoned response to what someone else says, although I openly admit that sometimes I am a little sarcastic. However you called me a "pompous cunt" and a "supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectual" - is that, despite being distressingly accurate, a personal attack or a cogent argument?

And if Boris is so keen on cogent argument and so sick of personal attack, why did he call people who disagree with him "whining wankers" and "moaning know all cunts"? Or was that OK because it was a general attack, not a personal attack?

[BoristheBiter]

I prefer arrogant to pompous, but then I also prefer big boned to fat and high forehead to bald.

If he is sick of "supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectuals who confuse personal attacks with cogent ‎argument", then why doesn't he present a cogent argument to support his position or challenge what us "pseudo-intellectuals" say? And yes, I called him a muppet (hard not to really), but apart from that if you look at my posts almost every single one of them presents a reasoned response to what someone else says, although I openly admit that sometimes I am a little sarcastic. However you called me a "pompous cunt" and a "supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectual" - is that, despite being distressingly accurate, a personal attack or a cogent argument?

And if Boris is so keen on cogent argument and so sick of personal attack, why did he call people who disagree with him "whining wankers" and "moaning know all cunts"? Or was that OK because it was a general attack, not a personal attack?

Who said i was sick of personal attacks? some of you guys come up with some good'ns. Makes KB more enjoyable.

[Edbear]

JFK ''Its not what your country can do for you, its what you can do for your country'' It seems so many people expect the Government to be their keeper and to dip into a bottomless pit.

Same goes for many employees, too. People need to realise that they are the key to survival and prosperity and the harder they work and the more honest they are, the better off everyone would be. The Government would have the money they need due to everyone paying taxes correctly, and the employer would have a successful business due to the integrity of its employees.

Too many people are ripping off the system, both welfare and business through greed and a lack of moral integrity and laziness born of long term welfare dependence to the point that these one's genuinely believe the country owes them.

Yes, the country needs a reserve of manpower, ie: a percentage of unemplyment to take up the slack when things get busy, but these one's need to be training and ready to work at a moment's notice, not sitting around bludging and wasting their lives being unemployable. People who are learning and getting qualifications are far happier and more motivated than those who prefer to sit around on their playstations, boozing and taking drugs and causing mayhem in their communities.

Youth complaining about lack of opportunites and places to let off steam are simply selfish and lazy. Back in the day we made our own fun and entertainment and didn't have to break the law to do it, well not seriously anyway.... I started working at 11 years old and by 13 had a lawn-mowing "business". At 14 I added a newspaper round to that and paid for my own first car myself. It's called initiative and looking for ways to work and earn and not being too fussy about what you start with.

Our kids have grown up expecting to be responsible for their choices and to have to work to get ahead, to be patient and not too fussy or demanding, to be honest as empoyees and gain the respect of their bosses and those they integrate with. Result? They are all working and happy, not on the dole or complaining about their lot in life. Have they had it easy? Not on your nelly they haven't and what they have gone through would raise the eyebrows of many on here, but they have survived and adapted and got stronger and learned how to cope and make the best of their situations.

Our son is a good example as he was ADHD and still has learning difficulties but he understood the need to cope and get around his disability and he's rarely been out of work. At 36 he's got a good steady job, has gained qualifications and could pretty much get work anywhere due to his experience and his attitude.

They never whinge and expect anyone to carry them, and they don't care who's in Govt. either as it's never made any difference to them. As parents we have helped them out at times, but they never take advantage and always pay us back and they don't expect us to support them.

So to all the whingers I ask, "What are you doing to change your situation?"

[shrub]

What would you have done? Let the rail network be rendered unusable? What would that have done to the economy? And when it was bought back, why couldn't we buy it back for $1 if it was in such a bad condition?

What people forget is that in the medium and long term not having a good rail network would damn near cripple NZ. Oil prices are rising which is making road transport increasingly expensive, whereas rail can not only be electric but even with diesel is a lot cheaper per tonne of freight. We can barely afford to maintain our existing roads, yet the cost of maintaining a rail network is a fraction the cost of maintaining a road, and I understand that building a railway line costs about the same as a good two lane highway.

And as a biker, the less trucks on the road the better for me. They fuck the surface and how many times have you come flying round a corner at the beginning of a beautiful set of corners to find a big old A train grinding along at 60 kmh? Imagine if that truck was parked in a depot somewhere because the freight was on that train you passed earlier?

I think the only reason the right hate rail is because Labour bought it back.

[mashman]

Like you said i would have brought it back for a dollar, at the most paid scrape value.
As to why they didn't, well only Helen will know that one.

Could it be that the owners didn't have to sell? and that they could afford to let the railways be run down?

[BoristheBiter]

It's all a little more discreet than simple subsidies or tax breaks. A key raw material used by the modern NZ dairy industry is water because dairy has moved from the traditional areas with good rainfall (Waikato etc) to places like the Canterbury Plains and Central Otago that need irrigation. The water to do that costs the farmer nothing despite that water being a finite resource. If I run a factory and i have waste materials, I pay someone to take those wastes away and put them in a landfill, whereas a farmer doesn't have that problem. When his cow pisses or shits (waste product from his business) that waste usually finds it's way into the water system which is why so many of our rivers and lakes are fucked. Who pays to clean those lakes? The taxpayer who is subsidising the farmer. And if a factory emits carbon they pay for that carbon, whereas a farmer doesn't.

this shows what farmers pay for their water and this does not inlude the cost of the irrigation systems themselves.

http://www.fedfarm.org.nz/n2178.html

Then there is the waste water charges imposed by council via the rates.

[Oscar]

I prefer arrogant to pompous, but then I also prefer big boned to fat and high forehead to bald.

If he is sick of "supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectuals who confuse personal attacks with cogent ‎argument", then why doesn't he present a cogent argument to support his position or challenge what us "pseudo-intellectuals" say? And yes, I called him a muppet (hard not to really), but apart from that if you look at my posts almost every single one of them presents a reasoned response to what someone else says, although I openly admit that sometimes I am a little sarcastic. However you called me a "pompous cunt" and a "supercilious ‎pseudo-intellectual" - is that, despite being distressingly accurate, a personal attack or a cogent argument?

And if Boris is so keen on cogent argument and so sick of personal attack, why did he call people who disagree with him "whining wankers" and "moaning know all cunts"? Or was that OK because it was a general attack, not a personal attack?


It certainly was a personal attack, and my excuse is that you started it (which I admit is ‎probably disingenuous and/or supercilious in itself). In respect of cogent argument, I ‎have absolutely no proof as to your resemblance to female genitalia, but I think on re-‎reading your post to Mr. Crasher, in your heart of hearts, you'd have to allow that it ‎was pompous.‎

[shrub]

Who said i was sick of personal attacks? some of you guys come up with some good'ns. Makes KB more enjoyable.

When Oscar said you were sick of personal attacks you said "Thanks Oscar. Saved me saying it!". If it saved you saying it, then you intended to say it.

[BoristheBiter]

What people forget is that in the medium and long term not having a good rail network would damn near cripple NZ. Oil prices are rising which is making road transport increasingly expensive, whereas rail can not only be electric but even with diesel is a lot cheaper per tonne of freight. We can barely afford to maintain our existing roads, yet the cost of maintaining a rail network is a fraction the cost of maintaining a road, and I understand that building a railway line costs about the same as a good two lane highway.

And as a biker, the less trucks on the road the better for me. They fuck the surface and how many times have you come flying round a corner at the beginning of a beautiful set of corners to find a big old A train grinding along at 60 kmh? Imagine if that truck was parked in a depot somewhere because the freight was on that train you passed earlier?

I think the only reason the right hate rail is because Labour bought it back.


Could it be that the owners didn't have to sell? and that they could afford to let the railways be run down?

I think it should have never been sold in the first place. But i think we all agree that the price they paid to get it back was way to high.
Also 13hrs to get from AKL to WGTN is a bit of a joke.

[mashman]

When Oscar said you were sick of personal attacks you said "Thanks Oscar. Saved me saying it!". If it saved you saying it, then you intended to say it.

t'was Crasher mate. Much better at articulating himself than Oscar imho

[BoristheBiter]

When Oscar said you were sick of personal attacks you said "Thanks Oscar. Saved me saying it!". If it saved you saying it, then you intended to say it.

I think you should go back and read it again.
It was CFWB who posted that.

[mashman]

I think it should have never been sold in the first place. But i think we all agree that the price they paid to get it back was way to high.
Also 13hrs to get from AKL to WGTN is a bit of a joke.

I wasn't here when it was sold, but I agree that the price seemed pretty feckin high when they bought it back... although had it had been the Nats, we would have paid double. 13hrs seriously??? fecknell

[Crasherfromwayback]

When Oscar said you were sick of personal attacks you said "Thanks Oscar. Saved me saying it!". If it saved you saying it, then you intended to say it.

Who's the 'muppet' now Knobjob? At least I know who I'm insulting.

[shrub]

I think on re-‎reading your post to Mr. Crasher, in your heart of hearts, you'd have to allow that it ‎was pompous.‎

No, on re-reading my post i think it was pretty accurate and even amusing. It also wound you guys up, so it did it's job.

[BoristheBiter]

I wasn't here when it was sold, but I agree that the price seemed pretty feckin high when they bought it back... although had it had been the Nats, we would have paid double. 13hrs seriously??? fecknell

It stops for 45min at Nat park for lunch.:facepalm:

[mashman]

It stops for 45min at Nat park for lunch.:facepalm:

so a Nat lunch of 45 mins would really be, erm, carry the one add 2 divide by Pi, 4.5 hours?

[shrub]

Who's the 'muppet' now Knobjob? At least I know who I'm insulting.

My apologies, but you basically say the same things as each other, so it's hard to find a difference between you two.

[Oscar]

No, on re-reading my post i think it was pretty accurate and even amusing. It also wound you guys up, so it did it's job.

Accurate? I can’t really comment (‘cause I’d have to go back and read all the posts ‎and frankly, I’d rather stick needles in my eyes). It was definitely pompous, because ‎it inferred that Mr. Crasher was hanging on your every pronouncement and lacked the ‎mental capacity to argue them.‎

As for you winding me up, that’s a tiny bit arrogant, as you haven’t really said ‎anything worth getting wound up about. ‎

[Oscar]

so a Nat lunch of 45 mins would really be, erm, carry the one add 2 divide by Pi, 4.5 hours?

Do you have a caregiver or adult that can check your posts for evidence of logic or humour?
You're wasting bandwith which is probably institutional and tax-payer provided...

[BoristheBiter]

so a Nat lunch of 45 mins would really be, erm, carry the one add 2 divide by Pi, 4.5 hours?

I hear Labour is looking for a new shadow economics minister. with that calculation you would be quids in.

[mashman]

Do you have a caregiver or adult that can check your posts for evidence of logic or humour?
You're wasting bandwith which is probably institutional and tax-payer provided...

You've highlighted your own cure, I suggest more action less talk



I’d rather stick needles in my eyes

[mashman]

I hear Labour is looking for a new shadow economics minister. with that calculation you would be quids in.

Fuck that... why would I settle for being nearly the leader... I'm JK'ing it, if I can't have it all I don't want to play.

[BoristheBiter]

Fuck that... why would I settle for being nearly the leader... I'm JK'ing it, if I can't have it all I don't want to play.

So you are part of the 1% after all.:drinknsin

[shrub]

Accurate? I can’t really comment (‘cause I’d have to go back and read all the posts ‎and frankly, I’d rather stick needles in my eyes). It was definitely pompous, because ‎it inferred that Mr. Crasher was hanging on your every pronouncement and lacked the ‎mental capacity to argue them.‎

As for you winding me up, that’s a tiny bit arrogant, as you haven’t really said ‎anything worth getting wound up about. ‎

Actually Mr Crasher wasn't talking to me. It seemed to be a fairly general attack on anyone who disagreed with him merely because they disagreed. Personally I love it when people disagree, especially when they make me think with a hard argument, but for a lot of people that's the last thing they want because their argument is not defensible and that is scary because their worldview is based on myth and confusion.

And if you guys aren't wound up, how come you're all biting:D?

[Oscar]

You've highlighted your own cure, I suggest more action less talk

Naughty, naughty - I'm sure your Therapist and/or Case WOrker wouldn't like you making physical threats, no matter how lame they are...

[mashman]

Naughty, naughty - I'm sure your Therapist and/or Case WOrker wouldn't like you making physical threats, no matter how lame they are...

I wasn't a physical threat, it was a suggestion that you took your own advice for a change.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Hmmm... allow me to interpret your little rant. You disagree with what those of us on the left say, but because your opinion isn't based on anything substantive and you lack the ability to construct and defend a logical and compelling argument in support of your position you want people who don't agree with you to go away and stop making your head spin.

Muppets, too funny!:clap::clap:

Tell ya what...I'll try again.

If you're so unbelievably clever, and have all the correct answers to our fine countries woes, how 'bout you become a Politian, and sort this place out? Because otherwise...you seem to me, just another armchair expert. If National are so shit, so wrong...don't just sit there and moan about it...do something about it. Make a difference. And yeah yeah, you tried. You voted. But there aren't enough people that agree with you to make a difference that way, so you'll have to try harder. Or simply be...another sideline tossbag that thinks they're a lot smarter than they actually are.

[shrub]

I wasn't a physical threat, it was a suggestion that you took your own advice for a change.

To the insecure, everything is a threat.

[Oscar]

To the insecure, everything is a threat.

I'm not insecure....and besides, it's not how long it is, it's what you do with it:confused::no:

[mashman]

So you are part of the 1% after all.:drinknsin

still missing the point eh... I'm probably part of the 0.0000000000000001%

[BoristheBiter]

still missing the point eh... I'm probably part of the 0.0000000000000001%

You fucking rich pricks, give us all your money.

[Crasherfromwayback]

This has now become a most excellent thread.

[Marnie]

I'm not insecure....and besides, it's not how long it is, it's what you do with it:confused::no:

Who told you that......:killingme

[mashman]

You fucking rich pricks, give us all your money.

It's yours... as long as you share it with everyone else. I can trust you, Right :shifty:

[mashman]

Who told you that......:killingme

"cannot spread" etc... and given the context I've never been so glad.

[Oscar]

Who told you that......:killingme

Yo momma....

[shrub]

Tell ya what...I'll try again.

If you're so unbelievably clever, and have all the correct answers to our fine countries woes, how 'bout you become a Politian, and sort this place out? Because otherwise...you seem to me, just another armchair expert. If National are so shit, so wrong...don't just sit there and moan about it...do something about it. Make a difference. And yeah yeah, you tried. You voted. But there aren't enough people that agree with you to make a difference that way, so you'll have to try harder. Or simply be...another sideline tossbag that thinks they're a lot smarter than they actually are.

Guess what, I am "doing something about it".

Rest of the post edited out as there is probably enough there to identify me and i don't want someone who is planning to pay me money to think "fuck, you're that wanker shrub from KB. You can stick your invoice where the sun don't shine"

[Crasherfromwayback]

Guess what, I am "doing something about it". I have been asked to put my hat in the ring for a candidacy in 2014, but I probably won't because I am too lazy to be a politician and there is some other stuff that is probably more important use of my time.

I am currently completing a masters degree in commerce, and that has involved a hell of a lot of research and analysis on top of several years studying my area of specialty. It has meant that I have been a contributing author to a number of studies, including 2 that were presented to parliamentary select committees in 2010 and 2011 and actually influenced policies passed by the National government. I have also had stuff I was involved in presented at international conferences and there are 3 companies in NZ, including one very big one that you probably deal with, that currently pay me to help them make the right decisions to stay competitive. I have also been asked to join an economic think tank that is developing ways to make NZ a richer country and the NZ operation of an international business consultancy company want me to join a team that will be advising companies on responding to what is probably the biggest trend hit business since IT. Only problem is it's in Auckland, and I don't think I can be arsed shifting.

Well I've gotta say that's impressive! My apologies.

[imdying]

I have been asked to put my hat in the ring for a candidacy in 2014Don't, you'd be wasted there.

[SPman]

And, at the climate change talks in Durban.....

And we've already won a silver fossil of the day as a result:
The 2nd place Fossil goes to New Zealand for proposing the most Flexible Mechanism imaginable with no oversight or review. Bring on the wild west. They want to be able to use any market mechanisms they wish with absolutely no oversight or international review! There would be no way to ensure that the units from one mechanism have not been sold two or three times to another such mechanism. This would likely unleash a wild west carbon market with double or triple counting of offsets and a likely increase of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere.


and
winning another Fossil of the Day:
New Zealand has been acting inconsistently in the KP negotiations. It has insisted that it could not constitutionally agree to provisional implementation of a second commitment period despite its internal policy stating that it can. Further, the Government formally announced on 30 November that interim Environment Minister Hon. Nick Smith would be attending COP-17, only to change its mind on 1 December. New Zealand has also blocked discussions on carry over, wanting enough carry over to fully cover five years’ worth of LULUCF emissions.
Ultimately, this series of events has led to other negotiators describing New Zealand as 'deliberately inconsistent' and 'problematic for a thousand reasons', with its 'extreme positions on a number of issues [making] it difficult to reach consensus on anything'.
Given that we pursue a mana-based foreign policy, that last paragraph is disastrous. The impressions we make at Durban of deceit and untrustworthiness will carry over to our other negotiations, and have consequences there. But National doesn't care about that; all they care about is shielding their polluting farmer friends for another few years, no matter what the cost to the rest of us.

at least we're consistent in international conferences these days..........:motu:

[mashman]

And, at the climate change talks in Durban.....

was just reading about that (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/12257481/big-three-polluters-oppose-binding-climate-deal/) :facepalm:


Don't, you'd be wasted there.

Did someone say wasted... I'll do it.

[shrub]

at least we're consistent in international conferences these days..........:motu:

We're consistent in ignoring the future.

[Crasherfromwayback]

We're consistent in ignoring the future.

Regarding the whole climate change issue...do you not think the earth has and will always go through heating/cooling cycles on it's own, without our interference?

[shrub]

Regarding the whole climate change issue...do you not think the earth has and will always go through heating/cooling cycles on it's own, without our interference?

I know where you're going with this, and this is all I will write about it is one of those arguments that never goes anywhere on KB.

Yes, it has, many times and the current warming cycle has something in common with every warming cycle that has ever happened before - there is a cause. However what is interesting is that none of the independent variables that caused previous warming cycles are present sufficiently to cause the current warming. That means the current warming cycle is being caused by something that has never been recorded before, and by far the most likely cause is the huge increase in concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to human activity. Climate change deniers have been trying for years to find another cause, but most are either improbable or dependent on factors that aren't sufficiently present to have a causative influence.

Using a motorcycle analogy, I am riding my bike down the road and it starts to slow down. That has happened before, and is normally because I have (a) closed the throttle, (b) started applying the brakes or (c) come into a headwind or hill. None of those are happening and when I look at my tripmeter it shows 220 km. I reset it to zero when I gassed up a couple of hours ago and the range before I hit reserve is a bit over 200km, so the likely cause of me slowing down is that I have gone onto reserve. However if I was a fuel range denier I would try and argue that i had somehow acquired a pillion passenger because that also slows me down, or that "bikes often slow down, it's nothing to worry about so ignore it" or "you don't realise you're putting on the brakes because you aren't looking at your hand".

And that is the end of the discussion from me because I would rather expend my energy finding a solution than arguing with someone who won't change their opinion regardless of the robustness and validity of the arguments they're presented with.

[imdying]

Using a motorcycle analogy, I am riding my bike down the road and it starts to slow down. That has happened before, and is normally because I have (a) closed the throttle, (b) started applying the brakes or (c) come into a headwind or hill. None of those are happening and when I look at my tripmeter it shows 220 km. I reset it to zero when I gassed up a couple of hours ago and the range before I hit reserve is a bit over 200km, so the likely cause of me slowing down is that I have gone onto reserve. However if I was a fuel range denier I would try and argue that i had somehow acquired a pillion passenger because that also slows me down, or that "bikes often slow down, it's nothing to worry about so ignore it" or "you don't realise you're putting on the brakes because you aren't looking at your hand".The planet is like that bike, just getting old.

[Crasherfromwayback]

I know where you're going with this, and this is all I will write about it is one of those arguments that never goes anywhere on KB.

Yes, it has, many times and the current warming cycle has something in common with every warming cycle that has ever happened before - there is a cause. However what is interesting is that none of the independent variables that caused previous warming cycles are present sufficiently to cause the current warming. That means the current warming cycle is being caused by something that has never been recorded before, and by far the most likely cause is the huge increase in concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere due to human activity. Climate change deniers have been trying for years to find another cause, but most are either improbable or dependent on factors that aren't sufficiently present to have a causative influence.


And that is the end of the discussion from me because I would rather expend my energy finding a solution than arguing with someone who won't change their opinion regardless of the robustness and validity of the arguments they're presented with.

Funnily enough I'm not about to argue with that. Thanks.

[Headbanger]

Guess what, I am "doing something about it".

Rest of the post edited out as there is probably enough there to identify me and i don't want someone who is planning to pay me money to think "fuck, you're that wanker shrub from KB. You can stick your invoice where the sun don't shine"

Yeah, we don't like you're kind around here, with all your facts, insights, education, experience, advanced capabilities, understanding and high level knowledge.

You hear?

No sir, Folks around here don't understand that sort of carry on.



Look, over there, a bear, someone poke it with a stick.

[Robert Taylor]

Regarding the whole climate change issue...do you not think the earth has and will always go through heating/cooling cycles on it's own, without our interference?

Has anyone thought that the thermostat on the sun might be faulty?

[emaN]

...arguing with someone who won't change their opinion regardless of the robustness and validity of the arguments they're presented with...

Yep.
Precisely why I've given up trying to get supposedly educated people to do something constructive with all that wool hanging about over their eyes, 'confusedly' following High Priest Gore where-ever he may roam.

:bye:

[Robert Taylor]

Or everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die. The neoliberalist doctrine holds that economic success comes from cutting taxes and reducing government expenditure through allowing the private sector to provide all but the most fundamental of what government's used to supply. The theory is that lower taxes give citizens more money which they can then spend on what their taxes used to cover. Fundamental to the success of this concept is the idea that privately owned businesses operating in a competitive free market are more efficient and competitive than state run enterprises with no competition.

Unfortunately worldwide experience has shown that the free market model generally offers more expensive services than the state, usually with few advantages. Therefore the services we depend on are either still being paid for by the state from a reduced tax take, or are more expensive which means most people (including businesses) have less money.

The neoliberal answer to that problem is to call for tax cuts, and over the last 25 years we have had a steady stream of tax cuts and most western governments have been spending far more than they have been earning and borrowing to fill the gap. The neoliberal solution to these huge deficits is to cut government spending, and while there were incredible efficiencies made 25 years ago, all the low hanging fruit have been picked and the only way to reduce government spending is to cut what are now increasingly essential services.

Why not just bite the bullet and raise taxes? I wouldn't have a problem if my tax rate was increased if it meant that we'd avoid going bankrupt just as a clever businessman will reduce drawings if the business is in a slump. We're all in the shit which means everyone needs to "cut their cloth", not just low income earners and beneficiaries.





So was it a bad idea to pay off government debt and rebuild the stripped infrastructure? Would it have been better if they had have given us all tax cuts so we could buy more TVs?

Are you contributing to the economy with a meaningful job, or just spending all of your time on here espousing your socialist doctrine?

[Robert Taylor]

Actually Mr Crasher wasn't talking to me. It seemed to be a fairly general attack on anyone who disagreed with him merely because they disagreed. Personally I love it when people disagree, especially when they make me think with a hard argument, but for a lot of people that's the last thing they want because their argument is not defensible and that is scary because their worldview is based on myth and confusion.

And if you guys aren't wound up, how come you're all biting:D?

Yes, same tired old self assumption, that Socialism has the moral high ground.

[oldrider]

And that is the end of the discussion from me because I would rather expend my energy finding a solution than arguing with someone who won't change their opinion regardless of the robustness and validity of the arguments they're presented with.

Pot - kettle - black .... mirror. :blip:

[rainman]

Funny that those of you on the left (as clever as you obviously are), are the minority though eh. That must do your head in.

Not at all. Smarter people can see further than their own self-interest (apart from those ultra-smart psychopath dudes, that is), and can see longer-term issues better, so are usually lefties.


Fuck that... why would I settle for being nearly the leader... I'm JK'ing it, if I can't have it all I don't want to play.

I think Mashman as FM would be fun. Better than Billy English, I'd suggest (but I'd really rather have Cunliffe or Cullen).

[Headbanger]

Not at all. Smarter people can see further than their own self-interest (apart from those ultra-smart psychopath dudes, that is), and can see longer-term issues better, so are usually lefties.


ffs, truly a stupid generalation to make, If you believe that then its only due to your lack ability to comprehend your own prejudice.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Not at all. Smarter people can see further than their own self-interest (apart from those ultra-smart psychopath dudes, that is), and can see longer-term issues better, so are usually lefties.
.

You're still a virgin right? You're so far up yourself that there's no room for anyone else.

[rainman]

ffs, truly a stupid generalation to make, If you believe that then its only due to your lack ability to comprehend your own prejudice.


You're still a virgin right? You're so far up yourself that there's no room for anyone else.

Two such intelligent responses, how can I fail to be persuaded? ;)

Try this for some light entertainment:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/genius-and-madness/200809/is-political-conservatism-mild-form-insanity


John Stuart Mill: "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."

Where are the canonical examples of right-wing intellectuals? Who is the opposite number of Chomsky, for example?

[jonbuoy]

Two such intelligent responses, how can I fail to be persuaded? ;)

Try this for some light entertainment:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/genius-and-madness/200809/is-political-conservatism-mild-form-insanity


John Stuart Mill: "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."

Where are the canonical examples of right-wing intellectuals? Who is the opposite number of Chomsky, for example?



Too busy playing with a fleet of these to be writing books dressed in a corduroy patched cardigan smoking woodbines. :chase:

http://www.superyachts.com/largest-yachts/worlds-largest-yachts-live.htm

[rainman]

Too busy playing with a fleet of these to be writing books dressed in a corduroy patched cardigan smoking woodbines. :chase:



More fool them. There is more to life than money.

[shrub]

Are you contributing to the economy with a meaningful job, or just spending all of your time on here espousing your socialist doctrine?

I work part time (around 12 hours a week) and study the rest of the time - you might notice that I come and go from here - at present I am waiting for some data to come in for analysis, so I am twiddling my thumbs on KB. At the moment I am working with 3 businesses and soon a fourth, and my role is to advise on specific key aspects of their business planning and marketing which I am able to do with a ludicrous charge out rate thanks to my education and qualifications. Two of the companies are exporters with combined exports of just over $117m in 2010, one is a national retail chain and my new client is in the music industry (I'm doing that one for fun and a trip to an overseas concert next year).

How do you contribute to the economy? I understand you import expensive (the less charitable would say overpriced) suspension components for bikes - how does that make NZ a richer and more productive country?

[shrub]

Yep.
Precisely why I've given up trying to get supposedly educated people to do something constructive with all that wool hanging about over their eyes, 'confusedly' following High Priest Gore where-ever he may roam.

:bye:

It must be bloody frustrating trying to convince people who know more about something than you that you're right and they're wrong.

[Headbanger]

Two such intelligent responses, how can I fail to be persuaded? ;)


Where are the canonical examples of right-wing intellectuals? Who is the opposite number of Chomsky, for example?




Its not about persuasion, Its about calling a spade a spade, and any man that actively engages in your argument is as retarded as the comment you made.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Not at all. Smarter people can see further than their own self-interest (apart from those ultra-smart psychopath dudes, that is), and can see longer-term issues better, so are usually lefties.

.


Two such intelligent responses, how can I fail to be persuaded? ;)

Try this for some light entertainment:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/genius-and-madness/200809/is-political-conservatism-mild-form-insanity


John Stuart Mill: "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."

Where are the canonical examples of right-wing intellectuals? Who is the opposite number of Chomsky, for example?



The funny thing about intelligence, is that like anything else, it's best to not try and compare yourself with others. For no matter how smart you think you are, someone far smarter is normally not far away.

I have a good mate, we go way back. He was doing 7th form math in the 3rd form, and by the 5th form, was basically wasting his time at college as there were no teachers there able to cope with or match his intelligence.

He earns nearly 300k a year. Yet he's a stupid cunt. He gives a huge hunk of that 300k away each year, to three different women for child support, and has done of the dumbest things I've ever seen and nearly killed himself a few times doing them.

People that try and tell me how much smarter they are than me make me laugh. It's like I care.

[MisterD]

Where are the canonical examples of right-wing intellectuals? Who is the opposite number of Chomsky, for example?


That's a stupid question. Intellectualism, which is really just thinking about how other people should live their lives is a definitively left-wing occupation.

[mashman]

That's a stupid question. Intellectualism, which is really just thinking about how other people should live their lives is a definitively left-wing occupation.

What's the right-wing "version"? (now that I know what the left-wing "version" is)

[Headbanger]

What's the right-wing "version"? (now that I know what the left-wing "version" is)


John Banks:facepalm:



Paul Henry:brick:

[mashman]

John Banks:facepalm:



Paul Henry:brick:

oh fuck sake, put me in with the lefties then please... although on second thoughts, that would mean that the right-wing "classification" is Idiotism and I kinda prefer that to Intellectualism... decisions decisions... I know, I'll be Intellidiotistic

[MisterD]

What's the right-wing "version"? (now that I know what the left-wing "version" is)

Right wingers are either authoritarian, in which case other people should just do as they're told according to existing well-defined codes, or libertarian in which case other people should do what they like, that's what freedom means. Thinking about how society should be made to operate to make the world a Better Place (TM), as I said, is a definition left-wing mindset.

HTH

[mashman]

Right wingers are either authoritarian, in which case other people should just do as they're told according to existing well-defined codes, or libertarian in which case other people should do what they like, that's what freedom means. Thinking about how society should be made to operate to make the world a Better Place (TM), as I said, is a definition left-wing mindset.

HTH

So the Socialist left try to find the best way for everyone to live?
The Authoritarian right already know what the best way is and tell everyone what the best way to live is?
And the laissez faire bordering on don't give a fuck libertarians are happy to watch the world burn?

And we're asked to vote on which "methodology" we prefer? Sounds like a bunch of narrow minded fuckwits to me.

[MisterD]

So the Socialist left try to find the best way for everyone to live?
The Authoritarian right already know what the best way is and tell everyone what the best way to live is?
And the laissez faire bordering on don't give a fuck libertarians are happy to watch the world burn?

And we're asked to vote on which "methodology" we prefer? Sounds like a bunch of narrow minded fuckwits to me.

Well as a "don't give a fuck libertarian", it's axiomatic that the best way for everyone to live is with the maximum amount of freedom and self-responsibility. I don't need some poncy intellectual taking time off from writing crap plays or their university sinecure, to tell me how I should be running my life.

[mashman]

Well as a "don't give a fuck libertarian", it's axiomatic that the best way for everyone to live is with the maximum amount of freedom and self-responsibility. I don't need some poncy intellectual taking time off from writing crap plays or their university sinecure, to tell me how I should be running my life.

That's fair enough, and to a huge degree I agree... slightly ironic that a political party would have to go against it's core principle to govern? After all you would be responsible for maintaining law and order. How do you do that without "enforcing" rules? Or are you just going to have a free for all? I fail to see how they're any better than the right or left? Will it be ok for me to go on a killing spree because that's what I choose to do? It'll be ok for me to be as dis-honest as possible, defrauding people out of their money, to the point where if I lie enough I could get into a position where I could bury the country financially? These are the sorts of things I have issues with in regards to the libertarians. They look more dangerous than the right and left?

I'm not having a pop, I'm airing my concerns. How do you disincentivise "bad behaviour"?

[Oscar]

Thinking about how society should be made to operate to make the world a Better Place (TM), as I said, is a definition left-wing mindset.

HTH

Like Mao and Stalin?

[MisterD]

I'm not having a pop, I'm airing my concerns. How do you disincentivise "bad behaviour"?

I think you're confusing Libertarianism (at least as exists wrt to political parties in western countries) and Anarchy. The role of government is to protect and uphold peoples' basic rights and that is all. So a department of justice is an entirely legitimate arm of government.

[MisterD]

Like Mao and Stalin?

Right-wingers don't have a monopoly on authoritarians.

[mashman]

I think you're confusing Libertarianism (at least as exists wrt to political parties in western countries) and Anarchy. The role of government is to protect and uphold peoples' basic rights and that is all. So a department of justice is an entirely legitimate arm of government.

I get that... who sets the "rules" under which the DoJ operates?

[CookMySock]

So, in summation, left and right wing voters are both full of shite... [....] neither left or right have the monopoly on moranism...Well hey we agreed that they should represent us, and then rule us. :shutup:

Didn't we? :yes:

They're all the same - it's a money go-around for the big players, and we're the mouse on the wheel - without us the system won't work. The only way out of it is change the whole deal, and they aren't going to like that one bit.

[Oscar]

Well hey we agreed that they should represent us, and then rule us. :shutup:

Didn't we? :yes:



By his own admission, he didn't vote.

[mashman]

Well hey we agreed that they should represent us, and then rule us. :shutup:

Didn't we? :yes:

They're all the same - it's a money go-around for the big players, and we're the mouse on the wheel - without us the system won't work. The only way out of it is change the whole deal, and they aren't going to like that one bit.

True.

I didn't, but the fact that I exist on the planet means that I did... voting or not!

Problem is without us, the system doesn't work for us either... kinda cutting yer nose off to spite yer face... I hope I get to see those little surprised faces someday, where 5000 cops face down 30,000 people. That's hypothetical, but I see it happening at some point in the future (probably more people though)... as is oft muttered, blood in the streets is where we're heading, left, right, libertarian, objectivist, anarchist, intellidiotist etc... won't matter a shit. One day I hope we figure that out and avoid the blood in the street bit... but hey, NZ is an ok place to live, we're not as bad as anywhere else in the world and nothing else the world does matters to us... why the need for change.

[avgas]

I am starting to wonder if I am actually and Anarchist.

I don't want someone else's decisions, and I don't want to use someone else for my own mistakes. The only way that is possible is without a scapegoat.....oppps I mean "Government".

But no carry on telling me why I should support right or left......I need to get back to work.

I wonder what a fractal looks like when you have no government?

[shrub]

Right wingers are either authoritarian, in which case other people should just do as they're told according to existing well-defined codes, or libertarian in which case other people should do what they like, that's what freedom means. Thinking about how society should be made to operate to make the world a Better Place (TM), as I said, is a definition left-wing mindset.

HTH

Ah yes, the old left-right continuum.

The so-called right wing are generally people who claim to adopt a libertarian perspective, and whether they are aware of it or not, they frequently follow the thinking of Ayn Rand. If you analyse what they say and do, there are some pretty consistent themes. The first is "leave me alone to do my thing and don't attempt to restrict me or make me pay for anything I don't personally need". Another theme is a rejection of the concept that human beings operate within a society of humans and within a network of interconnected systems. This is manifested in user pays, which is the idea that "If I look after myself and my needs, then so should everyone else and if anyone wants anything from me they should pay for it just as I will pay for what I need". That extends into the idea that not only do we have no responsibility to others currently alive unless we can either profit or there is no cost to us from the interaction, but that we have no responsibility for others still to live. And it extends even further to a resistance to spending time or money on anything that does not have an immediate material benefit and the idea that the most important considerations are financial, and if there is a profit to be made, that profit shall be made.

So what we see is a resentment towards people who for whatever reason aren't net contributors to the coffers, whether they be beneficiaries, artists, writers, academics etc. They are seen as a big reason the right don't have what they want and that's why beneficiary bashing is so popular, and why academic knowledge is looked down on. We also see people refusing to accept that social problems like the crime rate are symptoms of a disfunctional society and ultimately placing most of the blame for crime on the victims.

We see a complete refusal to accept that the environmental problems we are facing are the result of our actions, and they either deny there are problems or they refuse to accept that they have any part to play, therefore refuse to be a part of any solution. We see a desire to do things like mine the Denniston Plateau, even though the environmental costs far outweigh the financial gains, and why dairy farmers are not required to pay for water or the damage their industry does to the environment because cash trumps everything. We see a consumption of resources (including money) at a rate that exceeds the ability of those resources to regenerate because to reduce the consumption is seen as an infringement of their rights to have and do whatever they want. Ever wondered why the West is collapsing under debt?

I could go on, but I have work to do and then beer to drink.

[Crasherfromwayback]

then beer to drink.

Now you're just showing off!!

[avgas]

The so-called right wing are generally people who claim to adopt a libertarian perspective, and whether they are aware of it or not, they frequently follow the thinking of Ayn Rand. If you analyse what they say and do.........So what we see is a resentment towards people who for whatever reason aren't net contributors to the coffers, whether they be beneficiaries, artists, writers, academics etc. They are seen as a big reason the right don't have what they want and that's why beneficiary bashing is so popular, and why academic knowledge is looked down on. We also see people refusing to accept that social problems like the crime rate are symptoms of a disfunctional society and ultimately placing most of the blame for crime on the victims.
Huh? ;) Sorry I had to point that out.

I like Rand's book - good motivating stories. Yet ironically I have heard her ideas, and listened to her talk......... and in real life she was a strange women.

But I think that is the great thing about books - you change the story according to your own perception. For me Rand's books are all about the inventor being stuck in a workers job, or the designer/artist being told their work was not good enough, or the worker being put upon the machine until he breaks.
Which when you think about - is the complete opposite of what you are proposing I should think. Out of interest have you read a Rand book? If so what was your perception on it? I, imagine yours might have been somewhat different.

When I think about it I used to love Wilbur Smith books as a kid. But now I find them horrible racist piles of crap. So I guess my perception has changed as I got older, and became more aware of things.

[emaN]

It must be bloody frustrating trying to convince people who know more about something than you that you're right and they're wrong.
Depends if such individuals decide to "stop learning" or not.

Lemme hazard a guess.
You've found yourself ensconced in the "more people say its happening than don't, so it must be true" camp.
Can't otherwise imagine why someone with such educated grey matter would believe the IPCC et al.

Must be a muddy jam-packed camp-site by now.

I normally have a "live & let live" outlook.
However this time, someone else's ignorant & erroneous worldview is having a direct impact on my wallet. Hardly a "live & let live" outcome.

[Winston001]

Where are the canonical examples of right-wing intellectuals? Who is the opposite number of Chomsky, for example?

Ayn Rand, Karl Popper, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Havek (Austrian School), Theodore Dalrymple...


Your question is well made though: for no particularly good reason the conservative right-wing commentary which grabs public attention tends to be American and somewhat narrow. They have a complete and very successful television channel, Fox News. Dismissing that popularity would be dangerous for the left.

[Robert Taylor]

I work part time (around 12 hours a week) and study the rest of the time - you might notice that I come and go from here - at present I am waiting for some data to come in for analysis, so I am twiddling my thumbs on KB. At the moment I am working with 3 businesses and soon a fourth, and my role is to advise on specific key aspects of their business planning and marketing which I am able to do with a ludicrous charge out rate thanks to my education and qualifications. Two of the companies are exporters with combined exports of just over $117m in 2010, one is a national retail chain and my new client is in the music industry (I'm doing that one for fun and a trip to an overseas concert next year).

How do you contribute to the economy? I understand you import expensive (the less charitable would say overpriced) suspension components for bikes - how does that make NZ a richer and more productive country?

We import HIGH VALUE components that actually work. We employ people and we outsource a percentage of specific machining / fabrication work. We develop settings and build new shocks here that requires such participation from other suppliers / service providers, all of who gainfully employ people.

You mention a ''ludicrous charge out rate''. How does that rest with your socialist leanings?

[SPman]

..this time, someone else's ignorant & erroneous worldview is having a direct impact on my wallet......and because it might have an impact on your wallet, it is wrong (although supported and even considered very conservative, by 90% of the world's scientists)..........
You've found yourself ensconced in the "more people say its happening than don't, so it must be true" camp.
Are you for real?

Can't otherwise imagine why someone with such educated grey matter would believe the IPCC et al. aaaaah - there you are then......90% + of scientists and real world observation counts for naught - imagination is where it's at!


I could go on, but I have work to do and then beer to drink.

More important than any of the crap above - in this case 2 bottles of Stones Ruination IPA and 2 more of Stones Levitation Ale....mmmmmm

[rainman]

Its not about persuasion, Its about calling a spade a spade, and any man that actively engages in your argument is as retarded as the comment you made.

Why?

I think there is a good defence for the generalisation that smarter people tend to have a more nuanced view of politics and the human condition, and are more likely to be aligned with "left-wing" ideas than the right, for a bunch of structural reasons related to the core beliefs of these philosophies. This topic is the matter of academic research - not sure how you can validly insist it's "retarded" just because you don't like the conclusion.


The funny thing about intelligence, is that like anything else, it's best to not try and compare yourself with others. For no matter how smart you think you are, someone far smarter is normally not far away.

That's entirely correct, but It's not about me; I know I'm quite smart at some things and dumber than a bag of hammers at others. The real issue is how willing people here are to confront their tribal beliefs. Those of greater intelligence, goes the theory, are more open to novel ideas and better able to cope with ambiguity, so can question received wisdom without excessive insecurity. Ability to empathise with others can also be an important product of intelligence, thus smarter people tend to be more compassionate to the less fortunate. They might also more easily recognise the folly of short-term greed and self-interest, perhaps understanding better that life is a long road with many twists and turns. They can likely grasp more elements of a complex network phenomenon such as a set of economic or policy interactions, and therefore get a better sense of whether these will have the desired effect. They're probably more attuned to tone or semantics in a speech or debate, so can assess candidate intentions and character better, they're probably more widely read and have been exposed to more ideas and know more history... should I go on?

Do you really believe you shouldn't compare yourself with others? Admirable in some senses, I suppose, but how do you deal with sport?


That's a stupid question. Intellectualism, which is really just thinking about how other people should live their lives is a definitively left-wing occupation.


libertarian in which case other people should do what they like, that's what freedom means.

What are you, 14? Newsflash: freeeeedom as the absolute concept packaged by the looney minarchists is a myth, sometimes it's necessary and desirable for people to put limits on others. I swear this "don't tell me how to run my life" bullshit is just unresolved mother authority issues that most of us get over by the time we have to shave. (Women are generally too smart to fall for it in the first place).

Btw I count myself as being not too far from being a libertarian (-socialist, that is), although I'm more interested in reforming the individuals (and myself) than the society as such.


Well as a "don't give a fuck libertarian", it's axiomatic that the best way for everyone to live is with the maximum amount of freedom and self-responsibility. I don't need some poncy intellectual taking time off from writing crap plays or their university sinecure, to tell me how I should be running my life.

Yet I'll bet you pay close attention to the prognostications of economists.
What kind of libertarian is a "don't give a fuck libertarian", btw? How do you differ from a disengaged nihilist?


Ayn Rand, Karl Popper, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Havek (Austrian School), Theodore Dalrymple...

Your question is well made though: for no particularly good reason the conservative right-wing commentary which grabs public attention tends to be American and somewhat narrow. They have a complete and very successful television channel, Fox News. Dismissing that popularity would be dangerous for the left.

Thanks for answering the question. I've always found Rand to be tedious and wouldn't regard her as a particularly brilliant intellect, but one's MMV I guess. Popper was undoubtedly a bright chap, but was a reformed Marxist/social liberal, so centrist at best; I'll give you Friedman and Hayek, although I'd prefer Keynes of course - and I have not read any of Mr Daniels, although I'll add him to my list. (Hmmm, maybe not - he seems to argue multiculturalism is against "common sense" if Wikipedia is to be believed).

My current favourite non-leftie smart bugger is Nassim Nicholas Taleb - but then he's non-right too.

Re Fox: Popularity is not evidence of intelligence. Fox is evidence of that!

[Brian d marge]

Ayn Rand, Karl Popper, Milton Friedman, Friedrich Havek (Austrian School), Theodore Dalrymple...


Your question is well made though: for no particularly good reason the conservative right-wing commentary which grabs public attention tends to be American and somewhat narrow. They have a complete and very successful television channel, Fox News. Dismissing that popularity would be dangerous for the left.

Hayek , is interesting reading , ( hard work , wish he would use more commas,,,,,,,,, ;) The road to serfdom is sitting on my desk as we speak , I’m on page 87 , planning and the rule of law , for the third time ( I’m just about to watch mythbusters .....actually )

Stephen

[slowpoke]

Ah yes, the old left-right continuum.

The so-called right wing are generally people who claim to adopt a libertarian perspective, and whether they are aware of it or not, they frequently follow the thinking of Ayn Rand. If you analyse what they say and do, there are some pretty consistent themes. The first is "leave me alone to do my thing and don't attempt to restrict me or make me pay for anything I don't personally need". Another theme is a rejection of the concept that human beings operate within a society of humans and within a network of interconnected systems. This is manifested in user pays, which is the idea that "If I look after myself and my needs, then so should everyone else and if anyone wants anything from me they should pay for it just as I will pay for what I need". That extends into the idea that not only do we have no responsibility to others currently alive unless we can either profit or there is no cost to us from the interaction, but that we have no responsibility for others still to live. And it extends even further to a resistance to spending time or money on anything that does not have an immediate material benefit and the idea that the most important considerations are financial, and if there is a profit to be made, that profit shall be made.

Basically: the strong survive and the weak perish. Physically, financially and intellectually. Maybe, but you're intertwining of morals and politics is a lil' too murky. In absolutes you may be right, but human's are...well...human. To play devils advocate could not the focussing on financial health lead to more largesse in subsiding the less fortunate, whereas concentrating on the less fortunate and ignoring the financials does no-one any favours long term? There's a balance that has to be struck: I'd no more trust Mother Theresa in charge of the country than I would Donald Trump.

So what we see is a resentment towards people who for whatever reason aren't net contributors to the coffers, whether they be beneficiaries, artists, writers, academics etc. They are seen as a big reason the right don't have what they want and that's why beneficiary bashing is so popular, and why academic knowledge is looked down on. We also see people refusing to accept that social problems like the crime rate are symptoms of a disfunctional society and ultimately placing most of the blame for crime on the victims.

Yeah...nah. It's the "whatever reason" which you gloss over that is at the crux of most peoples resentment. I don't see it as "the right not having what they want", I see it as the right (and many people in general) rightly or wrongly fearing they are being forced via taxes to help people who won't help themselves. I agree regards the societal problems contributing to crime rates, but "blaming the vitim"? I think you've got your wires crossed on that one, no-one (not even the right) blames a dairy owner when he's robbed.

We see a complete refusal to accept that the environmental problems we are facing are the result of our actions, and they either deny there are problems or they refuse to accept that they have any part to play, therefore refuse to be a part of any solution. We see a desire to do things like mine the Denniston Plateau, even though the environmental costs far outweigh the financial gains, and why dairy farmers are not required to pay for water or the damage their industry does to the environment because cash trumps everything. We see a consumption of resources (including money) at a rate that exceeds the ability of those resources to regenerate because to reduce the consumption is seen as an infringement of their rights to have and do whatever they want. Ever wondered why the West is collapsing under debt?

To paraphrase "we see a complete refusal to independently analyse environmental problems". I for one take with a bag of salt any report from any organisation who's very existence is dependent on what conclusions it draws. That questioning or discussion of the wild variance between these conclusions is actively discouraged does nothing to engender faith in their veracity.

So what value do you/we/I put on things like the Denniston Plateau? What value on ghost towns on the West Coast? Me, I haven't seen anything except some desolate pictures so what value would I put on it? Considering I work in the resource sector outside NZ I'd put a high value on mining it because it's in a remote location and it would give me a chance to earn worthwhile money in NZ (and for NZ) instead of a 2 day commute to work and 30% of the tax on my (not bad) income going to 2 other countries before the IRD even get a sniff at the dregs. My thinking: if we're prepared to use minerals/resources (which we all are) then we should be prepared to produce them. To do otherwise is to shirk our responsibilities.

It's all very well to decry the demise of Sumatran rain forests but no-one is rushing to replant our pasture lands. We continue to reap millions, and enjoy 1st world (-ish) living standards as a result of our own deforestation, yet tell others they can't do the same and have the same. That they don't listen to our hypocritical bleating probably has something with needing to get food in hand while we sip our latte's and wonder what the sharemarket is doing today. Can't say I blame them.

I could go on, but I have work to do and then beer to drink.

Mmmmmmm, beeeeeeeeeeeeer.......5 1/2 nightshifts, 506,000bbl's, and counting.

[Robert Taylor]

One of the very biggest hypocrisies in evidence is that by and large most left wing politicians espouse an equal society, and yet they are just as eager to be at the feeding trough of taxpayer funded perks. Take that fag Chris Carter as one of the most blatant examples, a socialist and a ''man of the people'', but he had a lovely old time at the taxpayers expense.

[Spearfish]

Ah yes, the old left-right continuum.

The so-called right wing are generally people who claim to adopt a libertarian perspective, and whether they are aware of it or not, they frequently follow the thinking of Ayn Rand. If you analyse what they say and do, there are some pretty consistent themes. The first is "leave me alone to do my thing and don't attempt to restrict me or make me pay for anything I don't personally need". Another theme is a rejection of the concept that human beings operate within a society of humans and within a network of interconnected systems. This is manifested in user pays, which is the idea that "If I look after myself and my needs, then so should everyone else and if anyone wants anything from me they should pay for it just as I will pay for what I need". That extends into the idea that not only do we have no responsibility to others currently alive unless we can either profit or there is no cost to us from the interaction, but that we have no responsibility for others still to live. And it extends even further to a resistance to spending time or money on anything that does not have an immediate material benefit and the idea that the most important considerations are financial, and if there is a profit to be made, that profit shall be made.

So what we see is a resentment towards people who for whatever reason aren't net contributors to the coffers, whether they be beneficiaries, artists, writers, academics etc. They are seen as a big reason the right don't have what they want and that's why beneficiary bashing is so popular, and why academic knowledge is looked down on. We also see people refusing to accept that social problems like the crime rate are symptoms of a disfunctional society and ultimately placing most of the blame for crime on the victims.

We see a complete refusal to accept that the environmental problems we are facing are the result of our actions, and they either deny there are problems or they refuse to accept that they have any part to play, therefore refuse to be a part of any solution. We see a desire to do things like mine the Denniston Plateau, even though the environmental costs far outweigh the financial gains, and why dairy farmers are not required to pay for water or the damage their industry does to the environment because cash trumps everything. We see a consumption of resources (including money) at a rate that exceeds the ability of those resources to regenerate because to reduce the consumption is seen as an infringement of their rights to have and do whatever they want. Ever wondered why the West is collapsing under debt?

I could go on, but I have work to do and then beer to drink.

Fucks sake, put some pictures in between the paragraphs, this type of wordsmithing is way to much like a book for us magazine readers.:oi-grr:;)

[shrub]

Huh? ;) Sorry I had to point that out.

I like Rand's book - good motivating stories. Yet ironically I have heard her ideas, and listened to her talk......... and in real life she was a strange women.

But I think that is the great thing about books - you change the story according to your own perception. For me Rand's books are all about the inventor being stuck in a workers job, or the designer/artist being told their work was not good enough, or the worker being put upon the machine until he breaks.
Which when you think about - is the complete opposite of what you are proposing I should think. Out of interest have you read a Rand book? If so what was your perception on it? I, imagine yours might have been somewhat different.

When I think about it I used to love Wilbur Smith books as a kid. But now I find them horrible racist piles of crap. So I guess my perception has changed as I got older, and became more aware of things.

I read Atlas Shrugged a few years ago, and it's well written and intelligent. But it's also profoundly flawed in it's focus on the primary right of the individual and belief that the individual is rational. That idea of rational self interest has merit in arguing that human evolution is dependent on individuals operating under a code of personal values while seeking to improve their lot. However the overwhelming flaw is that it doesn't recognise that each individual operates within and is dependent on a society of interconnected individuals to be successful, and that society needs to be organised. It also doesn't recognise that human society in turn operates within a physical environment that is a network of interconnected systems, and that if those systems break down society collapses.

It's interesting when looking at Rand's ideas to consider Michels' iron law of oligarchy which is basically that all forms of human organisation descend into oligarchy. This is because of the tendency of humans to be self interested at the expense of others, so leaders inevitably seek increasing levels of power and control until they reach a state of oligarchy.

[shrub]

One of the very biggest hypocrisies in evidence is that by and large most left wing politicians espouse an equal society, and yet they are just as eager to be at the feeding trough of taxpayer funded perks. Take that fag Chris Carter as one of the most blatant examples, a socialist and a ''man of the people'', but he had a lovely old time at the taxpayers expense.

Or the right wing politicians who espouse personal responsibility and reject feeding at the trough, yet can't get their snouts in fast enough. Take that Rodney Hide as one of the most blatant examples, a right wing libertarian and a ''man who rejects users'', but he had a lovely old time at the taxpayers expense.

[Headbanger]

Why?

I think there is a good defence for the generalisation that smarter people tend to have a more nuanced view of politics and the human condition, and are more likely to be aligned with "left-wing" ideas than the right, for a bunch of structural reasons related to the core beliefs of these philosophies. This topic is the matter of academic research - not sure how you can validly insist it's "retarded" just because you don't like the conclusion.


Right, Lets look at the word.



Intellectualism denotes the use and development of the intellect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellect), the practice of being an intellectual (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual),[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectualism#cite_note-0) and of holding intellectual pursuits in great regard.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectualism#cite_note-1) Moreover, in philosophy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy), “intellectualism” occasionally is synonymous with “rationalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalism)”, i.e. knowledge derived mostly from reason and reasoning.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectualism#cite_note-HighBeam-2)[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectualism#cite_note-encarta-3) Socially, “intellectualism” negatively connotes: (i) single-mindedness of purpose (“too much attention to thinking”), and (ii) emotional coldness (the absence of affection and feelings)

So, in real world terms its a highly educated academic without a real job with their head stuck so far up their arse that they survive by inhaling their own brain farts.

There are such people spread all over the political, academic and social spectrum, Its just that being a flawed human being (as we all are ,some more so then others but we all have our prejudice) you only attribute the highest level of intelligence and rationality to those that are writing items that agree with or align with your personal view on the world, and dismissing as inferior view points you don't share.



In short, giant wank.

[Spearfish]

I read Atlas Shrugged a few years ago, and it's well written and intelligent. But it's also profoundly flawed in it's focus on the primary right of the individual and belief that the individual is rational. That idea of rational self interest has merit in arguing that human evolution is dependent on individuals operating under a code of personal values while seeking to improve their lot. However the overwhelming flaw is that it doesn't recognise that each individual operates within and is dependent on a society of interconnected individuals to be successful, and that society needs to be organised. It also doesn't recognise that human society in turn operates within a physical environment that is a network of interconnected systems, and that if those systems break down society collapses.

It's interesting when looking at Rand's ideas to consider Michels' iron law of oligarchy which is basically that all forms of human organisation descend into oligarchy. This is because of the tendency of humans to be self interested at the expense of others, so leaders inevitably seek increasing levels of power and control until they reach a state of oligarchy.

Society based on aristocracy didn't work now your saying meritocracy isn't working, what's the alternative?

It seems right wing policies have to be so much further right than left wing policies have to be left before the pitfalls of either political flavour is felt so sadly NZ swings either left or right looking for the least of a bad thing at the time of an election rather than looking for a good thing(what ever that is) capable of helping to create genuine, personal contentment in what ever forms that takes.(airy fairy tripe)

But then if we were all content with our lot then advertising/capitalism would be rooted?

[Headbanger]

society based on aristocracy didn't work now your saying meritocracy isn't working, what's the alternative?



destroy all humans.

[Spearfish]

Why?

I think there is a good defence for the generalisation that smarter people tend to have a more nuanced view of politics and the human condition, and are more likely to be aligned with "left-wing" ideas than the right, for a bunch of structural reasons related to the core beliefs of these philosophies. This topic is the matter of academic research - not sure how you can validly insist it's "retarded" just because you don't like the conclusion.





It's simple really GUILT, they have stuff and others don't. They are the rich pricks after all...

[Spearfish]

destroy all humans.

Not until Ive had my cheese and, heavy on the onion, sandwich for lunch.

[Crasherfromwayback]

. Ability to empathise with others can also be an important product of intelligence, thus smarter people tend to be more compassionate to the less fortunate.

They might also more easily recognise the folly of short-term greed and self-interest, perhaps understanding better that life is a long road with many twists and turns.


they're probably more widely read and have been exposed to more ideas and know more history... should I go on?

Do you really believe you shouldn't compare yourself with others? Admirable in some senses, I suppose, but how do you deal with sport?


I'm not sure I agree with the first bit. I often find extremely intelligent people tend to have a rather short fuse when it comes to dealing with people 'below' them. Often barely giving them the time of day.

The greed bit? No way. A lot of very intelligent people have been busted for fraud. Is that not all about greed?

Widely read? Whilst more often than not intelligent people do read a lot, I don't think being widely read will make you any more intelligent, it'll simply mean that. But that's not intelligence is it?

Sport? Well that's easy. You let the results speak for themselves. But I think you missed my point.

[shrub]

Society based on aristocracy didn't work now your saying meritocracy isn't working, what's the alternative?

It seems right wing policies have to be so much further right than left wing policies have to be left before the pitfalls of either political flavour is felt so sadly NZ swings either left or right looking for the least of a bad thing at the time of an election rather than looking for a good thing(what ever that is) capable of helping to create genuine, personal contentment in what ever forms that takes.(airy fairy tripe)

Meritocracy doesn't really exist in the modern world, or more to the point it is not followed in political or commercial environments. What we have is plutocracy which is in essence a modern form of feudalism.


But then if we were all content with our lot then advertising/capitalism would be rooted?

You're right, a very effective way of controlling people is to create and foster an ongoing sense of discontent and to offer the solution to that discontentment. It's been used in varying ways for all of time and right now it's framed in terms of "you deserve to have more and you will never be happy until you have.....". It's behind the almost obsessive desire to pay less tax, the growth of private debt and unsustainable consumption. I was amazed this morning, a guy on the radio was talking about how GST was stopping first home owners from building because "the GST on a $500k house is $75K, and that is too much". WTF???? I built my first home, and it was 110 m2, had particle board floors, chinaman hat light fittings and old sheets as curtains. I thought I was the king, but a young couple today would not be able to live without an ensuite, 2 lounges, internal entry garage etc because they have been convinced that is what they deserve.

[oneofsix]

Meritocracy doesn't really exist in the modern world, or more to the point it is not followed in political or commercial environments. What we have is plutocracy which is in essence a modern form of feudalism.


I've often said the 1%s are trying to return us to feudalism, you say they've already done it. There might be some truth in what you say but as life/history is a spiral I would suggest that the modern feudalism isn't as complete as the original and this time it has taken less than half a century for the revolt to start. You see I date the 1% from the 1980s, they took longer to build their base but greed didn't become god until then.

[Winston001]

Thanks for answering the question. I've always found Rand to be tedious.....I'll give you Friedman and Hayek, although I'd prefer Keynes of course -

Hayek is currently in vogue with the American right but for the sake of balance, here is what Paul Krugman (Nobel prize economist) has to say:



"Via Mark Thoma (http://economistsview.typepad.com/), David Warsh finally says what someone needed to say (http://www.economicprincipals.com/issues/2011.12.04/1314.html?): Friedrich Hayek is not an important figure in the history of macroeconomics.


These days, you constantly see articles that make it seem as if there was a great debate in the 1930s between Keynes and Hayek, and that this debate has continued through the generations. As Warsh says, nothing like this happened. Hayek essentially made a fool of himself early in the Great Depression, and his ideas vanished from the professional discussion.


So why is his name invoked so much now? Because The Road to Serfdom struck a political chord with the American right, which adopted Hayek as a sort of mascot — and retroactively inflated his role as an economic thinker.



But the Hayek thing is almost entirely about politics rather than economics. Without The Road To Serfdom — and the way that book was used by vested interests to oppose the welfare state — nobody would be talking about his business cycle ideas."

Will read about Taleb when I get a moment.

[shrub]

I've often said the 1%s are trying to return us to feudalism, you say they've already done it. There might be some truth in what you say but as life/history is a spiral I would suggest that the modern feudalism isn't as complete as the original and this time it has taken less than half a century for the revolt to start. You see I date the 1% from the 1980s, they took longer to build their base but greed didn't become god until then.

Yeah, that fits neatly with most of the theories of political change I'm familiar with, but I would go as far as to say it's probably not so much the wealthy 1% as the global corporate giants. If you look at an organisation like Vodafone, even Bill Gates would be unable to gain a controlling interest in it and they have a very powerful presence in most of the world providing and therefore controlling just about the most important aspects of modern life - communication and information transfer. If you look at NZ, we have 2 degrees and telecom in competition, and proponents of Adam Smith would say that they keep Vodafone honest through the mechanism of the market, but that's bullshit. Both of them are so miniscule and insignificant that if Vodafone decided to own the NZ market, they would be gone by lunchtime.

In the media world it's not much different. In a process of mergers and acquisitions almost all of the developed world's media comes through (from memory) 6 giant organisations that in turn own just about every newspaper, radio station, TV network and movie studio. But probably the most chilling picture is dairy farming in NZ. When I grew up owning a dairy farm by the time you hit 30 was very achievable. You got a job as a farm hand, saved and borrowed to buy a herd, went sharemilking and then after a few years bought a farm. It was possible because 100 and 100 head of cattle was all you needed to be successful. Now the average farm has 386 head with an average size of 140ha (350 acres) and with a median price of around $30k per ha, that makes an average farm $4.2m. How many 30 year olds can aspire to that? So what happens is the farms are owned by a diminishing number of owners and the gubuy who used to own his own farm is an employee, or more likely a contractor. He is self employed, but a modern serf.

Ah, it's all fucked up. I'm off down to the pub.

[pete376403]

One of the very biggest hypocrisies in evidence is that by and large most left wing politicians espouse an equal society, and yet they are just as eager to be at the feeding trough of taxpayer funded perks. Take that fag Chris Carter as one of the most blatant examples, a socialist and a ''man of the people'', but he had a lovely old time at the taxpayers expense.

Bit like that other guy Bill English, claiming the living expense for renting his own house. The trough mentality applies to both sides, ALL sides of the parliament.

[slowpoke]

Ya gotta larf at the opinions and theories being spruiked about other people opinions and theories which were written in bygone ages...or even today for that matter. It's the intellectual equivalent of Chinese whispers: so and so wrote a book in the 30's based on theories and assumptions that may or may not even be accurate let alone relevant to today's conditions, then my uni professor desseminated it and put his spin and interpretation on it, then I regurgitate it with my own interpretations based on half remembered discussions with that hot nerd chick I was trying to impress a few years/beers ago.

Like so much "intellectual" twaddle all the generalising and conceptualising is like having a really big cock, it sounds great in theory but in practice it's virtually useless.

[oldrider]

Ya gotta larf at the opinions and theories being spruiked about other people opinions and theories which were written in bygone ages...or even today for that matter. It's the intellectual equivalent of Chinese whispers: so and so wrote a book in the 30's based on theories and assumptions that may or may not even be accurate let alone relevant to today's conditions, then my uni professor desseminated it and put his spin and interpretation on it, then I regurgitate it with my own interpretations based on half remembered discussions with that hot nerd chick I was trying to impress a few years/beers ago.

Like so much "intellectual" twaddle all the generalising and conceptualising is like having a really big cock, it sounds great in theory but in practice it's virtually useless.

Isn't that the whole point of the thread, enjoy it or don't bother reading it. Choice. :lol:

[Crasherfromwayback]

Like so much "intellectual" twaddle all the generalising and conceptualising is like having a really big cock, it sounds great in theory but in practice it's virtually useless.

The funniest thing with intellectuals is the amount of (large) words they feel the need to use to get their point across.

They take ten times longer, with at least that much more drivel, to say the same thing a so called (in their eyes) simpleton can say with half the words.

[mashman]

Ya gotta larf at the opinions and theories being spruiked about other people opinions and theories which were written in bygone ages...or even today for that matter. It's the intellectual equivalent of Chinese whispers: so and so wrote a book in the 30's based on theories and assumptions that may or may not even be accurate let alone relevant to today's conditions, then my uni professor desseminated it and put his spin and interpretation on it, then I regurgitate it with my own interpretations based on half remembered discussions with that hot nerd chick I was trying to impress a few years/beers ago.

Like so much "intellectual" twaddle all the generalising and conceptualising is like having a really big cock, it sounds great in theory but in practice it's virtually useless.

That's a Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious post.

[Brian d marge]

The funniest thing with intellectuals is the amount of (large) words they feel the need to use to get their point across.

They take ten times longer, with at least that much more drivel, to say the same thing a so called (in their eyes) simpleton can say with half the words.

true , look at Mrs Pardickle , in bleak house, , but there is a certain level of education one is expected to be familiar with , below that .....insecurity reigns

Stephen

[slowpoke]

Isn't that the whole point of the thread, enjoy it or don't bother reading it. Choice. :lol:

I dunno mate, the tangent this thread has gone on is like taking your bike to a mechanic when it won't start. He can give me all the explanations in the world regarding exothermic reactions, and the merits of RON vs MON octane measurement but at the end of the day I just want a practical reason why my bike doesn't go and what I have to do to make it go.

[Brian d marge]

Fucks sake, put some pictures in between the paragraphs, this type of wordsmithing is way to much like a book for us magazine readers.:oi-grr:;)
good point

I shall do that from now

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

Hayek is currently in vogue with the American right but for the sake of balance, here is what Paul Krugman (Nobel prize economist) has to say:



"Via Mark Thoma (http://economistsview.typepad.com/), David Warsh finally says what someone needed to say (http://www.economicprincipals.com/issues/2011.12.04/1314.html?): Friedrich Hayek is not an important figure in the history of macroeconomics.


These days, you constantly see articles that make it seem as if there was a great debate in the 1930s between Keynes and Hayek, and that this debate has continued through the generations. As Warsh says, nothing like this happened. Hayek essentially made a fool of himself early in the Great Depression, and his ideas vanished from the professional discussion.


So why is his name invoked so much now? Because The Road to Serfdom struck a political chord with the American right, which adopted Hayek as a sort of mascot — and retroactively inflated his role as an economic thinker.



But the Hayek thing is almost entirely about politics rather than economics. Without The Road To Serfdom — and the way that book was used by vested interests to oppose the welfare state — nobody would be talking about his business cycle ideas."

Will read about Caleb when I get a moment.

you have been thinking , I likes that .......

Pop down to Rousseau , also Spooner , I liked him , but if you want to pin point the blame , " the prince " by Mac an Evelli ( spelling ), was one of the first to move the " contract " between us and Him .....it got worse from then ..I feel ....( maybe better ,,,,,then worse ...the french helped a tadge ! )

Still doesn’t help us in this day and age , when , I get stopped and told to " blow on the pie as its thermo nuclear "

Stephen

[Headbanger]

The funniest thing with intellectuals is the amount of (large) words they feel the need to use to get their point across.

They take ten times longer, with at least that much more drivel, to say the same thing a so called (in their eyes) simpleton can say with half the words.

Isn't there a saying "If you can't explain the concept simply then you simply don't understand the concept"

Maybe I just made it up.:wacko:

wait, It was Einstein, Best I don't try and claim his work.

Anyway, This guy would a like a word http://www.maori.canterbury.ac.nz/people/cooper.shtml


It must be terrible for someone to consider themselves just so damn gifted and clever while the rest of the world looks at them as a twat.

Luckily they are blinded by their own arrogance and self-importance.

[Crasherfromwayback]

, , but there is a certain level of education one is expected to be familiar with , below that .....insecurity reigns

Stephen

I guess so. I've always hung with clever people, as I love to learn new things, I'm hardly scared of intellligence. Crikey, my GF is a Dr. They make you feel pretty ordinary on the scale of smarts!

[oldrider]

Isn't there a saying "If you can't explain the concept simply then you simply don't understand the concept"

Maybe I just made it up.:wacko:

wait, It was Einstein, Best I don't try and claim his work.

Anyway, This guy would a like a word http://www.maori.canterbury.ac.nz/people/cooper.shtml :nya:


It must be terrible for someone to consider themselves just so damn gifted and clever while the rest of the world looks at them as a twat.

Luckily they are blinded by their own arrogance and self-importance.

Plus one for your thoughts on that little spiel! :confused:

[Robert Taylor]

Or the right wing politicians who espouse personal responsibility and reject feeding at the trough, yet can't get their snouts in fast enough. Take that Rodney Hide as one of the most blatant examples, a right wing libertarian and a ''man who rejects users'', but he had a lovely old time at the taxpayers expense.

Yes, good example. And the point is no-one has the moral majority in respect of. Left or Right.

[avgas]

Me and misses had a little giggle last night.
Carmel Sepuloni (chick who kicked out Ms Bennett) is actually an ex-flatmate of ours (10 years ago).
She was one of the worse flatmate's we have ever had, consistently stole from us and avoided responsibility like it was the plague.
Her stack of dishes would take up half the kitchen. Her room was trashed all the time (including inspections). She pissed all her money against the wall. She only saw her boy in the weekends (he stayed with grandparents). Getting her to pay rent was a blood-stone scenario.

After 3 months with her we moved out.

We had to laugh. The alternative was crying.
Fingers crossed she has grown up. At 30, with a job as a teacher, with a boy, she hadn't.

[shrub]

The funniest thing with intellectuals is the amount of (large) words they feel the need to use to get their point across.

They take ten times longer, with at least that much more drivel, to say the same thing a so called (in their eyes) simpleton can say with half the words.

Sometimes a long word is the way to describe something - plutocracy is easier than "the super-wealthy run the show and the more money you have; the more power you have". And lot of intellectuals use long words because that's the language they read all day and the language the people they spend their time with use, so why change? "I adjusted my compression and rebound damping" is easier and makes more sense to a biker than "I turned a screw on my suspension and that changed the way the wheels go up and down over bumps and shit".

It's also worth remembering that a lot of academics are crap writers. They know everything there is to know about their subject and the technical stuff like statistics but they're crap writers. I'm reasonably successful in my field because I can write well, but I break out in a sweat and hide under my desk when someone tells me I should use a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient to more accurately explain how X is influenced by Y but not by Z. As a result I'm a bit of a show pony and I openly admit that a lot of my research is a little thin, but lay people understand what I'm saying and there are plenty of people who know more than me that can do the hard shit.

[shrub]

Me and misses had a little giggle last night.
Carmel Sepuloni (chick who kicked out Ms Bennett) is actually an ex-flatmate of ours (10 years ago).
She was one of the worse flatmate's we have ever had, consistently stole from us and avoided responsibility like it was the plague.
Her stack of dishes would take up half the kitchen. Her room was trashed all the time (including inspections). She pissed all her money against the wall. She only saw her boy in the weekends (he stayed with grandparents). Getting her to pay rent was a blood-stone scenario.

After 3 months with her we moved out.

We had to laugh. The alternative was crying.
Fingers crossed she has grown up. At 30, with a job as a teacher, with a boy, she hadn't.

And that is one of the flaws in the electorate system. People get selected to run for seats because they will appeal to as many of of the great unwashed as possible, so we get retards and shysters in government because people who don't know them like what they are presented with by the spin doctors.

[Headbanger]

I break out in a sweat and hide under my desk when someone tells me I should use a Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient to more accurately explain how X is influenced by Y but not by Z.

ROADHOUSE


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERPbf-2zEZw

[Robert Taylor]

Me and misses had a little giggle last night.
Carmel Sepuloni (chick who kicked out Ms Bennett) is actually an ex-flatmate of ours (10 years ago).
She was one of the worse flatmate's we have ever had, consistently stole from us and avoided responsibility like it was the plague.
Her stack of dishes would take up half the kitchen. Her room was trashed all the time (including inspections). She pissed all her money against the wall. She only saw her boy in the weekends (he stayed with grandparents). Getting her to pay rent was a blood-stone scenario.

After 3 months with her we moved out.

We had to laugh. The alternative was crying.
Fingers crossed she has grown up. At 30, with a job as a teacher, with a boy, she hadn't.

Well qualified to be a Labour MP then!

[avgas]

Well qualified to be a Labour MP then!
:laugh:

Tell you what. Voting for that Adolf dude in the Nazi party is sounding better everyday. At least I know what I am getting from him. With Labour and National all bets are off.

[pete376403]

Godwins? Pity, it was a nice thread.

[BoristheBiter]

:laugh:

Tell you what. Voting for that Adolf dude in the Nazi party is sounding better everyday. At least I know what I am getting from him. With Labour and National all bets are off.

:facepalm:
I heard Stalin, Mussolini and Genghis Khan were great leaders to. never heard many complain about them, well not for long anyway.

[oneofsix]

:facepalm:
I heard Stalin, Mussolini and Genghis Khan were great leaders to. never heard many complain about them, well not for long anyway.

yup Mussolini got the trains running on time, Stalin built new roads with bone foundations :doh: and Genghis united a country

[BoristheBiter]

yup Mussolini got the trains running on time, Stalin built new roads with bone foundations :doh: and Genghis united a country


Maybe Len needs to look at the Mussolini train model for Auckland?

[oneofsix]

Maybe Len needs to look at the Mussolini train model for Auckland?

He's not the only one. Welly could do the same but personally I think I prefer the Japanese method as they do it without the military.

[avgas]

Godwins? Pity, it was a nice thread.
Morality? Is that you morality.
Nope? Must be a wrong number.

You know that Godwins theory is irrelevant when you consider Moores law?
If we have an exponential increase in the rate of information, must therefore have a increase in rate of references to Nazi's (among other things).
To prove me correct here is a picture of a cat.
http://dellone2one.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Cat_pictures2.jpg

[Clockwork]

Morality? Is that you morality.
Nope? Must be a wrong number.

You know that Godwins theory is irrelevant when you consider Moores law?
If we have an exponential increase in the rate of information, must therefore have a increase in rate of references to Nazi's (among other things).
To prove me correct here is a picture of a cat.
http://dellone2one.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Cat_pictures2.jpg




Why yes.... so it is.


You must be telling the truth.

[BoristheBiter]

Morality? Is that you morality.
Nope? Must be a wrong number.

You know that Godwins theory is irrelevant when you consider Moores law?
If we have an exponential increase in the rate of information, must therefore have a increase in rate of references to Nazi's (among other things).
To prove me correct here is a picture of a cat.
http://dellone2one.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Cat_pictures2.jpg

no sorry you are wrong for this is a picture of a cat in a silly hat.

http://oddanimals.com/images/lime-cat.jpg

[avgas]

no sorry you are wrong for this is a picture of a cat in a silly hat.

http://oddanimals.com/images/lime-cat.jpg
Pussy Mellon that's a cat in a hat.

[Brian d marge]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212153157.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily% 3A+Latest+Science+News%29

There ya go ...

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212153157.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily% 3A+Latest+Science+News%29

There ya go ...

Stephen

:rofl::rofl::rofl:
priceless you live in Japan...pot meet kettle.

[BoristheBiter]

Pussy Mellon that's a cat in a hat.

Try looking at it from another angle.

http://cdn.buzznet.com/assets/users16/celebgossip/default/50-cats-santa-hats--large-msg-129306881333.jpg

[Swoop]

consistently stole from us and avoided responsibility like it was the plague.

She pissed all her money against the wall.

Getting her to pay rent was a blood-stone scenario.

Fingers crossed she has grown up. At 30, with a job as a teacher, with a boy, she hadn't.
Bloody lovely. West Auckland gets to suffer this clown. Hopefully she has - as you say - "grown up".

yup Mussolini got the trains running on time
Hitler also had the trains running on time, it was the destination that had people concerned.

[avgas]

Bloody lovely. West Auckland gets to suffer this clown. Hopefully she has - as you say - "grown up".
In their defense they were screwed either way. It was her or Pulla-nothing-sicky Bennett.

I think only 50% (total) of W.AKL actually voted for either of those 2.

I also "Wu Chao Fu" from Botany. He IS a nice guy. Not too bright however. (Is intelligence a requirement for MP's? Prob not). I stayed in the same Hostel as him 11 years ago when we were both studying.

[Swoop]

In their defense they were screwed either way. It was her or Pulla-nothing-sicky Bennett.
I had meetings with her in the electorate office a little while back and found her quite sensible and easy to deal with.
Hopefully I do not have to visit MP's on a regular basis, however. The new one looks entertaining.

[avgas]

I had meetings with her in the electorate office a little while back and found her quite sensible and easy to deal with.
Hopefully I do not have to visit MP's on a regular basis, however. The new one looks entertaining.
I am simple. I don't trust anyone who has never worked a shitty job.
To go from Student - to benefit - to MP........ doesn't scream dedication to me.

[Brian d marge]

:rofl::rofl::rofl:
priceless you live in Japan...pot meet kettle.

eerrmm that sound whistling past your ears , is a point you have missed....

Yes Japan is a corrupt government , its openly known and I can deal with it

Never defended it

You on the other hand , still amaze me ...... I can only think that school Cert , changed to scratch and sniff,

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

eerrmm that sound whistling past your ears , is a point you have missed....

Yes Japan is a corrupt government , its openly known and I can deal with it

Never defended it

You on the other hand , still amaze me ...... I can only think that school Cert , changed to scratch and sniff,

Stephen

You're not defending it but you have said on many occasions you would rather be there than here.

Hypocrite is the the first polite word I can think of so i will use that.

See what happens when you think, you become deluded with thoughts of grandeur and the only thing that I can smell is your BS so you must have just sat your exams, but that would be NCEA as school cert went out years ago, but as you are so far behind, living in your granddad times, today's world got up and past you by.

[Brian d marge]

You're not defending it but you have said on many occasions you would rather be there than here.

Hypocrite is the the first polite word I can think of so i will use that.

See what happens when you think, you become deluded with thoughts of grandeur and the only thing that I can smell is your BS so you must have just sat your exams, but that would be NCEA as school cert went out years ago, but as you are so far behind, living in your granddad times, today's world got up and past you by.

Even the first polite word you could think of wasn’t the best one. Nice try keep going...you will get there in the end

Yes I prefer here, ,for a whole myriad of reasons , none of which is to do with the article I posted ,

As for BS

The National government looks set to forge ahead with its controversial state-owned asset sales and has nominated energy companies Solid Energy, Mighty River Power and Genesis as well as Air New Zealand for partial sale.



there ya go , I told you this would happen HOW MANY YEARS AGO ...but then I talk BS , don’t I Boris ......

At what point will you at least face facts , When your ACC is past 600 dollars , Educational fees through the roof ..... Hows that power bill , I WILL be surprised if the new owners start investing in upgrading the existing equipment (stand to be corrected on this )

Well done you fit the original article perfectly.

Stephen

[oneofsix]

At what point will you at least face facts , When your ACC is past 600 dollars , Educational fees through the roof ..... Hows that power bill , I WILL be surprised if the new owners start investing in upgrading the existing equipment (stand to be corrected on this )

Well done you fit the original article perfectly.

Stephen

Yeah I too will be surprised if the money fund shareholders let the new owners invest in upgrades. Look at Telecommunication, it take a Government funded (that's you and I tax payer) drive to invest in fibre and all the shareholder owned companies can do is bitch about how much they can get their hands on, no thought of building the resource they now consider so valuable themselves

[MisterD]

Look at Telecommunication, it take a Government funded (that's you and I tax payer) drive to invest in fibre

Yeah, but that's for the very understandable reason that Networks deliver 80% of their revenue from voice traffic which is 20% (and falling) of what they carry. The people making all the money out of comms are the "Over the tops" - Apple, Google etc. Running a network is a bloody difficult business to make a quid at and sooner or later those over the tops will need to start investing in the infrastructure to carry their products...Facebook as your ISP anyone?

[mashman]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212153157.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily% 3A+Latest+Science+News%29

There ya go ...

Stephen

I woulda gone for Stockholm Syndrome... but we're a democracy, apparently.

[BoristheBiter]

Even the first polite word you could think of wasn’t the best one. Nice try keep going...you will get there in the end

Yes I prefer here, ,for a whole myriad of reasons , none of which is to do with the article I posted ,

As for BS

The National government looks set to forge ahead with its controversial state-owned asset sales and has nominated energy companies Solid Energy, Mighty River Power and Genesis as well as Air New Zealand for partial sale.



there ya go , I told you this would happen HOW MANY YEARS AGO ...but then I talk BS , don’t I Boris ......

At what point will you at least face facts , When your ACC is past 600 dollars , Educational fees through the roof ..... Hows that power bill , I WILL be surprised if the new owners start investing in upgrading the existing equipment (stand to be corrected on this )

Well done you fit the original article perfectly.

Stephen

OK, how about pompous, pretentious or even supercilious, any of those should do.

You told us this would happen when? Was that when National were elected last term when they said they would privatize state assets?
The nats have never hid the fact they would sell off parts of the SOE's. the only point they made was they would not sell them off in the first term.

So for all your pontificating is even more laughable as all the nat's have/will do is all ready in the public forum.

When are you going to face the fact that it isn't 1970 anymore? Shit changes, you have to move on and grow or get left behind and crash. Greece is the case in point, stayed the same and now can't pay their way. Is that what you want for NZ? lets just rack up massive debts?

You say you stay in Japan not for these reason's so in other words these reasons are not high on you list of priority's so what's your problem?

And for the record I'm not happy about the price rises to ACC, but if i have an accident i am covered for both work and hospital bills.
As for power not much has changed, still have a bill under $80 so can't complain, at least there isn't any nuclear fallout floating around. Hows that working for ya?

[Headbanger]

What people forget is that in the medium and long term not having a good rail network would damn near cripple NZ.

I think the only reason the right hate rail is because Labour bought it back.

Your logic is affected by your bias just like everyone else, so much for big words and academic education.

Anyone with an ounce of brains can understand that in coming years the rail infrastructure will be an asset, But that doesn't mean you congratulate or even pardon the fools that bought it back for so many times more then its worth.

It should have been allowed to fail, and then the assets purchased for what they were worth. It takes an imbecile to divide such a stupid course of action simply into left vs right.

Makes no difference which way they lean, The government of the day should be accountable for their actions, That was our money they wasted, and we as a country suffer for it.

Labour failed New Zealand on many levels, especially during their last 3 years in office, to the extent that people actually noticed how bad they were performing, that is why they lost, and that is why they still have a stigma about them.

[Headbanger]

you have been thinking , I likes that .......

Pop down to Rousseau , also Spooner , I liked him , but if you want to pin point the blame , " the prince " by Mac an Evelli ( spelling ), was one of the first to move the " contract " between us and Him .....it got worse from then ..I feel ....( maybe better ,,,,,then worse ...the french helped a tadge ! )

Still doesn’t help us in this day and age , when , I get stopped and told to " blow on the pie as its thermo nuclear "

Stephen


Seriously, who (apart from yourself) do you think you are fooling?

You might have read a few books, But agreeing with people who are smarter then you and have actual ideas and insights doesn't count for anything.

You have offered nothing, zero, nada apart from negative sniping about NZ and arrogance.

You don't know shit.

[oneofsix]

with genius like these its no wander we are up the creek

The data, researched by Business and Economic Research (Berl), showed that workers once thought to be unskilled or blue collar were actually a vital cog in the economy, particularly the export sector.

Really, gee who would have thought that an economy needs workers at all levels?? :sherlock: Marx perhaps? to name but one of many.

[shrub]

Your logic is affected by your bias just like everyone else, so much for big words and academic education.

Anyone with an ounce of brains can understand that in coming years the rail infrastructure will be an asset, But that doesn't mean you congratulate or even pardon the fools that bought it back for so many times more then its worth.

It should have been allowed to fail, and then the assets purchased for what they were worth. It takes an imbecile to divide such a stupid course of action simply into left vs right.

Makes no difference which way they lean, The government of the day should be accountable for their actions, That was our money they wasted, and we as a country suffer for it.

Labour failed New Zealand on many levels, especially during their last 3 years in office, to the extent that people actually noticed how bad they were performing, that is why they lost, and that is why they still have a stigma about them.

No, my logic is affected by my knowledge which comes from my education. I know it's unfashionable these days to be educated, but over the years I worked out that people who knew about shit had an edge over people who didn't, and the best way I can think of to learn shit is to get an education. It's bloody hard work and hellish expensive, but it works. I am also largely neutral regarding Labour or their actions.

However your logic is influenced very strongly by your bias against Labour and anything they did or didn't do. You believe that the rail network should have been allowed to fail - how is that good for the country given the volume of freight that is carried on the rail network, especially freight that is just not economical to carry by road? How is it good for business if raw materials or stock is stuck in the middle of nowhere because the broken down old engine has died or the tracks have collapsed? Or an export shipment is missed because the boat left because the was late?

If the rail network had been allowed to continue to degenerate we'd have seen more and more trucks on the road - how is that a good thing? When you go for a ride, do you enjoy following an A train up a nice windy hill? Or do you find the damage trucks do to the roads makes riding more enjoyable? And the oil used to run them is a finite resource - why waste oil moving shit around when it can be used for motorcycles, classic cars and warbirds?

And let's assume that Labour hadn't bought it back, and it had slowly degenerated. Would Toll have sold it cheap? Or would they have done the commercially smart thing - strip out what was good and bin the rest. Let's say that day would have happened in 2013 - how would we have paid for it to be purchased and restored? By selling something else? Or how would we have paid for a completely new rail network? Or would we simply have been the only developed nation that had no rail network?

There are two things wrong with buying it when they did for what they did: first it should NEVER have been sold in the first place, and they should have bought it earlier when they could have paid less.

[Brian d marge]

Seriously, who (apart from yourself) do you think you are fooling?

You might have read a few books, But agreeing with people who are smarter then you and have actual ideas and insights doesn't count for anything.

You have offered nothing, zero, nada apart from negative sniping about NZ and arrogance.

You don't know shit.Looks like I fooled you ,

Spent quite a lot of my own money , back in the eighties , Campaigning against " rogernomics"

The removal of David Carter in my own electorate ,

The travel to wellington and the hotels and all the waiting in the corridors of the Beehive in order to to get meetings

I can sleep soundly , and have EARNED the right to complain , and have also given , a list and ways one should follow for a better society ( IMHO )

You ?
Snip
"You might have read a few books, But agreeing with people who are smarter then you and have actual ideas and insights doesn't count for anything."

Are you for real???? ...Can I just sit back and let you make a fool of yourself take your time , You are doing a damn good job at the moment

Tis a shame I have a meeting at 7.30,,,,I await with baited breath for your next installment

Stephen

oh and its usually about this point , when the undereducated usually say " if you don’t like it you can F off ",,,,,,,,

[Headbanger]

However your logic is influenced very strongly by your bias against Labour and anything they did or didn't do.


Waffle aside, and there is plenty in your post, None of which makes a worthwhile point or discussion, Hell yes I'm biased against our former labour Government, for their failures, which is good grounds to judge any political party on.

National and any other pack of wankers will be held to the same standard, I personally have no issue voting against National or for Labour in the future dependent on performance.

[shrub]

Waffle aside, and there is plenty in your post, None of which makes a worthwhile point or discussion

So you can't answer my questions? Was it because I used too many big words?

[Headbanger]

Looks like I fooled you ,

Spent quite a lot of my own money , back in the eighties , Campaigning against " rogernomics"

The removal of David Carter in my own electorate ,

The travel to wellington and the hotels and all the waiting in the corridors of the Beehive in order to to get meetings

I can sleep soundly , and have EARNED the right to complain , and have also given , a list and ways one should follow for a better society ( IMHO )

You ?
Snip
"You might have read a few books, But agreeing with people who are smarter then you and have actual ideas and insights doesn't count for anything."

Are you for real???? ...Can I just sit back and let you make a fool of yourself take your time , You are doing a damn good job at the moment

Tis a shame I have a meeting at 7.30,,,,I await with baited breath for your next installment

Stephen

oh and its usually about this point , when the undereducated usually say " if you don’t like it you can F off ",,,,,,,,


So, You failed on a grand scale and split?

Sweet.

Looks like rogonomics achieved more then I thought, It not only rescued a failed economy and enabled the country to function again but it got rid of a tosser such as yourself.

Would you like rice with that?

[avgas]

with genius like these its no wander we are up the creek
Really, gee who would have thought that an economy needs workers at all levels?? :sherlock: Marx perhaps? to name but one of many.
Yep. Only a matter of time until the workers are gone and all you have left is immigrated slaves.

Its funny I dreamed last night that I won lotto. In my dream you know what I did........nothing I didn't want to.
Turned into a scary concept to me, what if all the engineers, doctors, nurses, builders, laborers etc suddenly had "enough" money? What would happen if they suddenly said "Fuck it, the country doesn't need me today, and I will only get taxed if I work. I'm going fishing.

Kinda puts the whole "who's in the govt" thing on to a much smaller scale doesn't it. Like arguing what color car to buy in a fuel crisis.

[Headbanger]

So you can't answer my questions? Was it because I used too many big words?

Lack of interest, The fact that there is grounds for a better plan in regards to the railways only supports my view, not yours.

And any decision or plan of action has various repercussions further down the line, you want to make projections about numbers of trucks on the road (ok champ, give me a number, how many in October 2012 if the price of diesel is $5 a litre and the rail network is running at 80 percent of capacity in comparison to 1976) then go ahead but its pretty much a giant wank.

[oneofsix]

Lack of interest, The fact that there is grounds for a better plan in regards to the railways only supports my view, not yours.

And any decision or plan of action has various repercussions further down the line, you want to make projections about numbers of trucks on the road (ok champ, give me a number, how many in October 2012 if the price of diesel is $5 a litre and the rail network is running at 80 percent of capacity in comparison to 1976) then go ahead but its pretty much a giant wank.

You need to change your bi-line, Ultimate keyboard warrior :laugh: what a Tui moment, and what a rapid descent into bad language and general "I don't understand" type behaviour.

Thanks for the laugh.

[Headbanger]

You need to change your bi-line, Ultimate keyboard warrior :laugh: what a Tui moment, and what a rapid descent into bad language and general "I don't understand" type behaviour.

Thanks for the laugh.

Meh I understand completely that Shrub can run rings around me without breaking a sweat, Hence the dismissal of everything he raised as waffle.

The concepts behind his argument are simple to comprehend and not without merit, That doesn't make debating every point worthwhile or entertaining (especially against a foe of his caliber), Nor does it make wasting billions on a broken network a worthy purchase.

Its not, No matter how many circles academics want to run in.

[oneofsix]

Meh I understand completely that Shrub can run rings around me without breaking a sweat, Hence the dismissal of everything he raised as waffle.

The concepts behind his argument are simple to comprehend and not without merit, That doesn't make debating every point worthwhile or entertaining, Nor does it make wasting billions on a broken network a worthy purchase.

Its not, No matter how many circles academics want to run in.

arrh a case of discretion being the better part of valour you seem to be claiming. No prizes for guessing that shrub will not agree :laugh:

[shrub]

Lack of interest, The fact that there is grounds for a better plan in regards to the railways only supports my view, not yours.

And any decision or plan of action has various repercussions further down the line, you want to make projections about numbers of trucks on the road (ok champ, give me a number, how many in October 2012 if the price of diesel is $5 a litre and the rail network is running at 80 percent of capacity in comparison to 1976) then go ahead but its pretty much a giant wank.

If you're not interested, the why are you debating the subject in the first place?