The 2017 Election Thread [Archive] - Page 5

husaberg

2nd November 2017, 19:15

Don't matter how many times you post it, it doesn't show Orks gets more than it's share of road funding.

But as it's obvious that against all evidence you believe otherwise I'll abandon any hope that merely repeatedly pointing that out will relieve you of your delusions.

Sayonara, dude.
333217
Yet it so clearly does. Alf Weinstein.

A quality, responsive transport system designed to support the growth of New Zealand’s largest city will not occur overnight – in fact, some improvements are at risk of not happening at all. Why? Current sources of funding simply aren’t enough to pay for the transport programme laid out in the 30-year Auckland Plan, and even if we can achieve a signiﬁcant increase in investment, the forecast performance of key parts of the transport system will be worse from 2031 than it is today.
The funding gap Our job was not to evaluate the merits of individual transport projects, nor to question the Auckland Plan. To prevent Auckland’s congestion reaching unacceptable levels, the funding gap that needs to be ﬁlled will be at least $12 billion (ﬁnancial projections throughout this document are presented in 2012 dollars). This averages $400 million annually for the next 30 years. To raise that much additional money, widespread public support is essential.

The government invests approximately $1.6 billion a year on the constructing, maintaining and renewing of State highways, including provision for walking and cycling.
In partnership with local authorities, the government provides subsidies of $600 million towards the constructing, maintaining and renewing of our local roading networks that link into our highways, including provision for walking and cycling. Local authorities invest a similar amount.
The government also provides subsidies of $275 million for public transport, again with local authorities investing a similar amount.

Twyford told Newsroom in an interview that the Government and the Auckland Council are looking at ways to fill a $6 billion funding hole over the next decade that the previous Government had given no indication of filling. The Council is up against its debt limits for its current AA credit rating and each notch downgrade caused by extra borrowing increases rates by around one percent per year.
The new Government and the Auckland Council expect to work on using the National Land Transport Fund (previously dedicated to roads and motorways) to fund light rail, he said. The Council was also looking at using targeted rates on light rail and other rapid transit routes to capture the value uplift in property prices because of those plans. The Government would also introduce a 10c/litre regional fuel tax as an interim step to help fill the gap while a congestion charging system was being built over the next five to 10 years.
Twyford said he also wanted to use the National Land Transport Fund to help fund rapid transit systems in cities, including for light rail and busways. Previously, the fund (paid for from fuel levies and road user charges) was dedicated to road building and repairs.

<strike></strike>
"There's a six billion dollar funding gap there that the former Government never really explained how they were going to fund that," Twyford said.
He expected the Auckland Council to ask for a regional fuel tax, which would generate between $120 million and $150 million a year and $1.5 billion over the decade, or about 10 percent of the total build programme.
"It's tough to ask the rest of New Zealand to pay all of the marginal costs of Auckland's growth," he said.
<strike></strike>

pritch

4th November 2017, 13:43

I haven't seen anything which suggests they get more than their share of road funding.

You must have drifted off. For years we were told that there were no funds available for urgently required work here. Auckland, and to a lesser extent Wellington's Northern outlet, were the priority.

Only in the last year or so has that changed.

RDJ

4th November 2017, 15:25

Maybe if we stopped working for other people's families we could start working for some infrastructure that benefits everyone instead.

Aye, this.

Ocean1

4th November 2017, 18:36

You must have drifted off. For years we were told that there were no funds available for urgently required work here. Auckland, and to a lesser extent Wellington's Northern outlet, were the priority.

Only in the last year or so has that changed.

Other places didn't have urgently required work?

If you're interested in how resources are allocated then maybe you could find and quote all of the various funding sources and show how Orks gets more national funding per capita than everyone else.

Dollars spent per head of pop might be a good start. Kilometers of existing roads per head of pop might be interesting.

Either way, "they got stuff and we didn't" isn't a very compelling argument. Neither is "wah wah Orks is getting more than they used to", which completely ignores the fact that Orks population has had massively higher population growth than anywhere else.

In the meantime don't mind me drifting off, I really don't give a fuck, I tend to figure that any spending on actual infrastructure which benefits all of us to varying degrees is less interesting than plans to massively increase the funds flushed down the social spending toilet.

oldrider

8th November 2017, 10:44

Update on Brendon O'Connell - Australian Man Disappeared by the Jacinda Ardern Government :scratch: follow the links :weird:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5nBkHDiABq0" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

husaberg

8th November 2017, 18:23

Update on Brendon O'Connell - Australian Man Disappeared by the Jacinda Ardern Government :scratch: follow the links :weird:

https://youtu.be/5nBkHDiABq0

"This individual had his entry permission to New Zealand revoked on character grounds and is now in custody," a spokesperson said.
In 2011, the 46-year-old was sentenced to three years in jail in Australia (http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/man-jailed-for-posting-antisemitic-video-online-20110131-1abm3.html) after being found guilty of six racial hatred charges.
https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/apply-for-a-visa/tools-and-information/character-and-identity/good-character

Serious character issues

You can't be granted a visa to enter NZ if you:

have ever been convicted of an offence for which you were sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 5 years or more
have been convicted in the last 10 years of an offence for which you were sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 12 months or longer
are prohibited from entering New Zealand
have ever been removed, excluded or deported from any country.

oldrider

8th November 2017, 18:38

Thank you - what about the journalist that posted the video? - who is he? - what's he all about? - seems pretty wound up about something! :shit:

husaberg

8th November 2017, 20:26

Thank you - what about the journalist that posted the video? - who is he? - what's he all about? - seems pretty wound up about something! :shit:
He is not a journalist he is a blogger.
If he was a journalist he would have his name on the story.
Hes posting racist crap hiding behind a youtube psydonym.
if you read the comments you will see what crap he is spouting.
Oconnell was stopped at imigration.
They don't need a tip off they check credentials both upon arrivial and at overseas departure this information as well as his declaration which was as likely false hence why he was detained sealed his fate.
Also according to Oconnell himself he has warrants out for his arrest.:weird:

Its a strange feeling – being “on the run”. Stateless. Warrants out for your arrest. I’m not from Syria. Not from Iran. Not from Iraq. I’m from Australia, and it’s not a joke.”

But why trust him

The first man in WA jailed for racial vilification, who was also convicted for sending Facebook messages to a stranger claiming a kebab shop owner wanted Islamic State to cut his head off, is now on the run in Iran. Brendon O’Connell was jailed for three years in 2011 after being convicted on six charges related to an online video of a verbal altercation he had with two young Jewish men outside a South Perth shopping centre.
Months after being released from prison, he was arrested over alarming Facebook messages citing IS he sent to former BHP Billiton employee Justin Hodgkinson.
 He was found guilty of those charges last year, but was not jailed.
 He was facing more legal trouble last October after being convicted of threatening to kill a prison guard in an email he sent to Corrective Services Minister Joe Francis.
O’Connell had been due to be sentenced in the District Court in November. An arrest warrant was issued after he failed to appear in court.
https://thewest.com.au/news/wa/wa-race-vilifier-seeks-iran-political-asylum-ng-b88343577z

eldog

8th November 2017, 20:39

333217
<strike></strike><strike></strike>

Increase it by $1.00
stop fluffing around
increase rates
decrease council wages at upper level
get more businesses to move out to suburb business hubs, built around shopping centres
more businesses think about moving out of akl

give town planning a boot up the arse.

when is de gubbermint going to do something real against criminals.
it only costs a $

i am sure we could setup a marshman test facility in central akl
theres lots of needy folk there
Noticeable by its absence at election time.

Swoop

9th November 2017, 13:21

i am sure we could setup a marshman test facility in central akl

Presumably a gas chamber to eradicate idiots like him and cassina?

eldog

10th November 2017, 18:23

Presumably a gas chamber to eradicate idiots like him and cassina?

We could call it an air raid shelter:shifty:

And get a direct phone line to Yokel

mashman

11th November 2017, 12:25

Presumably a gas chamber to eradicate idiots like him and cassina?

We could call it an air raid shelter:shifty:

And get a direct phone line to Yokel

You guys should build it, as I can see an Darwin award in your future.

husaberg

11th November 2017, 14:40

You guys should build it, as I can see an Darwin award in your future.
Really maybe you should put it to the polls, As its highly likely your opinions only are agreed with with by about 0.5% of the voting public.:laugh:
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2017/electorate-details-22.html

eldog

11th November 2017, 14:50

You guys should build it, as I can see an Darwin award in your future.

There are several already built.

oldrider

11th November 2017, 15:56

Well Gordon http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/e...etails-22.html I reckon that was a pretty good effort all things considered!

"AND" at least you put yourself out there! :niceone: Respect for that! :yes:

mashman

11th November 2017, 16:49

There are several already built.

You're a Kiwi aincha? build another one :bleh:

Well Gordon http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/e...etails-22.html I reckon that was a pretty good effort all things considered!

"AND" at least you put yourself out there! :niceone: Respect for that! :yes:

Cheers John. Yer link is broken (http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2017/electorate-details-22.html) I probably spoke to, at maximum, about 150 people. I'm pretty happy with a 142.7% conversion, pun intended, rate.

eldog

11th November 2017, 18:03

You're a Kiwi aincha? build another one :bleh:.
yeah....... nah

rather go for a ride:not:

Swoop

11th November 2017, 20:42

Cheers John. Yer link is broken (http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2017/electorate-details-22.html) I probably spoke to, at maximum, about 150 people. I'm pretty happy...

You are involved with the mana party?
Well, that explains quite a lot.

mashman

11th November 2017, 21:55

yeah....... nah

rather go for a ride:not:

Fine plan.

You are involved with the mana party?
Well, that explains quite a lot.

No. I ran in the Mana electorate.

Katman

12th November 2017, 07:38

You are involved with the mana party?

:killingme

What a fucking moron.

husaberg

12th November 2017, 07:44

No. I ran in the Mana electorate.

0.5% of the votes suggests more a slow crawl.....
The breakdown of the voter stats suggest your support base is predominately made up of retired paranoid anti semites, plus Taupo based neo Nazis constantly begging for oral sex.
Have you considered that maybe your views did not gain popular support as they were neither popular or credible.

Quite simply put, I am the best candidate for the Mana electorate. If you visit my facebook page, (https://www.facebook.com/Gordon4ManaMP2017/), you'll be able to see why for yourself.

Maybe the suggestion of having multi-story tinny houses on the motorway overpasses wasn't the most well thought out plan.

<strike></strike>

mashman

12th November 2017, 09:09

:killingme

What a fucking moron.

I got in touch with a candidate from up norf somewhere, a so called logic party, to see if they fancied a chat about a few things. I got exactly the same response. One of the things I did learn during the run, is that those who are running for office are doing so with their own "policy". Not unsurprising as I did similar myself. The primary difference was that I was willing to talk about the issues and discuss them further to see if we could help each other in regards to raising awareness of each others existence. As you have maybe gathered, I couldn't even get through the door without the same ignorant reaction. Similar can be said when trying to engage with the "known" candidates. They simply don't want to know about anything that is outwith that which they know. This was highlighted at a meet the candidates thing down the road. A lady stood up and started going semi postal at the candidates for not really answering the questions... although she singled me out at the start of the tirade as I had already answered her questions with plenty of detail. Speaks volumes regarding the mindset of candidates when it comes to actually answering the questions. As such, we end up with an entire parliament full of people who do nothing but tow the party line, and despite people obviously being sick of it, they go ahead and vote for who they think the winner will be.

Another lesson was that of not being a part of a party. As an independent candidate, you only get to sign up at the end of August. This sees one miss out on 3/4 months of invites to events. I had to invite myself to 2 local events as the invites had been sent out before I could register and therefore be found to be contacted. So if you wish to be a part of the larger picture, you need to be a member of a registered party. A couple of TOP supporters asked me why I wasn't running for TOP. So I briefly explained the contradiction of a couple of TOP's policies in around about 30 seconds. You know, the all important UBI that's the antithesis of a successful environmental policy. With such glaring contradictions in policy v's outcome, it wasn't hard to destroy the claimed logic, reason and common sense being offered as a way forwards. Their faces were a picture though. Such a shame the process doesn't allow for independent candidates to register at the same time as the parties.

eldog

12th November 2017, 09:47

Similar can be said when trying to engage with the "known" candidates. They simply don't want to know about anything that is outwith that which they know. As such, we end up with an entire parliament full of people who do nothing but tow the party line, and despite people obviously being sick of it, they go ahead and vote for who they think the winner will be.

Another lesson was that of not being a part of a party. As an independent candidate, you only get to sign up at the end of August. This sees one miss out on 3/4 months of invites to events. I had to invite myself to 2 local events as the invites had been sent out before I could register and therefore be found to be contacted. So if you wish to be a part of the larger picture, you need to be a member of a registered party. A couple of TOP supporters asked me why I wasn't running for TOP. So I briefly explained the contradiction of a couple of TOP's policies in around about 30 seconds. You know, the all important UBI that's the antithesis of a successful environmental policy. With such glaring contradictions in policy v's outcome, it wasn't hard to destroy the claimed logic, reason and common sense being offered as a way forwards. Their faces were a picture though. Such a shame the process doesn't allow for independent candidates to register at the same time as the parties.

No surprises about candidates towing the party line.
some party lines are deliberately vague.... see recent election.

might have been a good ideal to include your reasoning about why TOP policies are contradictory.

i can’t see why independents are registered at a different time to parties.

politics are really a closed shop with the door slightly ajar the light spilling out of the pub door, onto the public stage

husaberg

12th November 2017, 10:20

I got in touch with a candidate from up norf somewhere, a so called logic party, to see if they fancied a chat about a few things. I got exactly the same response. One of the things I did learn during the run, is that those who are running for office are doing so with their own "policy". Not unsurprising as I did similar myself. The primary difference was that I was willing to talk about the issues and discuss them further to see if we could help each other in regards to raising awareness of each others existence. As you have maybe gathered, I couldn't even get through the door without the same ignorant reaction. Similar can be said when trying to engage with the "known" candidates. They simply don't want to know about anything that is outwith that which they know. This was highlighted at a meet the candidates thing down the road. A lady stood up and started going semi postal at the candidates for not really answering the questions... although she singled me out at the start of the tirade as I had already answered her questions with plenty of detail. Speaks volumes regarding the mindset of candidates when it comes to actually answering the questions. As such, we end up with an entire parliament full of people who do nothing but tow the party line, and despite people obviously being sick of it, they go ahead and vote for who they think the winner will be.

Another lesson was that of not being a part of a party. As an independent candidate, you only get to sign up at the end of August. This sees one miss out on 3/4 months of invites to events. I had to invite myself to 2 local events as the invites had been sent out before I could register and therefore be found to be contacted. So if you wish to be a part of the larger picture, you need to be a member of a registered party. A couple of TOP supporters asked me why I wasn't running for TOP. So I briefly explained the contradiction of a couple of TOP's policies in around about 30 seconds. You know, the all important UBI that's the antithesis of a successful environmental policy. With such glaring contradictions in policy v's outcome, it wasn't hard to destroy the claimed logic, reason and common sense being offered as a way forwards. Their faces were a picture though. Such a shame the process doesn't allow for independent candidates to register at the same time as the parties.
Yet you stood with the backing of a party (The money free party)in the 2016 Local body elections with the same result............
You only got 337 votes..........or 1.8% only of the votes
Odd because you also said this

Marshall said the campaign was "an eye-opener in many different ways" and was gearing up to present alternative ideas for the Money Free Party in next year's general election.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/wellington/85220440/Defeated-Porirua-mayoral-candidates-look-on-the-bright-side

Not only that

Money Free Party NZ is led by Richard Osmaston, who founded the party. Osmaston had stood for the mayor of Nelson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayor_of_Nelson,_New_Zealand) in 2013
before founding the party in 2014.

The party did not gain enough members to register for the 2014 general election (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_2014). It stood five electorate candidates, but none were successful. Party members stood for multiple mayoralties in the 2016 local elections, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_local_elections,_2016) such as Richard Osmaston in Nelson (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson,_New_Zealand), Gordon Marshall in Porirua and Ted Howard in Kaikoura (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaikoura). As of January 2017 the party's website states that they "expect to have a major presence" in the 2017 general election (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_2017).

Could it be that you had to stand as an independant as your party that you belong to could not actually get the required 500 members signitures to meet the NZ election standard.......

Graystone

12th November 2017, 11:01

Yet you stood with the backing of a party (The money free party)in the 2016 Local body elections with the same result............
You only got 337 votes..........or 1.8% only of the votes
Odd because you also said this

Not only that

Could it be that you had to stand as an independant as your party that you belong to could not actually get the required 500 members signitures to meet the NZ election standard.......

While I may agree with the technical accuracy of that which you post, since he is continuing to attempt to make changes it is surely worth giving him the benefit of the doubt that his real life persona is much less arrogant than his online one.

mashman

12th November 2017, 11:59

No surprises about candidates towing the party line.
some party lines are deliberately vague.... see recent election.

might have been a good ideal to include your reasoning about why TOP policies are contradictory.

i can’t see why independents are registered at a different time to parties.

politics are really a closed shop with the door slightly ajar the light spilling out of the pub door, onto the public stage

Yeah, seems like people are noticing it too... if they ever haven't that is.

I included the reasoning when I spoke to the ladies who asked. Simply put, if you're giving people more money to spend outwith that which they currently have, then you are supporting business as usual, which is proven to lead to pollution, poverty etc... All TOP supporters really seemed to care about was that his policy was different and looked good on paper compared to the policies of the other colours. As soon as you give it any form of real critique, it falls apart. Too much reliance on experts ;)

I can see why independents are registered at different times to parties. There are a few reasons, but the primary reason is because the independent can actually be independent in their opinion of any given thing and can therefore answer a question directly without being deliberately vague. It's not in their best interest to allow that sort of thing build up over 5 months. They might lose their advantage :killingme

lmao. Nice analogy.

mashman

12th November 2017, 12:14

While I may agree with the technical accuracy of that which you post, since he is continuing to attempt to make changes it is surely worth giving him the benefit of the doubt that his real life persona is much less arrogant than his online one.

I don't read his posts. He's 1 of 3 I don't bother with. They lack the ability to understand 1 simple truth. There is no digital persona. There are only words on the screen that lack intonation. I know what I know. That anyone should claim arrogance from a digital persona is ridiculous based on words on paper. The Parable of the Pub showed me what was wrong. Since then. Meh.

In brief, The Parable of the Pub is 5 people sitting outside a pub having a beer. A social issue comes up in conversation and there's a Resource Based Economy advocate there who offers a different way of solving/mitigating the issue. The conversation lasts for about an hour. Each have their input. But there is one who monopolises the questions and judgements... and really refuses to listen to the answers. This is underlined as at the end of the hour, it starts to rain. The "intelligent" one with all of the questions stands up and states something along the lines of. Thank god for that, I'm fed up with listening to this negative bullshit. 2 others turn and instantly state that what they have heard is positive. The fourth knows my views and his default position is that he doesn't know if we would do it or not. I'm of the same mind, but slightly more positive than he is.

NOW. They all heard the same answers to the same questions, yet 1 declared the interaction as me being negative. So to be fair, eve with intonation an arsehole will always consider you to be an arsehole because they don't understand what you're saying. Or indeed choose not to coz funnin' like.

Arrogance. Nah. You choose to read what you choose to read... and ironically, prove your own arrogance. Fun thing to watch. Frustrating thing to not be able to do anything about. But also fun to play with, which negates most of the frustration. That or people simply ignoring the truth because they've been programmed to :killingme.

Love n hugs

Gordon

Graystone

12th November 2017, 12:14

All TOP supporters really seemed to care about was that his policy was different and looked good on paper compared to the policies of the other colours. As soon as you give it any form of real critique, it falls apart. Too much reliance on experts ;)

I disagree, TOP policy was forward thinking and robust, with a large focus on the environment and future generations. Their housing policy was difficult for some people to grasp due favoring rent over ownership, but this does fit well with their UBI idea.

mashman

12th November 2017, 12:20

I disagree, TOP policy was forward thinking and robust, with a large focus on the environment and future generations. Their housing policy was difficult for some people to grasp due favoring rent over ownership, but this does go well with their UBI idea.

I know what he was trying to achieve. But he had no Tech Unemployment policy. Nor Tech Employment policy for that matter. No one knows what to do with it coz free market. If you haven't read it, consider this (https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/122031-My-first-poll-for-the-NZ-public?p=1131071239#post1131071239). But also note that this is a mitigation. Technology will catch it up within about 10 years. And 10 years is lots of wasted resources. Morgan was rearranging the deckchairs i.e. where money gets invested. Anyhoo, time to get the kids.

Graystone

12th November 2017, 12:35

I know what he was trying to achieve. But he had no Tech Unemployment policy. Nor Tech Employment policy for that matter. No one knows what to do with it coz free market. If you haven't read it, consider this (https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/122031-My-first-poll-for-the-NZ-public?p=1131071239#post1131071239). But also note that this is a mitigation. Technology will catch it up within about 10 years. And 10 years is lots of wasted resources. Morgan was rearranging the deckchairs i.e. where money gets invested. Anyhoo, time to get the kids.

The UBI is a policy covering all types of unemployment, what would the point of a specific tech unemployment policy be? Tech employment is taken care of via the free market. What is the problem those two policies would be required for? Your linked post does not address this either.

husaberg

12th November 2017, 13:15

While I may agree with the technical accuracy of that which you post, since he is continuing to attempt to make changes it is surely worth giving him the benefit of the doubt that his real life persona is much less arrogant than his online one.
It could be true........But sincerly i have my doubts.
I would suggest he would be one to avoid at parties as he would bore you with endless conspiracy theories (mostly regarding Jews.)
One of those that think every opinion of theirs is the absolute only valid opinion.
I do agree and somewhat respect that he has put himself and his policy out there. But making piss poor excueses as to why they fail gain voter support is trite.
As for Gordon not reading my posts, its pretty clear he does, hence his need to make excuses for his poor number of votes.
His threads are alas only a vehicle for "blackslaping circle jerking" green rep sessions with him and Axzlel Oldie and Katman...............

mashman

12th November 2017, 20:01

The UBI is a policy covering all types of unemployment, what would the point of a specific tech unemployment policy be? Tech employment is taken care of via the free market. What is the problem those two policies would be required for? Your linked post does not address this either.

The UBI is funded by a tax base of people earning $. Tech Unemployment will replace more jobs than it will create and it will take over entire industries as companies come to the realisation that if they don't efficientise via technology, then they'll lose their market to someone who will. This sees the tax base shrink somewhat as disposable income goes out of the system and the government, who will be paying a UBI, end up paying for an ever increasing number of unemployed people and with a shrinking tax base. That'll kill the economy. That's why it needs to be taken into account. The future of business is going to be tech based. That's not an opinion. There's plenty of journalists exploring these issues and wondering how to deal with them. One of, what I would call the foremost minds regarding any form of UBI, is Anthony Painter of the RSA... or at least he was writing for the RSA when I was reading him. He clearly states, as do those who have designed and undertaken the Finnish UBI experiment, that a UBI is not affordable. Did you see Morgans number regarding a UBI? 10,400 per person per year. Say that the average weekly rent in NZ is $200 per week. That $10,400 on rent alone. Whilst he states he can pay for it, which he did in the video that outlined how he was going to pay for it, what he doesn't state is that it actually can't be afforded as people need food, electricity, transport, clothing etc... too. Disingenuous at best and completely ignoring the fact that the tens of thousands of people that will lose their government jobs during such a rationalisation of the system are someone else's customers. Or at least will be until they're unemployed. The link offers a cost neutral, government interference free and completely optional approach to mitigating Tech Unemployment. However, as mentioned earlier, the approach has a shelf life. The free market cannot and will not handle Tech Unemployment. It isn't equipped for it from a financial perspective. No customers = no need to produce stuff = failing economy. And so on and so forth. The link is not an exhaustive list of answers to questions that everyone will have. So whilst you may not think the link addresses anything regarding your questions, I'm here to tell you it does, and so much more should you be of a mind to understand such things as well as I do.

Graystone

12th November 2017, 20:17

The UBI is funded by a tax base of people earning $. Tech Unemployment will replace more jobs than it will create and it will take over entire industries as companies come to the realisation that if they don't efficientise via technology, then they'll lose their market to someone who will. This sees the tax base shrink somewhat as disposable income goes out of the system and the government, who will be paying a UBI, end up paying for an ever increasing number of unemployed people and with a shrinking tax base. That'll kill the economy. That's why it needs to be taken into account. The future of business is going to be tech based. That's not an opinion. There's plenty of journalists exploring these issues and wondering how to deal with them. One of, what I would call the foremost minds regarding any form of UBI, is Anthony Painter of the RSA... or at least he was writing for the RSA when I was reading him. He clearly states, as do those who have designed and undertaken the Finnish UBI experiment, that a UBI is not affordable. Did you see Morgans number regarding a UBI? 10,400 per person per year. Say that the average weekly rent in NZ is $200 per week. That $10,400 on rent alone. Whilst he states he can pay for it, which he did in the video that outlined how he was going to pay for it, what he doesn't state is that it actually can't be afforded as people need food, electricity, transport, clothing etc... too. Disingenuous at best and completely ignoring the fact that the tens of thousands of people that will lose their government jobs during such a rationalisation of the system are someone else's customers. Or at least will be until they're unemployed. The link offers a cost neutral, government interference free and completely optional approach to mitigating Tech Unemployment. However, as mentioned earlier, the approach has a shelf life. The free market cannot and will not handle Tech Unemployment. It isn't equipped for it from a financial perspective. No customers = no need to produce stuff = failing economy. And so on and so forth. The link is not an exhaustive list of answers to questions that everyone will have. So whilst you may not think the link addresses anything regarding your questions, I'm here to tell you it does, and so much more should you be of a mind to understand such things as well as I do.

Tech also decreases cost of goods, while allowing a new tax source, or at least making the remaining tax sources generate more in tax. It won't kill the economy but does require risks to be managed. After all, production and consumption are still trivial to balance in a tech centric economy.

Rent is commonly available for $100, the UBI is a Basic income, you can live on it, but it greatly incentivises not doing that.

The free market handles Tech re-employment.

You post in the link was very focused on a few specific examples with a massive amount of ambiguity in how the system would actually work, and I don't feel like being berated for not being a mind reader again so how about you reiterate its points as to how it relates to our discussion now.

mashman

12th November 2017, 21:00

Tech also decreases cost of goods, while allowing a new tax source, or at least making the remaining tax sources generate more in tax. It won't kill the economy but does require risks to be managed. After all, production and consumption are still trivial to balance in a tech centric economy.

Rent is commonly available for $100, the UBI is a Basic income, you can live on it, but it greatly incentivises not doing that.

The free market handles Tech re-employment.

That's the whole point when you start messing with prices in markets first to adopt automation. The rest of the economy needs the same investment levels that it receives today. In fact it needs more in order to grow the economy. You seem to be missing the important part here... you know, where, say, a civil servants had a 60k job, 2 kids and a house and could happily service it all. Suddenly not being able to do those things, because they have just lost nearly 50k is spending power, sees that money no longer enter the economy. Where is the tax going to come from if noone can afford to buy anything because certain sectors needs todays income and growth in order to survive? What new tax sources are you talking about?

Production has to stop. You still have pollution and climate issues to deal with. That will also kill your economy. I'm not giving you a timeframe here. So stop making it out as if I am. It will slide into oblivion as each sector fights for the $ that's left in any given market, coz again, who will really be able to afford things?

The free market is like jesus trying to catch a marble. It lurches from one side to the other trying to ensure that money gets to the right place. Well, it doesn't. The number of jobs that will be created will be miniscule and will be paid peanuts. And back we go again to the discretionary income no longer existing and prices highly unlikely to fall that much to accomodate where entire industries automate and peeps lose well paid jobs blah blah ad infinitum. That's the economic chain and how things happen in todays world when you shake a pillar of the economy. Technology has massive potential when it is directed, not pushed to a place where it makes money and gives you a shinier version of yesterdays. It's a waste in any language.

You post in the link was very focused on a few specific examples with a massive amount of ambiguity in how the system would actually work, and I don't feel like being berated for not being a mind reader again so how about you reiterate its points as to how it relates to our discussion now.

There was no ambiguity in it. You would pay people for not being at their job, because you had already budgeted to do so. If you choose not to, then realise the economic consequences of individual businesses doing such a thing in a fashion that gives no consideration to their employee being someone else's customer.

A special menton

and I don't feel like being berated for not being a mind reader again

Then don't read the post like that fuckstain. Why would I need to? Other than fucking with you... which while tempting, I've already done that and it got boring real quick.

super special mention

not being a mind reader again

Thinking would help. But hey, we're moving into wanting to fuck with you territory.

Graystone

12th November 2017, 21:29

That's the whole point when you start messing with prices in markets first to adopt automation. The rest of the economy needs the same investment levels that it receives today. In fact it needs more in order to grow the economy. You seem to be missing the important part here... you know, where, say, a civil servants had a 60k job, 2 kids and a house and could happily service it all. Suddenly not being able to do those things, because they have just lost nearly 50k is spending power, sees that money no longer enter the economy. Where is the tax going to come from if noone can afford to buy anything because certain sectors needs todays income and growth in order to survive? What new tax sources are you talking about?

Production has to stop. You still have pollution and climate issues to deal with. That will also kill your economy. I'm not giving you a timeframe here. So stop making it out as if I am. It will slide into oblivion as each sector fights for the $ that's left in any given market, coz again, who will really be able to afford things?

The free market is like jesus trying to catch a marble. It lurches from one side to the other trying to ensure that money gets to the right place. Well, it doesn't. The number of jobs that will be created will be miniscule and will be paid peanuts. And back we go again to the discretionary income no longer existing and prices highly unlikely to fall that much to accomodate where entire industries automate and peeps lose well paid jobs blah blah ad infinitum. That's the economic chain and how things happen in todays world when you shake a pillar of the economy. Technology has massive potential when it is directed, not pushed to a place where it makes money and gives you a shinier version of yesterdays. It's a waste in any language.

There was no ambiguity in it. You would pay people for not being at their job, because you had already budgeted to do so. If you choose not to, then realise the economic consequences of individual businesses doing such a thing in a fashion that gives no consideration to their employee being someone else's customer.

A special menton

Then don't read the post like that fuckstain. Why would I need to? Other than fucking with you... which while tempting, I've already done that and it got boring real quick.

super special mention

Thinking would help. But hey, we're moving into wanting to fuck with you territory.

What's this sudden job loss you think a UBI is going to bring? that's coming in any system, it's not a UBI attribute. The new tax source is the automation, either tax it 'directly' or simply enjoy the increased tax income from the profits (probably the latter moving to the former over time, and no I haven't made out as if you are giving me a time-frame).

Why does production have to stop? To address the climate and resource issues production has to get smarter, and more efficient, this does not stop it at all.

There will be vast amount of jobs created, however the skill level required will be high so they may not be attainable for everyone. The free market will ensure that education is prioritised accordingly; if some automation is good, more is better, and this requires more engineers to automate things. Then we can head of to the moon/mars and asteroid belts for resources...

Well since I'm now being berated anyway. Your post and system outlined in the other thread is garbage, your IRD example particularly so, the loss of tax income from those 4000 people is more than offset by not having to pay them to begin with! There is however, a lot of parrallels that can be drawn to the UBI system, you suggest paying those people anyway while they retrain, a UBI pays people while the retrain as well, don't make the mistake of taking GM's 10k pa UBI as the only amount that it could ever be.

TheDemonLord

12th November 2017, 21:36

mashman

12th November 2017, 22:13

What's this sudden job loss you think a UBI is going to bring? that's coming in any system, it's not a UBI attribute. The new tax source is the automation, either tax it 'directly' or simply enjoy the increased tax income from the profits (probably the latter moving to the former over time, and no I haven't made out as if you are giving me a time-frame).

Why does production have to stop? To address the climate and resource issues production has to get smarter, and more efficient, this does not stop it at all.

There will be vast amount of jobs created, however the skill level required will be high so they may not be attainable for everyone. The free market will ensure that education is prioritised accordingly; if some automation is good, more is better, and this requires more engineers to automate things. Then we can head of to the moon/mars and asteroid belts for resources...

Well since I'm now being berated anyway. Your post and system outlined in the other thread is garbage, your IRD example particularly so, the loss of tax income from those 4000 people is more than offset by not having to pay them to begin with! There is however, a lot of parrallels that can be drawn to the UBI system, you suggest paying those people anyway while they retrain, a UBI pays people while the retrain as well, don't make the mistake of taking GM's 10k pa UBI as the only amount that it could ever be.

Have it your way. You're bang on with your analysis. Love your work.

Swoop

12th November 2017, 22:14

:killingme

What a fucking moron.

That was called "asking a question" and you might have seen the curvy-line with a dot underneath it at the end, which denotes same.
Rather pointless using one anywhere near you though eh Steve?

You can get bak to watching The Wiggles now.

Brian d marge

13th November 2017, 00:29

"The Printing Press will make the monks lazy and idle"
"The Steam Mills will signal the end of the Textile worker"
"The Traction Engine will invalidate the requirement for Farm Laborers and Horses"
"Shipping containers will make Dock workers obsolete"
"AI will make driving jobs a thing of history"

And yet - with each great and radical leap forward in industry, when Technology has come along that has drastically reduced the required workforce in one area, we have not seen the compound unemployment and the financial apocalypse that is predicted.

It's almost like necessity drives people to innovate and create jobs, thus allowing for job movement in the market.No but it brought about the rise of " the shitty job"... At least the Chinese have meaningful work

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Ocean1

13th November 2017, 07:19

No but it brought about the rise of " the shitty job"... At least the Chinese have meaningful work

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Outside of Beijing most of them would give up their "meaningful" job for a merely shitty job in a heartbeat. Their current job "means" the same as it has since before feudal times: fucking hard work, fuck all pay and a fucking short life.

TheDemonLord

13th November 2017, 11:11

No but it brought about the rise of " the shitty job"... At least the Chinese have meaningful work

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Speak for yourself.

My job involves and Air conditioned office, Flexible hours and Youtube.

Katman

13th November 2017, 12:50

That was called "asking a question" and you might have seen the curvy-line with a dot underneath it at the end, which denotes same.

And if you'd taken the slightest notice of the page you were making reference to, you'd realise what a fucking retarded question it was.

Brian d marge

13th November 2017, 13:09

Outside of Beijing most of them would give up their "meaningful" job for a merely shitty job in a heartbeat. Their current job "means" the same as it has since before feudal times: fucking hard work, fuck all pay and a fucking short life. Currently there is over a million or more ( dont make me find the book and quote thats a pain ) a shitload of landless people in china flowing to work areas and out again , many whose land was stolen by the state , many of them who " prefer" to have their land back and work "fkin hard "

Speak for yourself.

My job involves and Air conditioned office, Flexible hours and Youtube.

As do I , I choose my work , and sometime they pay me through the nose for it . but I would rather be doing something else.

Ocean1

13th November 2017, 14:59

Currently there is over a million or more ( dont make me find the book and quote thats a pain ) a shitload of landless people in china flowing to work areas and out again , many whose land was stolen by the state , many of them who " prefer" to have their land back and work "fkin hard "

That's, what, about 1.4%?
So fuck all.

In the meantime the 30% plus Chinese that are designated agricultural workers, working on the land the local govt designates as "theirs", (none of which has ever been anything but state owned) would just love to have one of those "shitty" jobs.

But, as I've pointed out before, if you fancy that lifestyle you can always go live on a commune.

Brian d marge

13th November 2017, 15:08

That's, what, about 1.4%?
So fuck all.

In the meantime the 30% plus Chinese that are designated agricultural workers, working on the land the local govt designates as "theirs", (none of which has ever been anything but state owned) would just love to have one of those "shitty" jobs.

But, as I've pointed out before, if you fancy that lifestyle you can always go live on a commune.I do and will ( I hope) as stuffed into trains and returning to my stack and pack 5 X 10 just seems so idyllic
Looks like I'm going to have to get me book out and edumikate you again

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Graystone

13th November 2017, 17:42

"The Printing Press will make the monks lazy and idle"
"The Steam Mills will signal the end of the Textile worker"
"The Traction Engine will invalidate the requirement for Farm Laborers and Horses"
"Shipping containers will make Dock workers obsolete"
"AI will make driving jobs a thing of history"

And yet - with each great and radical leap forward in industry, when Technology has come along that has drastically reduced the required workforce in one area, we have not seen the compound unemployment and the financial apocalypse that is predicted.

It's almost like necessity drives people to innovate and create jobs, thus allowing for job movement in the market.

Exactly, so more innovation into automation sectors leads to more innovation everywhere!

Except spotify, fuck spotify.

YellowDog

19th January 2018, 15:27

TheDemonLord

19th January 2018, 15:29

So Jacina's pregnant and Winston's going to be PM.

Sounds like the "King Maker" made himself King :lol:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/100721182/jacinda-ardern-an-inspiration-for-a-generation

Who shot the Beaver?

And suddenly I have visions of Winston in his throne room, gleefully tapping his fingers muttering "Just as planned"

Voltaire

19th January 2018, 15:34

The Mediaocre must be over the moon, all the photo opps, fawning and new dumb questions they can ask. :puke:

RDJ

19th January 2018, 15:39

And one more poor bastard child with a high statistical likelihood of growing up in a solo mother household. Wondering as he/she gets older why bio mom and bio pop don't / didn't love each other enough to commit.

Woodman

19th January 2018, 15:47

Wonder if the baby will be born with teeth?

eldog

19th January 2018, 17:42

The Mediaocre must be over the moon, all the photo opps, fawning and new dumb questions they can ask. :puke:

All the more reason to go riding (at least something to do with riding) and ignore the media B/S:whocares::rockon:

Ocean1

19th January 2018, 18:43

Has Mark Richardson commented? :laugh:

Brian d marge

19th January 2018, 18:58

Rosemarys baby

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Brian d marge

19th January 2018, 19:04

Wonder if the baby will be born with teeth?Gnasherhttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180119/d22aeec26f2d6c1fe22e52bc1038ae31.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Crasherfromwayback

19th January 2018, 19:30

Wonder if the baby will be born with teeth?

You've never shown us pics of your Mrs/Mr, despite multiple requests! Put up the pics, or fuck off you dopey cunt.

Woodman

19th January 2018, 21:11

You've never shown us pics of your Mrs/Mr, despite multiple requests! Put up the pics, or fuck off you dopey cunt.

For fucks sake it was just a stupid comment on a stupid internet forum.

YellowDog

20th January 2018, 09:35

Wonder if the baby will be born with teeth?

Bound to have prominent teeth :yes:

http://cdn-static.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeek/files/styles/main_wide/public/alien_3.jpg?itok=l08AhCUq

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 09:53

For fucks sake it was just a stupid comment

Too fucking right it was. But hardly surprising coming from you.

YellowDog

20th January 2018, 10:20

It's funny how things turn out.

WP has dropped from high 20%s, before the election, to around 5% in popularity, since the election.

However as a PM or Senior Statesman, he has always polled very highly. My suspicion is that his resulting 5%-ish disappointment poll will be back to the high 20%s or, very likely, much higher :yes:

As this is likely to be his very last bite at the cherry, I wish him the very best of luck :)

pritch

20th January 2018, 11:02

I haven't looked at the local news yet but I fully anticipate an ongoing series of trite and stupid articles.
Adern is not the first PM to have a baby while in office. Benazir Bhutto did that in Pakistan, a conservative muslim country, so lets not have any silly journos gushing that NZ is leading the way in womens rights.

A few decades back it was common to have parliamentarians who were seemingly perpetually pissed. One of them even called a snap election while drunk in charge of a country. An election which he promptly lost. (Thank you Lord.) Having a sober woman in the house doesn't seem a problem. She won't be the only mother in parliament so really, what the fuck?

The thought occurred that it might be safer to read the overseas papers, but they too are covering the 'happy event'.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 11:16

Having a sober woman in the house doesn't seem a problem. She won't be the only mother in parliament so really, what the fuck?

'.

I'm actually fucking sickened by the morons that are slating her. Such sad, useless fucks. Things like this, make me sad. The world really is full of cunts.

YellowDog

20th January 2018, 11:22

I'm actually fucking sickened by the morons that are slating her. Such sad, useless fucks. Things like this, make me sad. The world really is full of cunts.

I think it's the 'My Team', 'Your Team' thing. Always has been and always will be a problem for a fixed percentage of voters.

Woodman

20th January 2018, 11:22

Too fucking right it was. But hardly surprising coming from you.

I aim to please

eldog

20th January 2018, 11:29

will WP be a godparent?
:girlfight:

meanwhile time marches on

obviously not much happening gubbermint wise either........

Woodman

20th January 2018, 11:31

I'm actually fucking sickened by the morons that are slating her. Such sad, useless fucks. Things like this, make me sad. The world really is full of cunts.

Her having a kid is all good by me. I have read comments that she is irresponsible etc, but for fucks sake she doesn't sit in a chair making all the decisions.

Also, any public figure with even the slightest hint of a slightly irregular physical feature is open slather to have that feature ridiculed in public. Been happening for centuries, its just a bit of fun just check out any satirical cartoon.

eldog

20th January 2018, 11:32

The world really is full of cunts.

there is a lot of people with not much to do........

except report on events, mostly trivial

I hope it doesn't relapse into the Diana type exposure.

Its why I don't listen or watch the media (except via KB of course)

CFWB - Have they finished all the roadworks around parliament and the surrounds yet?
It was a nightmare last time I was there. Far too many cunts leaning on shovels, no one making the tea though.

time for coffee

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 11:53

CFWB - Have they finished all the roadworks around parliament and the surrounds yet?
It was a nightmare last time I was there. Far too many cunts leaning on shovels, no one making the tea though.

time for coffee

I'm not sure Bro. I very rarely get down that end of town.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 12:06

The only concerns I have with the Pregnancy are as follows:

1: Although small, there are still risks associated with Pregnancy (nearly lost of a friend due to Blood loss from a Uterus that didn't clamp down and clot after delivery) - which could see either an extended absence from the position of PM (resulting in the country being led by someone no one effectively voted for) or potentially forcing her to step down - now I must stress, these are unlikely, but still a possibility.

2: The Baby Blues and Post-Natal Depression - these are a thing, for most women, their Hormones sort themselves out after a couple of weeks after Birth (although there is a fair amount of research to suggest that the body undergoes permanent changes due to this), but nonetheless, it is a potential issue.

3: I've read that she is going to have her partner be the Stay-at-home dad - which is fair enough, however - There's a fair amount of statistical evidence that suggests she will either:
a) Not go back to work full time
b) Be resentful at having to go back to work full time
As a perfect case study - look at Toni Street formerly form Seven Sharp - from her own words - her Dream Job, the pinnacle of success, everything she had ever wanted.... And yet having to spend that much time away from her kids was making her miserable to the point she chose to step down, in order to achieve a better work/life balance.

Now, I'm sure there will be the predictable accusations of "SEXIST!" - however the first 2 are ones that are uniquely applicable to Women, and the second is backed up by a wealth of Statistical data.

It's fair to say, I'm not a Jacinda/Labour fan - but all that said - I wish her well with the Pregnancy - I hope she doesn't suffer any of the risks I've outlined, and I hope she proves the skeptics like me wrong and is able to fully commit to being the PM.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 12:16

1: Although small, there are still risks associated with Pregnancy (nearly lost of a friend due to Blood loss from a Uterus that didn't clamp down and clot after delivery) - which could see either an extended absence from the position of PM (resulting in the country being led by someone no one effectively voted for) or potentially forcing her to step down - now I must stress, these are unlikely, but still a possibility.

2: The Baby Blues and Post-Natal Depression - these are a thing, for most women, their Hormones sort themselves out after a couple of weeks after Birth (although there is a fair amount of research to suggest that the body undergoes permanent changes due to this), but nonetheless, it is a potential issue.

Seriously. Just fuck off you total CUNT.

Katman

20th January 2018, 12:42

It's fair to say, I'm not a Jacinda/Labour fan - but all that said - I wish her well with the Pregnancy - I hope she doesn't suffer any of the risks I've outlined, and I hope she proves the skeptics like me wrong and is able to fully commit to being the PM.

Seriously, what a fuckwit.

YellowDog

20th January 2018, 12:54

resulting in the country being led by someone no one effectively voted for

A poll I saw before the election suggested that many would have preferred WP over JA or WE as PM.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 13:16

Seriously. Just fuck off you total CUNT.

Seriously, what a fuckwit.

Why so angry?
Does reality upset you so much?

Edit:

Just for clarity

https://bpac.org.nz/BPJ/2010/nataldep/postnatal.aspx

We've got a 1 in 6 chance of our PM having a significant Mental condition, I'd say that's something serious to consider.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 13:17

A poll I saw before the election suggested that many would have preferred WP over JA or WE as PM.

I'd counter with the question - why didn't more people vote for him then?

pritch

20th January 2018, 13:24

About that "your team my team" thing, yes it does exist. A guy I know, not at all irrational although he does seem to watch a fair bit of Fox News, was aghast when Labour managed to cobble together a coalition. Really though we don't have too many loose units in our parliament, used to be lots in the Social Credit Party, but they couldn't actually get into parliament. These days the odd one seems to turn up, usually in NZ First or the Greens. There really isn't a huge difference between Labour and National, both are centrist parties.

Grumph

20th January 2018, 13:45

We've got a 1 in 6 chance of our PM having a significant Mental condition, I'd say that's something serious to consider.

We've survived a PM with a significant drinking problem at least once - Muldoon - we'll survive this.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 14:05

Why so angry?
Does reality upset you so much?

Edit:

Just for clarity

https://bpac.org.nz/BPJ/2010/nataldep/postnatal.aspx

We've got a 1 in 6 chance of our PM having a significant Mental condition, I'd say that's something serious to consider.

I'm far from angry. Just have a poor tolerance for total fuckwits. And I'm guessing, seeing as she's got through the first bit, dealing with morning sickness, and a massive change in hormonal balance, that she'll be just fine. She's obviously built of way sterner stuff than your poor self. And you'd know all about having to deal with mental illness.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 14:06

We've survived a PM with a significant drinking problem at least once - Muldoon - we'll survive this.

Exactly. And it's not like JA is the first woman in a position of power to have a fucking baby right? FFS.

Paulo

20th January 2018, 14:08

What a bunch of wankstains all you manopausal middle aged fat bastards having a crywank because a Woman is having a baby and she has a better job than you.
FFS I'd much rather have Jacinda in power than that total cunt John Key who did nothing but help sell of New Zealand assets to the highest foreign bidder whilst letting the average Kiwi fucking struggle.
National were a cabinet of cunts. All of them , Crusher Collins has a Chinese hubby who is taking 56,000 litres of NZ 's purest water off shore per day for bottling in a Chinese plant , he pays $561 Per Annum for the privileged. John Key let this sort of self interested pocket lining corruption happen at every level of cabinet.

You know for once I can watch the news and not feel my skin crawl having to watch that slimy Ex Merrly Lynch banker boy smarm and Lie his way though every interview whilst pretending to give a fuck about this country, Now he's pissed off to Hawaii and sold his mansion to another forienger, surprise surprise.

Something a bit wrong with men who get threatened by Woman who have a brain and some character or class. oh and I imagine all your misses are smoking hot and devoid of any physical flaws too. LOL

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 14:18

Woodman

20th January 2018, 14:25

Fuck, I can see the womans weekly and new idea falling all over themselves over this.

Hope you have your subscriptions Crasher.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 14:28

Fuck, I can see the womans weekly and new idea falling all over themselves over this.

Hope you have your subscriptions Crasher.

You're the cunt that seems to know which women's mag is which, cumstain. Only mags I have a sub for are Cycleworld and D-Photo. Don't forget that pic of ya partner for us eh?!

RDJ

20th January 2018, 14:47

Seriously. Just fuck off you total CUNT.

Awesome rebuttal, not. Despite your venom, it's a reasonable view to have, to criticize someone (a) demanding votes to be put in charge of a major project, going into it knowing he/she will be out of it for 6-8 weeks *minimum* during the startup phase; while she is (b) concealing that fact from the people she answers to while asking them for full faith and confidence; and (c) knowing in advance she will handover the entire project to an outside deputy with a completely different agenda and very small minority support, all the while (d) pretending all is well and there was total transparency.

That's not integrity.

In very many professions and trades you don't put your hand up for, and become, project leader, knowing that you know you won't be at your best. I've seen quite a few colleagues over the years stand down while on chemo, after major surgery and so forth, to make sure the best person runs the project.

That's not saying a pregnant woman can't cope. That's saying a pregnant woman in late pregnancy is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions. Just like a newly diagnosed insulin-dependent male is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions (the most recent example I've encountered in industry).

In short - don't put your hand up for a role knowing you're concealing something which is a big deal.

Paulo

20th January 2018, 16:06

unless you have magically grown a vagina and popped out a sprog or two I don't think your opinion is worth that much :)

she's having a kid not fucking dying with cancer and chemo :)

Awesome rebuttal, not. Despite your venom, it's a reasonable view to have, to criticize someone (a) demanding votes to be put in charge of a major project, going into it knowing he/she will be out of it for 6-8 weeks *minimum* during the startup phase; while she is (b) concealing that fact from the people she answers to while asking them for full faith and confidence; and (c) knowing in advance she will handover the entire project to an outside deputy with a completely different agenda and very small minority support, all the while (d) pretending all is well and there was total transparency.

That's not integrity.

In very many professions and trades you don't put your hand up for, and become, project leader, knowing that you know you won't be at your best. I've seen quite a few colleagues over the years stand down while on chemo, after major surgery and so forth, to make sure the best person runs the project.

That's not saying a pregnant woman can't cope. That's saying a pregnant woman in late pregnancy is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions. Just like a newly diagnosed insulin-dependent male is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions (the most recent example I've encountered in industry).

In short - don't put your hand up for a role knowing you're concealing something which is a big deal.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 16:21

Awesome rebuttal, not. Despite your venom, it's a reasonable view to have, to criticize someone (a) demanding votes to be put in charge of a major project, going into it knowing he/she will be out of it for 6-8 weeks *minimum* during the startup phase; while she is (b) concealing that fact from the people she answers to while asking them for full faith and confidence; and (c) knowing in advance she will handover the entire project to an outside deputy with a completely different agenda and very small minority support, all the while (d) pretending all is well and there was total transparency.

That's not integrity.

In very many professions and trades you don't put your hand up for, and become, project leader, knowing that you know you won't be at your best. I've seen quite a few colleagues over the years stand down while on chemo, after major surgery and so forth, to make sure the best person runs the project.

That's not saying a pregnant woman can't cope. That's saying a pregnant woman in late pregnancy is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions. Just like a newly diagnosed insulin-dependent male is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions (the most recent example I've encountered in industry).

In short - don't put your hand up for a role knowing you're concealing something which is a big deal.

Here's a better rebuttal for you then. Fuck off, you total CUNT. What a thick CUNT you are. Do you know, she didn't fucking know she was preggers until AFTER the fucking election, you self righteous CUNT? And what the fuck would you know about *integrity* ? You don't even quote fucking FACTS! Dopey cunt.

Grumph

20th January 2018, 16:34

Awesome rebuttal, not. Despite your venom, it's a reasonable view to have, to criticize someone (a) demanding votes to be put in charge of a major project, going into it knowing he/she will be out of it for 6-8 weeks *minimum* during the startup phase; while she is (b) concealing that fact from the people she answers to while asking them for full faith and confidence; and (c) knowing in advance she will handover the entire project to an outside deputy with a completely different agenda and very small minority support, all the while (d) pretending all is well and there was total transparency.

That's not integrity.

In very many professions and trades you don't put your hand up for, and become, project leader, knowing that you know you won't be at your best. I've seen quite a few colleagues over the years stand down while on chemo, after major surgery and so forth, to make sure the best person runs the project.

That's not saying a pregnant woman can't cope. That's saying a pregnant woman in late pregnancy is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions. Just like a newly diagnosed insulin-dependent male is not best suited for a demanding leadership role that can involve life-and-death-and-huge-financial-impact decisions (the most recent example I've encountered in industry).

In short - don't put your hand up for a role knowing you're concealing something which is a big deal.

Rubbish - remember that we've had from the last National Govt, stand-in PMs varying from the odd to the odder - Brownlee to Paula Bennet.
Alomgside either of them, Winston looks like a statesman.
Listen to the sequence as released - when she accepted the party leader's position, she didn't know she was pregnant. Once past that there was no going back. I fail to see any reason why she should have either.

Katman

20th January 2018, 16:35

We've got a 1 in 6 chance of our PM having a significant Mental condition.

I'd say that's fucking hilarious coming from you.

Woodman

20th January 2018, 17:19

You're the cunt that seems to know which women's mag is which, cumstain. Only mags I have a sub for are Cycleworld and D-Photo. Don't forget that pic of ya partner for us eh?!

Chill fanboy................

RDJ

20th January 2018, 17:20

Well, we all of us - including the spitefully vituperative and logic-challenged - will find out how well or poorly this all works out in due course, won't we...

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 17:22

Chill fanboy................

Still waiting on that pic.

jasonu

20th January 2018, 17:26

Well, we all of us - including the spitefully vituperative and logic-challenged - will find out how well or poorly this all works out in due course, won't we...

Sounds like over here.

Woodman

20th January 2018, 17:34

Still waiting on that pic.

Not happening........

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 18:12

Not happening........

Surprise surprise. I'm willing to bet, JA is a far more attractive woman, teeth or no. Must be hard to be a guy, that feels threatened by an attractive and intelligent woman. Possibly make you want to shack up with one that's neither.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 18:21

Here's a better rebuttal for you then. Fuck off, you total CUNT. What a thick CUNT you are. Do you know, she didn't fucking know she was preggers until AFTER the fucking election, you self righteous CUNT? And what the fuck would you know about *integrity* ? You don't even quote fucking FACTS! Dopey cunt.

You were saying you weren't angry and yet....

As for not knowing she was Pregnant - well, I've got a few problems with that Statement. You see, I believe that Jacinda is reasonably well educated, in which case she is well aware of both the Human Reproductive cycle (you know - Cause > Effect) and also the myriad of ways that one can interupt said cycle...

In which case - either she's ignorant (not a good look for a PM) or reckless (not a good look for a PM) or deceptive (not a good look for a PM).

Woodman

20th January 2018, 18:25

Surprise surprise. I'm willing to bet, JA is a far more attractive woman, teeth or no. Must be hard to be a guy, that feels threatened by an attractive and intelligent woman. Possibly make you want to shack up with one that's neither.

Threatened my ass, fuck you are a Jacinda fanboy.
As explained in a prior post I was having some fun about her prominent teeth as people have done for centuries about any public figure when there is even the slightest hint of anything slightly different about them. Fuck even Jacinda Adearn herself makes jokes about her teeth.

Tell me, have you ever laughed, smiled, or smirked while watching on tv, or been involved in any humorous discussion about someones perculiarity? I would be surprised if you haven't.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 18:34

I'm far from angry. Just have a poor tolerance for total fuckwits. And I'm guessing, seeing as she's got through the first bit, dealing with morning sickness, and a massive change in hormonal balance, that she'll be just fine. She's obviously built of way sterner stuff than your poor self. And you'd know all about having to deal with mental illness.

Yeah, except Morning Sickness varies - One lady I knew spent the first 3 months of Pregnancy spewing 3 times a day (and yes, that did impact her ability to do her job, by her own admission) - We don't know how mild or Severe it was, but more to the point - Those are caused by the HGH (Human growth Hormone) whereas the Baby Blues/postnatal depression are caused by a completely different set of Hormones - from memory it's the hormone that creates the motherly bond, and it's pretty powerful (you know - think of how strong the Mother/Infant bond is).

To put into context - You can be talking to someone one moment and the very next moment be in a flood of tears and completely inconsolable. The problem being that the Hormones that regulate emotions (and not human growth) are going completely spaz after birth.

It's not a case of being made of Sterner Stuff - I mean, if it was that simple, you could collect your nobel prize in Psychiatry for creating the cure for depression...

As for knowing how to deal with Mental Illness, well - I do read your and Katman's Posts on KB, so I guess that counts :P

To clarify - I'm not saying it is impossible for her to do a good job, what I'm saying is that there are a number of pretty relevant risk factors with Pregnancy that can easily impact her ability to do her job well. These factors are also unique to the Female of the Species.

If pointing that out makes me a Cunt, then fair enough - feel free to forward your complaints to:

Mother Nature,
Corner of Evolution Street and Sexual Dimorphic road
Reproductive Town
Reality.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 18:37

I'd say that's fucking hilarious coming from you.

You've got your PHD in Psychiatry yet?
Oh?
You haven't?
Well, you are right about one thing - something IS fucking hilarious coming from you

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 18:46

What a bunch of wankstains all you manopausal middle aged fat bastards having a crywank because a Woman is having a baby and she has a better job than you.

Has a better job? Doubt it. She has to deal with Politicians all day - I can't think of anything worse...

FFS I'd much rather have Jacinda in power than that total cunt John Key who did nothing but help sell of New Zealand assets to the highest foreign bidder whilst letting the average Kiwi fucking struggle.

Yeah - about that, do you know how much NZ Didn't suffer during the Recession whilst National was in power? Compare to what happened in other parts of the world, there was pretty much no recession here - so, I'd say they did a pretty good job of not letting the average kiwi struggle.

National were a cabinet of cunts. All of them , Crusher Collins has a Chinese hubby who is taking 56,000 litres of NZ 's purest water off shore per day for bottling in a Chinese plant , he pays $561 Per Annum for the privileged. John Key let this sort of self interested pocket lining corruption happen at every level of cabinet.

There is plenty to critique National's cabinet about - but that issue IMO is a drop in the ocean...

You know for once I can watch the news and not feel my skin crawl having to watch that slimy Ex Merrly Lynch banker boy smarm and Lie his way though every interview whilst pretending to give a fuck about this country, Now he's pissed off to Hawaii and sold his mansion to another forienger, surprise surprise.

I'm not gonna lie - John Key did come off as a Smug Git, with a face I'd love to slap...

Something a bit wrong with men who get threatened by Woman who have a brain and some character or class. oh and I imagine all your misses are smoking hot and devoid of any physical flaws too. LOL

I'm more worried about her Socialist leanings tbh, but it's not a case of Threatened. It's a case of taking a job, knowing full well you are going to take a big chunk of time out from doing that job and (statistically) being unlikely to want to continue to do that job - it's something like 5% of professional women return to work a 40 hour job after Child Birth - and as I've already pointed out - look at Toni Street for a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 19:09

You were saying you weren't angry and yet....

.

Thing is, if you were to actually know me in real life, you'd know I speak like I do here, in real life. I'm a mechanic by trade, we use rough language. It's a hard habit to break. Hardly means I'm angry. When I'm angry, I'll tell you I want to smash you in the fucking face.

Threatened my ass, fuck you are a Jacinda fanboy.

I most def am that. She's a super intelligent, caring woman, that actually wants to help the av Joe. What's not to like about that? Dopey Cunt.

Woodman

20th January 2018, 19:21

Thing is, if you were to actually know me in real life, you'd know I speak like I do here, in real life. I'm a mechanic by trade, we use rough language. It's a hard habit to break. Hardly means I'm angry. When I'm angry, I'll tell you I want to smash you in the fucking face.

I talked to you in real life, and you were pretty polite to be fair.

I most def am that. She's a super intelligent, caring woman, that actually wants to help the av Joe. What's not to like about that? Dopey Cunt.

Don't disagree with you, she seems okay, doesn't mean she is above a bit of stick does it?

HenryDorsetCase

20th January 2018, 19:24

You were saying you weren't angry and yet....

As for not knowing she was Pregnant - well, I've got a few problems with that Statement. You see, I believe that Jacinda is reasonably well educated, in which case she is well aware of both the Human Reproductive cycle (you know - Cause > Effect) and also the myriad of ways that one can interupt said cycle...

In which case - either she's ignorant (not a good look for a PM) or reckless (not a good look for a PM) or deceptive (not a good look for a PM).

You are approaching this as if it was a problem. It isnt. I think it is fucking fantastic. It underlines the step change (not to mention the generational change) we now have, the changing of the guard and so forth.

Just look at the pack of middle aged white MALE cunts the current government replaced. Did I mention I fucking loathe Nazional and after nine years in power their legacy is child poverty, betting the farm on foreign buyers buying overpriced shitholes in Auckland, and generally being a bunch of cunts? Even the ones WITH cunts are cunts. Yes Paula Bennet and JUCOL I am looking at you.

As for you, you can go fuck yourself, and the horse you rode in on if you havent already, and deal.

Nothing but good news.

I bet if we were in Mrka you would have voted Trump, and that is the most dire insult I would throw at anyone. Fuck y'all.

HenryDorsetCase

20th January 2018, 19:26

Thing is, if you were to actually know me in real life, you'd know I speak like I do here, in real life. I'm a mechanic by trade, we use rough language. It's a hard habit to break. Hardly means I'm angry. When I'm angry, I'll tell you I want to smash you in the fucking face.

I most def am that. She's a super intelligent, caring woman, that actually wants to help the av Joe. What's not to like about that? Dopey Cunt.

When I am arguing with people at work (and basically that is what my job is) I often have to tell them: "I'm not angry, you'll know when I'm angry" ;-)

HenryDorsetCase

20th January 2018, 19:28

Jacinda fanboy

So am I. Just so you know.

Woodman

20th January 2018, 19:41

So am I. Just so you know.

You do realise that with celebrity politics, this child will be partly responsible for labour getting in for a second term.

RDJ

20th January 2018, 19:43

She's a super intelligent, caring woman, that actually wants to help the av Joe. What's not to like about that? Dopey Cunt.

A little bit of ornery irony ongoing with some of you - wanting to be deeply supportive of a female PM but using the F and C words to denigrate people who have a different opinion about the situation... as the saying goes, you won't tolerate intolerance in others... but for yourselves... all Eff You's and Dopey C's 24/7...

Let's see how the elderly primigravida* does with her day job shall we? Even with all the support and top tier care the rest of the nation's mums can't access.

* Not pejorative, purely an obstetric description.
"The elderly primigravida is defined as a woman who goes into pregnancy for the first time at the age of 35 years or older."

Brian d marge

20th January 2018, 19:46

At what point will people realise .. different face same turd..

Nowt will change .. maybe a less corrupted

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

RDJ

20th January 2018, 19:51

Here's a better rebuttal for you then. Fuck off, you total CUNT. What a thick CUNT you are. Do you know, she didn't fucking know she was preggers until AFTER the fucking election, you self righteous CUNT? And what the fuck would you know about *integrity* ? You don't even quote fucking FACTS! Dopey cunt.

She didn't know she was pregnant until after the election? My oh my. You've got yourself a fact-free zone right there. Studying up on the early signs of pregnancy might help you in the future. Top tip: telling other people you are pregnant is not the same as knowing that you are pregnant.

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 19:55

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 20:07

You are approaching this as if it was a problem. It isnt. I think it is fucking fantastic. It underlines the step change (not to mention the generational change) we now have, the changing of the guard and so forth.

Progress is good - agreed, but to turn a blind eye to reality in the name of 'Progress' is moronic.

Is it a problem - not yet.
Could it be a problem - there are factors which are unique to the Gender that bears children that could cause it to be a problem - and those factors are worth thinking about.

Just look at the pack of middle aged white MALE cunts the current government replaced.

I'm very quickly getting to a place where anyone that says things like that I consider a Misandrist Racist. And not only that - the worst kind of Racist at that - the one who doesn't believe they are a Racist.

Would you accept it from me if I referred to the Prison population as a Pack of Nigger Cunts? Of course you wouldn't - so why do you accept it from yourself?

At least the KKK and the Alt-right have the common decency to outright declare that they are Racists.

Did I mention I fucking loathe Nazional and after nine years in power their legacy is child poverty, betting the farm on foreign buyers buying overpriced shitholes in Auckland, and generally being a bunch of cunts? Even the ones WITH cunts are cunts. Yes Paula Bennet and JUCOL I am looking at you.

As is your right to do - there's things I don't like about National - but there are also things I don't like about Labour - and given how far to the left they appear to have swung - I dislike them more.

As for you, you can go fuck yourself, and the horse you rode in on if you havent already, and deal.

No Deal. What is with Far-Left wingers and their weird Sexual Fetishes?

I bet if we were in Mrka you would have voted Trump, and that is the most dire insult I would throw at anyone. Fuck y'all.

I would have - for a multitude of Reasons - amongst which was that Hilary was Corrupt as fuck, the Tears at the Left wing establishment both would have and have been absolutely joyous to behold.

But I have to ask - is having a different Political viewpoint such a grievous Sin?

The way you carry on, it's like I've murdered the Pope by simply disagreeing with you. And I'd take a really. Really. REALLY long hard look in the Mirror about that.

Look at the history of Far-Left wing institutions that get into power and how they dealt with someone with a differing Viewpoint/political philosophy - then consider how angrily you react.

HenryDorsetCase

20th January 2018, 20:19

Progress is good - agreed, but to turn a blind eye to reality in the name of 'Progress' is moronic.

Is it a problem - not yet.
Could it be a problem - there are factors which are unique to the Gender that bears children that could cause it to be a problem - and those factors are worth thinking about.

I'm very quickly getting to a place where anyone that says things like that I consider a Misandrist Racist. And not only that - the worst kind of Racist at that - the one who doesn't believe they are a Racist.

Would you accept it from me if I referred to the Prison population as a Pack of Nigger Cunts? Of course you wouldn't - so why do you accept it from yourself?

At least the KKK and the Alt-right have the common decency to outright declare that they are Racists.

As is your right to do - there's things I don't like about National - but there are also things I don't like about Labour - and given how far to the left they appear to have swung - I dislike them more.

No Deal. What is with Far-Left wingers and their weird Sexual Fetishes?

I would have - for a multitude of Reasons - amongst which was that Hilary was Corrupt as fuck, the Tears at the Left wing establishment both would have and have been absolutely joyous to behold.

But I have to ask - is having a different Political viewpoint such a grievous Sin?

The way you carry on, it's like I've murdered the Pope by simply disagreeing with you. And I'd take a really. Really. REALLY long hard look in the Mirror about that.

Hey cunt, if you did murder the pope you would go up in my estimation, because religion is the worst thing we as a species have inflicted on ourselves, by far.

It is a grievous sin to have a have a stupid opinion especially if it differs from mine, which by definition is the correct one.

As for the rest of it, fuck you, I've been drinking and can't be bothered.

AllanB

20th January 2018, 20:32

I've been drinking and can't be bothered.

What ya drinking HDC? I've a nice Sav on the go.

Brian d marge

20th January 2018, 20:35

I'm a mechanic and I use lots of posh sounding words , then sit back and watch the confused ..... Hours of fun

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Graystone

20th January 2018, 20:37

Fuck the morning sickness and impaired capacity, that shit's all bollocks anyway. The downside here is just that we're stuck with fucking winston cuntfacing peters as acting pm while her Jacindaness is on maternity leave.

Should have put Bill in 2ic position, god knows he's got the experience.

Swoop

20th January 2018, 20:38

I seem to recall a little "tiff" running up to the election when some media person commented about pregnancies, etc.
Perhaps the parliamentary rumor mill had already heard something?

sidecar bob

20th January 2018, 20:42

She's a super intelligent, caring woman, that actually wants to help the av Joe. What's not to like about that? Dopey Cunt.

She's going to be very dissapointed when she discovers she's not actually pregnant & finds your boots hanging out of her arse. :msn-wink:

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 20:49

Hey cunt, if you did murder the pope you would go up in my estimation, because religion is the worst thing we as a species have inflicted on ourselves, by far.

No, that would be Communism.

Followed very closely by Soap Operas.

It is a grievous sin to have a have a stupid opinion especially if it differs from mine, which by definition is the correct one.

And that is exactly the Justification the Stasi used when they were rounding up people for Torture and Murder
And Angkor
And the SSD

I'm not being contrary for the sake of it - you may be having a laugh, you may have had a drink - but your posts give off the same stench of totalitarian resentment that fuelled the biggest Genocides in human history.

RDJ

20th January 2018, 20:55

Graystone

20th January 2018, 21:11

I'm not being contrary for the sake of it - you may be having a laugh, you may have had a drink - but your posts give off the same stench of totalitarian resentment that fuelled the biggest Genocides in human history.

Dial it back a notch sunshine, he's clearly taking the piss; you on the other hand, judging the whole for the conditions of the few isn't a squeaky clean way of thinking...

pritch

20th January 2018, 21:42

No Deal. What is with Far-Left wingers and their weird Sexual Fetishes?
.

Nah that's the territory of the right. Better yet if they are from the religous right. As an example I give you Graham Capill. You can add Roy Moore if you want to go international.

Trump voters tend to be one of two types, billionaires or fuckwits. If in doubt just check your bank balance. :whistle:

ellipsis

20th January 2018, 21:54

- but your posts give off the same stench of totalitarian resentment that fuelled the biggest Genocides in human history.

...wanker...

ellipsis

20th January 2018, 21:55

Apologies for interrupting the invective narrative (not), but back to the facts of the situation; I believe (and am sure colourful corrections will swiftly follow if I misremember) that Labour campaigned vociferously on 26 weeks parental leave but Ardern only requires 6 weeks.

So - when it's everyone else we taxpayers need to suck it up & pay them for 6 months because Oh The Humanity... but the woperson in the most responsible job in the country needs only 6 weeks? Which is it...

26 weeks' parental leave is an important principle for all wopeople; or it isn't. Pick one, hmmm?

...wanker...

TheDemonLord

20th January 2018, 21:56

Nah that's the territory of the right. Better yet if they are from the religous right. As an example I give you Graham Capill.

I'm not saying the right wing are perfect - but a while ago there was a Left-wing article that seemed to be advocating for the rights of Pedophiles (if memory serves) - His comment kinda reminded me of that.

There's been a few other Left wing articles along similar lines - basically advocating for the rights of those poor repressed Predators. One in particular basically argued that you shouldn't fire Left wing Politicians (who've committed Sexual assault) because they at "Vote for womens rights" (in reference to Abortion)

Brian d marge

20th January 2018, 22:14

...wanker...All those half babies swimming for their little ( future ) lives ..... All in vein

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

husaberg

20th January 2018, 22:52

Brian d marge

20th January 2018, 22:53

Not sure if you know it but elected officials don't get paid parental or maternity leave.
Also given the choice i would rather have someone not mention they might have a baby after they are elected than not mention they are infact a raging alcoholic.It would bankrupt the country

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Crasherfromwayback

20th January 2018, 23:30

She's going to be very dissapointed when she discovers she's not actually pregnant & finds your boots hanging out of her arse. :msn-wink:

Rather have my head up her arse, that up your own like yourself.

RDJ

21st January 2018, 07:26

Not sure if you know it but elected officials don't get paid parental or maternity leave.

Yeah, I am aware elected officials don't get maternity or paternity leave. My point is that if the officials are going to use our money to impose a very costly policy on everybody else, it should apply to them on the principle of consistency. Otherwise where is their rationale? (Rhetorical q.)

Katman

21st January 2018, 07:37

Dial it back a notch sunshine, he's clearly taking the piss; you on the other hand, judging the whole for the conditions of the few isn't a squeaky clean way of thinking...

He's autistic.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 08:34

He's autistic.

Clearly you could also learn not to judge the whole for the conditions of the few.

mashman

21st January 2018, 08:42

She's likely already used to being knackered. I hope she breastfeeds on TV.

husaberg

21st January 2018, 10:17

Yeah, I am aware elected officials don't get maternity or paternity leave. My point is that if the officials are going to use our money to impose a very costly policy on everybody else, it should apply to them on the principle of consistency. Otherwise where is their rationale? (Rhetorical q.)
From what i understand most if not all countries do not actually have maternity or any form of parental leave for elected officials.
It should be noted it appears however they also have no way of deducting their salary while they take leave such as jacinda intends to.
Many MPs and even prime ministers go on holidays and overses trips as holidays rather than official visits all of which are not deducted from their salary.

Thus it appears she will be paid regardless. So your point is rather moot. she could if she wished take 6 months leave or a year its up to her.
For instance MP Todd Barclay enjoyed a two-month sun-filled tour of Italy, Croatia and Greece all while receiving a $3000 a week taxpayer-funded pay packet. then after the election was paid for another 3 months.
As all MP's after each election also get paid for three months at full salary if they don't get elected or don't stand.
But what are your thoughts on elected officials not declaring their alcoholism compared to that they may get or may be pregnant?

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 10:38

This guy seems to know what it's all about!

https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1881091321922349/?hc_ref=ARQjp5KycPVQB9MZPe8rTe_L-y-hm7ro2XWH3wT2ZmperWpjdsXIQKCoxBu-CKDUYHs

Not.

RDJ

21st January 2018, 10:42

(Answering husaberg)

Since my thoughts are never going to be enshrined in law I do feel free to advise :-)

In my opinion, physical and mental 'presentations' (mental even more than physical) should be monitored and recorded for all people in positions of power and responsibility. I see no reason why politicians should be any different than, for example, commercial airline pilots - they should be subject to mandatory documented health checks for similar reasons. That would include liver function tests as well as mental function tests when the history and examination findings so indicate.

On occasions where I work offshore I am required to be breath-tested and occasionally urine-tested both on a scheduled and a random basis, along with everybody else on the installation, for the safety of everybody we work with. Don't see any reason whatsoever why we don't apply those rules to politicians and those standing for office. When we go offshore we know D&A testing is a requirement of the position. No big deal.

For me the issue is not so much payment of MPs whether Barclay or Ardern - after all, criminals get ACC payouts, and people accused of very serious offences indeed continue to get paid until they are convicted - but the usual detached view MPs have of the rest of us, which is we've gotta fund their pet projects, but they feel under no obligation to subject themselves to the same restrictions as we deplorable voters.

Of course the PM 'can' take as long off, as she likes. But we hire her to run a country, & she was elected on the basis she was transparently fit for purpose, not to swan off on maternity leave. As she is a mother-to-be I wish her very well both for her and her baby's sake. That doesn't distract or detract from the significant risk to the task of being NZ's PM, of a possible lengthy perinatal absence from work...

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 10:54

[I]

Of course the PM 'can' take as long off, as she likes. But we hire her to run a country, & she was elected on the basis she was transparently fit for purpose, not to swan off on maternity leave. .

Listen you stupid cunt. She's said she'll take six weeks off, as any human has the fucking right to do. IF she takes more, rark her up here then. If not, just shut the fuck up. How many rounds of golf did John Key play? How many rounds has Jacinda had so far? Did we pay JK to play fucking golf? I bet he had the equivalent of six weeks worth of golf in his time licking arse.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 11:09

She's said she'll take six weeks off, as any human has the fucking right to do.

NZ employment law is we get 4 weeks per year, and this does not need to be made available until the end of the first year. So it's not something any human has the right to do.

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 11:40

NZ employment law is we get 4 weeks per year, and this does not need to be made available until the end of the first year. So it's not something any human has the right to do.

That's called annual leave. Someone needs to study up on maternity leave. You'd be a cunt to work for.

https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/

T.W.R

21st January 2018, 11:51

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 11:52

How many rounds of golf did John Key play? How many rounds has Jacinda had so far? Did we pay JK to play fucking golf? I bet he had the equivalent of six weeks worth of golf in his time licking arse.

How many rounds of Golf last 18 years?

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 12:02

How many rounds of Golf last 18 years?

Prob every one you play, you unco cunt.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 12:10

That's called annual leave. Someone needs to study up on maternity leave. You'd be a cunt to work for.

https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/

6 weeks maternity leave isn't something the govt gives any human the right to, any woman yes, human, no. Have a read of this.

https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/

pritch

21st January 2018, 12:22

This guy seems to know what it's all about!

https://www.facebook.com/NowThisPolitics/videos/1881091321922349/?hc_ref=ARQjp5KycPVQB9MZPe8rTe_L-y-hm7ro2XWH3wT2ZmperWpjdsXIQKCoxBu-CKDUYHs

Not.

Thanks for that. I had quoted the "very stable genius" on my Facebook page but didn't have the clip.

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 12:35

6 weeks maternity leave isn't something the govt gives any human the right to, any woman yes, human, no. Have a read of this.

https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/

Ummmm..think you're the one that needs to read that bro.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 12:54

Ummmm..think you're the one that needs to read that bro.

Try the clicky questiony bit, cunts only give me two weeks.

https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/#parentalleavecalc

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 13:00

Try the clicky questiony bit, cunts only give me two weeks.

https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/#parentalleavecalc

Best you not get preggers then.

RDJ

21st January 2018, 13:09

Listen you stupid cunt. She's said she'll take six weeks off, as any human has the fucking right to do. IF she takes more, rark her up here then. If not, just shut the fuck up. How many rounds of golf did John Key play? How many rounds has Jacinda had so far? Did we pay JK to play fucking golf? I bet he had the equivalent of six weeks worth of golf in his time licking arse.

Wow. You're still so angry. Hungover, or just being you?

Katman

21st January 2018, 13:14

Clearly you could also learn not to judge the whole for the conditions of the few.

Don't look at it as a judgement - see it as an explanation.

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 13:25

Wow. You're still so angry. Hungover, or just being you?

Def not angry. Just saying it like I see it. If I think some cunt is being a dopey cunt, I'll gen just tell them. Dopey Cunt.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 13:29

Don't look at it as a judgement - see it as an explanation.

That sort of explanation is similarly antiquated to his explanation that women are impaired through maternity.

YellowDog

21st January 2018, 13:38

Does anyone on here actually understand how maternity or paternity leave works?

Does anyone on here actually understand why most parents can't afford to take their full entitlement?

The PM can afford to take her full entitlement. I doubt that she will do so, for other reasons, and is most likely to take the absolute minimum, with au pairs and Nannies taking up the slack.

All professional females, in top jobs, would do exactly the same. This isn't something new :no:

FJRider

21st January 2018, 14:27

Try the clicky questiony bit, cunts only give me two weeks.

Both you AND your partner can't take 52 weeks off (paid) at the same time ...

RDJ

21st January 2018, 14:51

That sort of explanation is similarly antiquated to his explanation that women are impaired through maternity.

Physiology, chaps, physiology and anatomy. I fully appreciate that your generation's belief is that DNA & science are non-determinative, but - reality does continue to play a part in what men, women and otherkins can actually achieve. There are reasons why there are separate men and womens' sports. There are reasons why some men don't do as well as those with other grades of melanin in certain sports, and do better in other sports, plus math etc. I understand this doesn't conform to your view that all one has to do to overcome reality is feelz... But again, let's see what happens.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 15:15

Physiology, chaps, physiology and anatomy. I fully appreciate that your generation's belief is that DNA & science are non-determinative, but - reality does continue to play a part in what men, women and otherkins can actually achieve. There are reasons why there are separate men and womens' sports. There are reasons why some men don't do as well as those with other grades of melanin in certain sports, and do better in other sports, plus math etc. I understand this doesn't conform to your view that all one has to do to overcome reality is feelz... But again, let's see what happens.

And the day they bring in winston-tossing (preferably out the top windows of parliament) I'll be all in favour of electing the Man with the mostly manly of mustachioed biceps; until then, how about we let the woman who got elected on her merit for the position, have a fair go at performing her duty in it.

Grumph

21st January 2018, 15:19

:facepalm: Do the math....the pregnancy is most likely the result of celebrating the election result.... :yes: she'd be a pretty wicked piece of kit if the night she rode bareback she realised she was up the duff that instant :blink:

Plus as has been made public, they had been told that pregnancy was unlikely without specialised assistance. Must have come as a shock....

As I understand the Parliamentary setup, she gets no maternity leave. She will have to apply to the speaker for the leave she wishes to take.
Same deal for any MP wanting time off.

jasonu

21st January 2018, 15:38

And the day they bring in winston-tossing (preferably out the top windows of parliament) I'll be all in favour of electing the Man with the mostly manly of mustachioed biceps; until then, how about we let the woman who got elected on her merit for the position, have a fair go at performing her duty in it.

She wasn't elected. She bargained her way into the job.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 15:44

She wasn't elected. She bargained her way into the job.

You say that like those are different things? :scratch:

jasonu

21st January 2018, 15:46

Not sure if you know it but elected officials don't get paid parental or maternity leave.
.

Apparently not the case.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11979183

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 15:48

She wasn't elected. She bargained her way into the job.

So what? Not like National weren't trying to do the very same thing. They just failed is all. Like they've failed NZ, for the last 9 years.

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 15:56

That sort of explanation is similarly antiquated to his explanation that women are impaired through maternity.

On a purely technical level - Women are impaired by Maternity.

I don't mean in a perjurative sense:

In the first trimester there is Morning Sickness
In the third trimester you've got the added weight and inconvenience of a baby bump, not to mention the fact that you might have to drop everything you are doing and rush to Hospital.
Straight after birth you've got some raging hormonal mood swings
Then for the first year - if you are breastfeeding - then you either have to be available 24/7 or you have get expressing at regular intervals.
You've also got the risk of postnatal depression.
There is also a fair deal of research that suggests that women (on average) prefer to be heavily involved in the first year, typically until the baby starts to get Mobile -
which incidentally is when Dads start to engage in physical/rough and tumble play.
Finally - I'm not sure if this is backed by research, but anecdotally - all the Mothers I know - if they are away from their child tend to worry about said child. Often getting distracted on tangents wondering if they are okay.

Now, Am I saying it's impossible for Jacinda to be able to give 100% to being PM? No. I'm not saying that.

What I am saying is that statistically, the numbers aren't in Jacindas favor and that there are Biological hurdles she will have to jump over that Men and Fathers don't have to.

jasonu

21st January 2018, 15:57

So what? Not like National weren't trying to do the very same thing. They just failed is all. Like they've failed NZ, for the last 9 years.

That's alright. Soon you lot will have a PM that pretty much no one voted for.:niceone::niceone::niceone:

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 15:58

Does anyone on here actually understand how maternity or paternity leave works?

Fyi - NZ doesn't have Paternity leave....

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 16:01

That's alright. Soon you lot will have a PM that pretty much no one voted for.:niceone::niceone::niceone:

I'm ok with that. Rather Winnie than that lying two faced ponytail pulling CUNT that is John Key!:msn-wink:

Graystone

21st January 2018, 16:03

On a purely technical level - Women are impaired by Maternity.

I don't mean in a perjurative sense:

In the first trimester there is Morning Sickness
In the third trimester you've got the added weight and inconvenience of a baby bump, not to mention the fact that you might have to drop everything you are doing and rush to Hospital.
Straight after birth you've got some raging hormonal mood swings
Then for the first year - if you are breastfeeding - then you either have to be available 24/7 or you have get expressing at regular intervals.
You've also got the risk of postnatal depression.
There is also a fair deal of research that suggests that women (on average) prefer to be heavily involved in the first year, typically until the baby starts to get Mobile -
which incidentally is when Dads start to engage in physical/rough and tumble play.
Finally - I'm not sure if this is backed by research, but anecdotally - all the Mothers I know - if they are away from their child tend to worry about said child. Often getting distracted on tangents wondering if they are okay.

Now, Am I saying it's impossible for Jacinda to be able to give 100% to being PM? No. I'm not saying that.

What I am saying is that statistically, the numbers aren't in Jacindas favor and that there are Biological hurdles she will have to jump over that Men and Fathers don't have to.

So, are we also supposed to be prejudiced against:
Sick cunts
fat cunts
moody cunts
cunts who have to regularly expel fluids
more moody cunts
loving cunts
caring cunts

Those are your biological hurdles that men don't have to jump over?

husaberg

21st January 2018, 16:03

Apparently not the case.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11979183
Its a wording gaff, she gets her salary and plans to donate part of it while she is taking leave.
What it means is there is no actual legal obligation to keep her job open.
www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/01/jacinda-ardern-not-eligible-for-paid-parental-leave.html (http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/01/jacinda-ardern-not-eligible-for-paid-parental-leave.html)

Fyi - NZ doesn't have Paternity leave....
Some contracts do have provision for it.
As does the law
Partner’s leave

Fathers or partners are entitled to:

one week of unpaid leave if they’ve worked for you for six months for at least an average of 10 hours a week, or
two weeks of unpaid leave if they’ve worked for you for 12 months for at least an average of 10 hours a week.

https://www.business.govt.nz/hiring-and-managing/handling-holidays-and-leave/parental-leave/

<strike>
</strike>

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 16:06

Now, Am I saying it's impossible for Jacinda to be able to give 100% to being PM? No. I'm not saying that.

What I am saying is that statistically, the numbers aren't in Jacindas favor and that there are Biological hurdles she will have to jump over that Men and Fathers don't have to.

How did Old Lizzy get on? And her Mum before her? Maybe they're just made of far better stuff than yourself, as I've mentioned before. I'm willing to bet you, 10 cases of Steinie, that everything will go as planned, if the baby is hatched. Shall we call that a bet?

ellipsis

21st January 2018, 16:20

jasonu

21st January 2018, 16:34

I'm ok with that. Rather Winnie than that lying two faced ponytail pulling CUNT that is John Key!:msn-wink:

Are you saying JayKay would have won if he stayed in the running?

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 17:06

So, are we also supposed to be prejudiced against:
Sick cunts
fat cunts
moody cunts
cunts who have to regularly expel fluids
more moody cunts
loving cunts
caring cunts

Those are your biological hurdles that men don't have to jump over?

Its funny you say that - cause yeah, we do.

Sick Cunts - sickness benefits and ACC for those who can't work due to illness and accidents

Fat Cunts - when was the last time you saw a morbidly obese air steward/stewardess?

Moody Cunts - psychological evaluations are job requirements for some fields and failure means termination.

Cunts who have to regularly expel fluids - if it's getting to the point that your work is suffering...

Loving Cunts/Caring Cunts - there are a number of fields where being too agreeable means you are unable to perform your job role correctly. And in the wider context of business - being disagreeable is a predictor for long term success.

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 17:07

Its a wording gaff, she gets her salary and plans to donate part of it while she is taking leave.
What it means is there is no actual legal obligation to keep her job open.
www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/01/jacinda-ardern-not-eligible-for-paid-parental-leave.html (http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/01/jacinda-ardern-not-eligible-for-paid-parental-leave.html)

Some contracts do have provision for it.
As does the law
Partner’s leave

Fathers or partners are entitled to:

one week of unpaid leave if they’ve worked for you for six months for at least an average of 10 hours a week, or
two weeks of unpaid leave if they’ve worked for you for 12 months for at least an average of 10 hours a week.

https://www.business.govt.nz/hiring-and-managing/handling-holidays-and-leave/parental-leave/

<strike>
</strike>

I should have clarified: Paid Paternity leave.

Woodman

21st January 2018, 17:11

She wasn't elected. She bargained her way into the job.

Ooooh maybe that explains the baby. Next time she will just give blowjobs I bet.

Crasherfromwayback

21st January 2018, 17:16

Are you saying JayKay would have won if he stayed in the running?

Not that it matters, as he wasn't. But yeah, I think the cunts that are the Nats would've stayed in power if JK was still at the helm. Lots of thick as fuck Kiwis seem to like the cunt. Bit like Yanks liking Trump.

Murray

21st January 2018, 17:19

Plus as has been made public, they had been told that pregnancy was unlikely without specialised assistance. Must have come as a shock....

The force with Winston is strong! Anything for a spell as P.M.

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 17:21

How did Old Lizzy get on? And her Mum before her? Maybe they're just made of far better stuff than yourself, as I've mentioned before.

I'm presuming you mean The Royal family yes?

In which case it's an interesting comparison - but not one I think is fully accurate. To start a Royal isn't elected. They are king or queen regardless. Secondly a royal is groomed for the position - at every stage of their life with a strong emphasis on the responsibility of the position. Finally - the Queen does not run the day-to-day operations of the government. As far as politics goes, she merely has to provide the royal assent to make proposed legislation into Law. Now I know the Queen has a metric tonne of other duties (suchas patron to something like 800 charities I think) but those things can be put on hold.

I'm willing to bet you, 10 cases of Steinie, that everything will go as planned, if the baby is hatched. Shall we call that a bet?

Okay - define the parameters that constitute 'go as planned' that we both agree on - I can't bring myself to buy 10 cases of Steinlager (on principal, not finances). But my tipple of choice is Vodka - how ever much Steinlager you can get for ~$50.

PM me with how you'd want to take delivery or how you'd want to drop it off. If we can agree on the bet, then I will take you up on the offer.

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 17:22

...an even bigger wanker than before...

Oh Sweetiepie, are you feeling left out?

Graystone

21st January 2018, 17:22

Its funny you say that - cause yeah, we do.

Sick Cunts - sickness benefits and ACC for those who can't work due to illness and accidents

Fat Cunts - when was the last time you saw a morbidly obese air steward/stewardess?

Moody Cunts - psychological evaluations are job requirements for some fields and failure means termination.

Cunts who have to regularly expel fluids - if it's getting to the point that your work is suffering...

Loving Cunts/Caring Cunts - there are a number of fields where being too agreeable means you are unable to perform your job role correctly. And in the wider context of business - being disagreeable is a predictor for long term success.

So what's the problem if men have to jump over the same hurdles? Our PM is nowhere near being unfit for her position on any of those counts, so why the hullabaloo?

pritch

21st January 2018, 17:26

Heard one I liked today. Trump payed the porn star US$130,000 to keep her mouth shut. Thereby becoming the first person ever to pay a porn star to keep her mouth closed.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 17:26

Secondly a royal is groomed for the position - at every stage of their life with a strong emphasis on the responsibility of the position.

Bout time we gave monarchy's another shot, democracy only works with an intelligent populace, which our society is too decadent to maintain. I'd vote for a monarchy over any of this other shit anyway, let's just leave her Jacindaness in power until her kid comes of age.

Swoop

21st January 2018, 17:51

Woodman

21st January 2018, 18:04

So, according to Te NEWS tonight, we are going to have mandatory gratuitous shots of Jacinda's guts each time she is interviewed OR simply in the footage.
It seems the woman's gossip magazines have taken over the "mainstream"* news presentations.

* (laughable description really)

Correct, it's "parental leave".
https://www.employment.govt.nz/leave-and-holidays/parental-leave/eligibility/

Now I don't mind Jacinda Adearn, didn't vote for her but she seems to have the right stuff even if I disagree with (not all) her policies, but if she starts getting comfortable with the womans mags any respect will be gone.

Actually I wonder what the rules are around her selling her story to the womans magazines?

jasonu

21st January 2018, 18:30

Actually I wonder what the rules are around her selling her story to the womans magazines?

Doesn't matter. It's all you are going to hear about until prolly forever.

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 19:09

So what's the problem if men have to jump over the same hurdles? Our PM is nowhere near being unfit for her position on any of those counts, so why the hullabaloo?

That's a massive false equivalence and you know it. Simply put - do Men have to deal with any of those when they have Children? The answer is no....

Katman

21st January 2018, 19:14

That's a massive false equivalence and you know it. Simply put - do Men have to deal with any of those when they have Children? The answer is no....

Fuck up shitforbrains.

FJRider

21st January 2018, 19:28

That's a massive false equivalence and you know it. Simply put - do Men have to deal with any of those when they have Children? The answer is no....

But JA has now comfortably sown up "The women's vote" for the next three elections ... :whocares:

Graystone

21st January 2018, 19:30

That's a massive false equivalence and you know it. Simply put - do Men have to deal with any of those when they have Children? The answer is no....

Do women? The answer is also no. So what's the false equivalence?

Every pregnancy, every woman, every man is different, so judge them only on their ability.

FJRider

21st January 2018, 19:32

Fuck up shitforbrains.

another witty comeback ... you're so full of them ... :Playnice:

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 19:37

Fuck up shitforbrains.

At least now I know what to get you for Christmas.

https://www.amazon.com/Oxford-Picture-Dictionary-Monolingual-English/dp/0194349977/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1516520204&sr=1-2&keywords=kids+dictionary

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 19:39

Do women? The answer is also no. So what's the false equivalence?

Every pregnancy, every woman, every man is different, so judge them only on their ability.

Except for one teeny tiny detail.

Women get Pregnant.
Men Don't.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 19:41

Except for one teeny tiny detail.

Women get Pregnant.
Men Don't.

So what? Men get prostate cancer, women don't.

Pregnancy is no guarantee of any of those outcomes. Your false equivalence is trying to make out that it does.

Katman

21st January 2018, 19:53

Your false equivalence is trying to make out that it does.

Dude, accept the fact that you will never win.

Refer post #1131.

Woodman

21st January 2018, 20:00

But JA has now comfortably sown up "The women's vote" for the next three elections ... :whocares:

Oh yean her spin team are going to be all over this kid. I hope for the kids sake that she doesn't allow it.

sidecar bob

21st January 2018, 20:05

Not that it matters, as he wasn't. But yeah, I think the cunts that are the Nats would've stayed in power if JK was still at the helm. Lots of thick as fuck Kiwis seem to like the cunt. Bit like Yanks liking Trump.

No no, you made a mistake, the thick as fuck kiwis had Labour polling at fuck all until several weeks out from the election, then, without any discernible policy changes, miss congeniality takes centre stage & dopey cunts fawn over her & the tables are turned.
Fuck knows.

Katman

21st January 2018, 20:06

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 20:11

So what? Men get prostate cancer, women don't.

Pregnancy is no guarantee of any of those outcomes. Your false equivalence is trying to make out that it does.

But Women also get Cancer....

Sure, it's no Guarantee, but then riding headfirst into a brick wall at 100 Kph is no guarantee of Death either....

We tend to deal with majority cases though....

sidecar bob

21st January 2018, 20:11

Bitter, much?

No, I'm incredibly chilled out & relaxed these days. :niceone:
You should try not having to work too.

Graystone

21st January 2018, 20:21

But Women also get Cancer....

Sure, it's no Guarantee, but then riding headfirst into a brick wall at 100 Kph is no guarantee of Death either....

We tend to deal with majority cases though....

Majority cases? Best you back that one up, history is littered with despots and tyrants persecuting groups of people based on their idea of what represents the 'majority' of cases.

You should probably also be aware, majority is not enough for a conclusive judgment. Not in any sort of enlightened, merit based system anyway.

Katman

21st January 2018, 20:32

I'm not being contrary for the sake of it - you may be having a laugh, you may have had a drink - but your posts give off the same stench of totalitarian resentment that fuelled the biggest Genocides in human history.

Majority cases? Best you back that one up, history is littered with despots and tyrants persecuting groups of people based on their idea of what represents the 'majority' of cases.

Fuck me, are you cunts twins?

Graystone

21st January 2018, 20:38

Fuck me, are you cunts twins?

Are you that much of a thick cunt to think it wasn't deliberate hyperbole on my part to take the piss out of that specific post?

Go find a forum you can access with crayons or something, there's a good boy.

Woodman

21st January 2018, 20:46

No no, you made a mistake, the thick as fuck kiwis had Labour polling at fuck all until several weeks out from the election, then, without any discernible policy changes, miss congeniality takes centre stage & dopey cunts fawn over her & the tables are turned.
Fuck knows.

If crashers celebrity voting is anything to go by, fucken kim kardashian would have got voted in if she had been made leader of the labour party.

TheDemonLord

21st January 2018, 20:52

Majority cases? Best you back that one up, history is littered with despots and tyrants persecuting groups of people based on their idea of what represents the 'majority' of cases.

You should probably also be aware, majority is not enough for a conclusive judgment. Not in any sort of enlightened, merit based system anyway.

For sure - but we aren't talking about prejudice against a group are we?

We are talking about the very real Physiological changes that occur in most women through the period of Pregnancy and into the first year of Motherhood.

Changes that are completely absent in the Male of the Species.

Some of those changes could impede the PM from being able to do the job they were elected to do.

That is something that should be of concern and discussed. Now, I can appreciate the viewpoint of giving Jacinda the benefit of the doubt and letting her prove herself - and there is merit to that notion - I'm not calling for her resignation or saying she can't be PM - but I do think a discussion about it is warranted. Especially given the Timing.

Honest Andy

21st January 2018, 20:53

If crashers celebrity voting is anything to go by, fucken kim kardashian would have got voted in if she had been made leader of the labour party.

who's kim kardholder...?

Graystone

21st January 2018, 20:59

For sure - but we aren't talking about prejudice against a group are we?

We are talking about the very real Physiological changes that occur in most women through the period of Pregnancy and into the first year of Motherhood.

Changes that are completely absent in the Male of the Species.

Some of those changes could impede the PM from being able to do the job they were elected to do.

That is something that should be of concern and discussed. Now, I can appreciate the viewpoint of giving Jacinda the benefit of the doubt and letting her prove herself - and there is merit to that notion - I'm not calling for her resignation or saying she can't be PM - but I do think a discussion about it is warranted. Especially given the Timing.

Preggo women are a group. A group the sane of mind would not want to fuck with, those bitches be crazy!

"Some" and "could", not even close to a certainty.

So what more discussion is needed? What is wrong with the timing?

jasonu

22nd January 2018, 04:51

No no, you made a mistake, the thick as fuck kiwis had Labour polling at fuck all until several weeks out from the election, then, without any discernible policy changes, miss congeniality takes centre stage & dopey cunts fawn over her & the tables are turned.
Fuck knows.

Same as in 2008 all the blacks that didn't usually vote showing up to vote for Obama because of his blackness.

roogazza

22nd January 2018, 06:51

who's kim kardholder...?

334860xxxxx

YellowDog

22nd January 2018, 07:04

Preggo women are a group. A group the sane of mind would not want to fuck with, those bitches be crazy!

"Some" and "could", not even close to a certainty.

So what more discussion is needed? What is wrong with the timing?

So this could all be a part of a 'cunning plan' and an opportunity for the country at achieve a great deal.

No one will want to make the preggers lady cry, so they might just agree with her instead :yes:

The PM is just one voice in a large team. I don't think is will be an issue at all.

TheDemonLord

22nd January 2018, 08:21

Preggo women are a group.

But a Voluntary group...

A group the sane of mind would not want to fuck with, those bitches be crazy!

If - as you say - those Bitches be Crazy - then perhaps a leadership position isn't appropriate.

"Some" and "could", not even close to a certainty.

I've never said it was a certainty - only that Statistics are not in Jacindas favor.

So what more discussion is needed? What is wrong with the timing?

Well, we tried to have the discussion before the election - and everyone had a cry about it - and now a possible scenario has come true - we need to talk about it.

YellowDog

22nd January 2018, 08:37

OMG - The entire world has all of a sudden become unstable with Jancinda's crazed finger hovering over the nuclear button (a virtual one).

That North Korean ugly fat dumpy kid won't know what's hit him.

Swoop

22nd January 2018, 11:48

Fuck me, are you cunts twins?

Speaking of twin cunts.
It has been noted that you have returned now that Cassina has disappeared. Is that your alternate login, per chance?

No Katman = Cassina present.

No Cassina = Katman present.

Hmmm. Coincidence?

jasonu

22nd January 2018, 13:02

Speaking of twin cunts.
Cassina has disappeared

No Katman = Cassina present.

No Cassina = Katman present.

Hmmm. Coincidence?

Not so fast.
See post 17
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/184761-Ditching-Sky-TV-Your-experiences-advice/page2

RDJ

22nd January 2018, 13:34

Doesn't matter. It's all you are going to hear about until prolly forever.

Yep, wot 'e said.

YellowDog

22nd January 2018, 17:24

Speaking of twin cunts.
It has been noted that you have returned now that Cassina has disappeared. Is that your alternate login, per chance?

No Katman = Cassina present.

No Cassina = Katman present.

Hmmm. Coincidence?

Having read many posts from both, unless there is a schizophrenic factor in play, I am certain that Katman & Cassina posts are not composed by the same brain :no:

Graystone

22nd January 2018, 17:33

But a Voluntary group...

If - as you say - those Bitches be Crazy - then perhaps a leadership position isn't appropriate.

I've never said it was a certainty - only that Statistics are not in Jacindas favor.

Well, we tried to have the discussion before the election - and everyone had a cry about it - and now a possible scenario has come true - we need to talk about it.

What does voluntary have to do with it?

Perhaps a joke is though...

She's used to overcoming stats not in her favour.

Perhaps if you had learned why it was inappropriate to discuss this before the election, you'd understand why it is now as well. We don't need to talk about it at all, what is there to discuss? what outcome are you looking for?

Woodman

22nd January 2018, 19:43

Having read many posts from both, unless there is a schizophrenic factor in play, I am certain that Katman & Cassina posts are not composed with a brain :no:

Fixed it for ya.....

TheDemonLord

22nd January 2018, 20:47

What does voluntary have to do with it?

One does not choose to be Black, or female, or disabled. One definitely chooses to have unprotected Sex in this instance.

Perhaps a joke is though...

Been done many time before

She's used to overcoming stats not in her favour.

Indeed, but...

Perhaps if you had learned why it was inappropriate to discuss this before the election, you'd understand why it is now as well. We don't need to talk about it at all, what is there to discuss? what outcome are you looking for?

It was entirely appropriate - because she falls within a very particular demographic of Women, with a very high statistical probability of this occuring - hence why the Question was asked before the election and hence why it was both right to discuss it then and now - and whilst she may be used to overcoming some stats, there are others that she has conformed to, to a T.

Brian d marge

22nd January 2018, 22:55

As it happens live ......334871

fk knows how to get them in the pron folder ...so deal with it

husaberg

22nd January 2018, 22:56

Having read many posts from both, there is a schizophrenic factor in play, I am certain that Katman & Cassina posts are the same :no:

Fixed it for ya.....

Nah,its more like this

eldog

23rd January 2018, 01:32

Speaking of twin cunts.
It has been noted that you have returned now that Cassina has disappeared. Is that your alternate login, per chance?

No Katman = Cassina present.

No Cassina = Katman present.

Hmmm. Coincidence?

reminds me of a song

”puppet on a string”

just who is pulling the strings?

the comments on the videos, didn’t seem to be written by the author.:wari:

husaberg

23rd January 2018, 07:20

reminds me of a song

”puppet on a string”

just who is pulling the strings?

the comments on the videos, didn’t seem to be written by the author.:wari:

Shirley... it has to be the chinese.

https://i1.wp.com/www.seriouseats.com/images/2014/08/20140724-asian-noodle-guide-wonton-noodle-thin-vicky-wasik.jpg?resize=618%2C464 (https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi6sPyrpezYAhWKHpQKHRNOB9oQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fhowto.ankaperla.com%2Fhow-to-cook-fresh-asian-noodles%2F&psig=AOvVaw2dd85ambLRXWzbdh8_WWta&ust=1516735157487213)

Graystone

23rd January 2018, 19:53

One does not choose to be Black, or female, or disabled. One definitely chooses to have unprotected Sex in this instance.

Been done many time before

Indeed, but...

It was entirely appropriate - because she falls within a very particular demographic of Women, with a very high statistical probability of this occuring - hence why the Question was asked before the election and hence why it was both right to discuss it then and now - and whilst she may be used to overcoming some stats, there are others that she has conformed to, to a T.

I get what choice is, but why is it relevant? is it somehow acceptable to judge a whole group from a subset simply because it is a voluntary group?

We could likewise discuss how often JK jacked off, based on particular demographics etc. Of what special relevance is it that she is preggers? and what do you want from its discussion? It's looking awfully like you think women should always be marked down for suitability simply because they can bear our children. That sort of thinking was outdated 20 yeears ago.

Brian d marge

23rd January 2018, 20:02

The elephant in the room being whose cock went near those choppers ...https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180123/52a53e073d1e2e6ee82b64155dd9fefa.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

husaberg

23rd January 2018, 20:17

The elephant in the room being whose cock went near those choppers ...

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Good Sir I think you may have the baby making system backwards.

pritch

23rd January 2018, 20:21

Some of you guys are coming across like the blokes (and women) getting a serve in this.

https://thespinoff.co.nz/parenting/19-01-2018/the-pms-baby-all-the-worst-takes-so-far/

FJRider

23rd January 2018, 20:24

I get what choice is, but why is it relevant? is it somehow acceptable to judge a whole group from a subset simply because it is a voluntary group?

We could likewise discuss how often JK jacked off, based on particular demographics etc.

He has money ... probably pays people to do it for him ... (or asks for volunteers) ... :devil2:

Brian d marge

23rd January 2018, 20:28

Good Sir I think you may have the babby making system backwards.I had a 1 in 3 chance of getting the right hole ... Nowt complaints so far...

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

husaberg

23rd January 2018, 20:34

I had a 1 in 3 chance of getting the right hole ... Nowt complaints so far...

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I will say this jacinda not a patch on your own Mako or Kako.....

TheDemonLord

23rd January 2018, 20:34

I get what choice is, but why is it relevant? is it somehow acceptable to judge a whole group from a subset simply because it is a voluntary group?

If I choose to do something that potentially could hinder my ability to do my job - then absolutely it is relevant to my Job.

We could likewise discuss how often JK jacked off, based on particular demographics etc.

And when a wank requires at a minimum 6 weeks off work, then it would be a relevant comparison.

Of what special relevance is it that she is preggers?

That she is Pregnant, and so soon after taking the job, and that certain people were lambasted for suggesting that since she falls *perfectly* into the demographic of 30 something Career focused woman who is approaching the Biological cut-off point for having a family, NZ might want to consider that they elect her as PM, only for her to take Maternity leave.

Which is exactly what has happened.

and what do you want from its discussion?

A bit of honesty would be a start - people are suggesting that having a child is no imposition on Work, whereas the real world data says not only is it an imposition, that it is so much so that a large number of Competent, Professional women choose not to go back into full-time work once having children.

Further to this, given the Election result, is the possibility of being stuck with a PM who arguably, no one voted for.

At no point am I saying it's a guaranteed thing - but to simply say it's not worthy of discussion or to presume that everything will be fine smacks of a certain idealistic thinking, not grounded in reality.

It's looking awfully like you think women should always be marked down for suitability simply because they can bear our children.

There's quite a few things Women are marked down for, for biological unsuitability - take Israel's mixed Defence force - even with lightened webbing - the Ladies still suffer stress fractures and other serious injury at a rate of about 40%.

Then you've got the effect or prenatal testosterone has a large impact on spatial awareness and on an individuals preference in things vs people

Then the biggest elephant in the room is the distribution curves of IQ between men and women - Women have a much tighter distribution, with Men having a wider distribution (this is in line with greater variability in all traits in Males across all species) - the result is, you don't get many truly stupid women, but you don't get any female Elon Musks or Bill Gates or Mozarts or Da Vinci etc.

That sort of thinking was outdated 20 yeears ago.

And yet, in the last 20 years - 2 things have happened which are interesting:

1: Women have been getting progressively unhappier
2: They are still, in a large proportion, choosing to leave their careers or work part time only, in order to spend more time raising their kids.

Call me Outdated all you want, but there is a Biological (and Neurological) drive, that uniquely effects women. It's the same drive that led people to ask the question before the election. I didn't put it there, I just want a frank discussion about it.

husaberg

23rd January 2018, 20:44

.

Call me Outdated all you want, but there is a Biological (and Neurological) drive, that uniquely effects women. It's the same drive that led people to ask the question before the election. I didn't put it there, I just want a frank discussion about it.
Youre outdated "Frank"
The voters can decide in a few years if she did an okay job or not. Its a bit early to suggest what has not actually occued yet, is an legitimate impediment to her performance or not.
When she starts selling off assets for zero gain, pulling girls ponytails or mincing about on catwalks and doing three handed handshakes i will of course agree with all your points wholeheartedly.

Woodman

23rd January 2018, 20:51

If I choose to do something that potentially could hinder my ability to do my job - then absolutely it is relevant to my Job.

To be fair, having a child may improve how she does her job. Also Helen Clarke, who oddly also had weird teeth was accused of not being able to do her job properly because she did not have children.

Katman

23rd January 2018, 20:57

Call me Outdated all you want.

I'll stick with calling you shitforbrains instead.

Graystone

23rd January 2018, 21:02

If I choose to do something that potentially could hinder my ability to do my job - then absolutely it is relevant to my Job.

And when a wank requires at a minimum 6 weeks off work, then it would be a relevant comparison.

That she is Pregnant, and so soon after taking the job, and that certain people were lambasted for suggesting that since she falls *perfectly* into the demographic of 30 something Career focused woman who is approaching the Biological cut-off point for having a family, NZ might want to consider that they elect her as PM, only for her to take Maternity leave.

Which is exactly what has happened.

A bit of honesty would be a start - people are suggesting that having a child is no imposition on Work, whereas the real world data says not only is it an imposition, that it is so much so that a large number of Competent, Professional women choose not to go back into full-time work once having children.

Further to this, given the Election result, is the possibility of being stuck with a PM who arguably, no one voted for.

At no point am I saying it's a guaranteed thing - but to simply say it's not worthy of discussion or to presume that everything will be fine smacks of a certain idealistic thinking, not grounded in reality.

There's quite a few things Women are marked down for, for biological unsuitability - take Israel's mixed Defence force - even with lightened webbing - the Ladies still suffer stress fractures and other serious injury at a rate of about 40%.

Then you've got the effect or prenatal testosterone has a large impact on spatial awareness and on an individuals preference in things vs people

Then the biggest elephant in the room is the distribution curves of IQ between men and women - Women have a much tighter distribution, with Men having a wider distribution (this is in line with greater variability in all traits in Males across all species) - the result is, you don't get many truly stupid women, but you don't get any female Elon Musks or Bill Gates or Mozarts or Da Vinci etc.

And yet, in the last 20 years - 2 things have happened which are interesting:

1: Women have been getting progressively unhappier
2: They are still, in a large proportion, choosing to leave their careers or work part time only, in order to spend more time raising their kids.

Call me Outdated all you want, but there is a Biological (and Neurological) drive, that uniquely effects women. It's the same drive that led people to ask the question before the election. I didn't put it there, I just want a frank discussion about it.

Actually it isn't, pretty sure that sort of discrimination is illegal hiring practice.

So it's just time off work is it? not the bullshit about hormones impairing job performance?

So it's relevance is only to the 'told you so'rs, which are utterly irrelevant.

Honestly, you should shut the fuck up and let her do her job. I'm not sure what other honesty you expect us to give you?

Fuck you're going downhill quick now, she got to where she is based on merit, your ficticious IQ distributions are utterly irrelevant. But out of curiosity, what is Elon Musk's IQ?

Women are getting unhappier? news to me. I can see how the ones you spend time around would be less happy though.

Frankly, there is nothing to discuss about it.

AllanB

23rd January 2018, 21:10

I think it is a marketing dream come true.

She will be fine.

The country will love the baby.

She will gain even more supporters in the sub 50 year old category.

If I was Labours marketing person I'd enjoy the above for close to three years then make darn sure that halfway through the election campaign they both get engaged.

Think of the headlines and that 50 plus set of voters who like her but were worried about a family out of marriage will roll on board.

Bill is going to have to pop out some triplets to trump this one.

Katman

23rd January 2018, 21:24

Fuck you're going downhill quick now, she got to where she is based on merit, your ficticious IQ distributions are utterly irrelevant. But out of curiosity, what is Elon Musk's IQ?

TheDemonLard just loves working conversations around to talking IQs.

Has he told you how he's Mensa material yet?

TheDemonLord

23rd January 2018, 22:59

Actually it isn't, pretty sure that sort of discrimination is illegal hiring practice.

Depends on how you define it - you can't not hire someone on the presumption they are likely to get pregnant in the future - however, reading of the fine print implies that it is not discrimination if you are unable to perform your job (the critieria they list is Medical or safety).

However, I'm not saying she can't do the job and be a Mother - just that there are some trends, which are made up of the free choices of Women - which should be considered - given the political implications.

So it's just time off work is it? not the bullshit about hormones impairing job performance?

Sure - if she sticks to her word (problem is a large amount of Professional women who say they will go back full time, don't), although something you might like to read:

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/how-pregnancy-changes-a-womans-brain.html

TL;DR - Pregnancy rewires a Womans brain, for a period of about 2 years after birth (and what an interesting time frame, given the development of human baby to about the 2 year mark)

So it's relevance is only to the 'told you so'rs, which are utterly irrelevant.

And yet, here we are discussing it - it's obviously relevant enough for you to reply to me...

I raised it more as a point as there was a cadre of people who said it wasn't relevant, and yet, here we are.

Honestly, you should shut the fuck up and let her do her job. I'm not sure what other honesty you expect us to give you?

And isn't it a wonderful world we live in, that we don't have to shut the fuck up about our opinions on our Political leaders. As for the Honesty - how about not even acknowledging the base physiological changes that do have an impact - most notably in the 3rd Trimester?

Fuck you're going downhill quick now, she got to where she is based on merit, your ficticious IQ distributions are utterly irrelevant. But out of curiosity, what is Elon Musk's IQ?

I've never said she didn't get to where she did on Merit.

Ficticious?

http://personal.lse.ac.uk/kanazawa/pdfs/PAID2011.pdf

So - the Median is about the same - but in all the sample sets the SD for Men was higher - this means at the extremes, the differences get multiplied - often expressed in a graph such as:

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-931645bc1d615f2d152a437c6de0f1a7-c

This means at the extremes of IQ - the ratio of Men to Women gets massively skewed. If you still think it's fictitious,

As for Elon Musks IQ - Fuck knows - I'd estimate it in the 150-170 range

Women are getting unhappier? news to me. I can see how the ones you spend time around would be less happy though.

It'll be an interesting read for you then: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14969

Frankly, there is nothing to discuss about it.

If that's how you feel, then you can always not reply, yet you do - so there clearly IS something to discuss about it.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 10:56

To be fair, having a child may improve how she does her job. Also Helen Clarke, who oddly also had weird teeth was accused of not being able to do her job properly because she did not have children.

This is actually a really interesting point - I think the common consensus is that being a Parent gives you a different outlook on life, nothing quite compares to the experience of being a Parent, this experience gives a certain life experience which is valuable and even necessary for making decisions in the top job.

I'd hazard a guess that the ideal is that someone (Man or Woman) has kids, goes through the formative years of their childs life (0-5 years) and then assume the mantle of power (ie once their kids are more self-sufficient)

Crasherfromwayback

24th January 2018, 11:00

However, I'm not saying she can't do the job and be a Mother - just that there are some trends, which are made up of the free choices of Women - which should be considered - given the political implications.

.

Bro...a couple of MP's that I know of ride motorcycles. We shouldn't allow that. They may have an accident, and become brain dead vegetables (like yourself), and be unfit for their jobs. Some MP's might get early onset of dementia (like yourself) and be unfit for their jobs.

IF we were to worry about what MIGHT happen to someone down the track, no CUNT would ever get a fucking job.

Ya fucking Goober.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 11:05

Bro...a couple of MP's that I know of ride motorcycles. We shouldn't allow that. They may have an accident, and become brain dead vegetables (like yourself), and be unfit for their jobs. Some MP's might get early onset of dementia (like yourself) and be unfit for their jobs.

IF we were to worry about what MIGHT happen to someone down the track, no CUNT would ever get a fucking job.

Ya fucking Goober.

Does the PM ride?

No?

Why is that?

Is it because it's a high risk activity that is inappropriate for the LEADER of a country to do?

Dementia however is not something you choose.

I'm also a bit sad you didn't want to go forward with that Bet.

Crasherfromwayback

24th January 2018, 11:07

I'm also a bit sad you didn't want to go forward with that Bet.

It's because you obviously can't read.

Katman

24th January 2018, 11:13

Why is that?

Is it because it's a high risk activity that is inappropriate for the LEADER of a country to do?

What the fuck is 'inappropriate' about the leader of a country riding a motorcycle?

Maybe she's just never had the urge to.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 11:16

It's because you obviously can't read.

Uh Huh.

Either way, Poor Form.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 11:18

What the fuck is inappropriate about the leader of a country riding a motorcycle?

Maybe she's just never had the urge to.

I thought that comment about 'high risk activities' kinda gave it away.

I swear, your interpretation skills were never this bad.

Crasherfromwayback

24th January 2018, 11:19

Uh Huh.

Either way, Poor Form.

Fuck off Knobjob. I offered you a bet, you wanted to change said bet. That makes the form poor by you, not I. You either take the bet as it's offered, or eat a dick. But carry on talking utter shit, it's actually fun to see you digging such a deep hole.

Katman

24th January 2018, 11:22

I thought that comment about 'high risk activities' kinda gave it away.

I swear, your interpretation skills were never this bad.

Dude seriously, your autism is off the charts today.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 12:14

Fuck off Knobjob. I offered you a bet, you wanted to change said bet. That makes the form poor by you, not I. You either take the bet as it's offered, or eat a dick. But carry on talking utter shit, it's actually fun to see you digging such a deep hole.

I wanted to Clarify the terms of said Bet. "Go as planned" is pretty vague. So there could be no accusations of weasling out by either side.

Furthermore - I don't drink Steinlager, so I suggested an alternative - you know, the whole 'If I win, you give me X, if you win, I give you Y' - where X and Y are equivalent value.

But either way, You've chickened out, and I can't be bothered entertaining it further.

Crasherfromwayback

24th January 2018, 13:03

But either way, You've chickened out, and I can't be bothered entertaining it further.

Took you long enough. I forgot all about it as soon as you tried to change $200.00 odd dollars worth of beer into $50.00. Mr Chicken.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 13:07

Took you long enough. I forgot all about it as soon as you tried to change $200.00 odd dollars worth of beer into $50.00. Mr Chicken.

That's simple - I don't drink very much - I probably go through about a Bottle Vodka a year.

$200 worth of Vodka is useless to me.

Crasherfromwayback

24th January 2018, 13:25

$200 worth of Vodka is useless to me.

It might make your arguments and posts a lil better though.

TheDemonLord

24th January 2018, 13:57

It might make your arguments and posts a lil better though.

True....

It would bring them down to a level that you can understand :lol:

Crasherfromwayback

24th January 2018, 14:21

True....

It would bring them down to a level that you can understand :lol:

Fuck no. Need LSD for that.

Banditbandit

24th January 2018, 15:45

Fuck no. Need LSD for that.

:rofl:

I can't give you green bling twice ..

Graystone

24th January 2018, 17:28

TheDemonLard just loves working conversations around to talking IQs.

Has he told you how he's Mensa material yet?

Well I can certainly see why our own Crayola Kid would shy from the topic of IQ...

you can't not hire someone on the presumption they are likely to get pregnant in the future

Seems like kind of the salient point here doesn't it?

So - the Median is about the same - but in all the sample sets the SD for Men was higher - this means at the extremes, the differences get multiplied - often expressed in a graph such as:

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-931645bc1d615f2d152a437c6de0f1a7-c

This means at the extremes of IQ - the ratio of Men to Women gets massively skewed. If you still think it's fictitious,

As for Elon Musks IQ - Fuck knows - I'd estimate it in the 150-170 range

I think you'l find our PM is older than 16...

Yeh probably not a solid point to say IQ is why we don't have female Elon Musks when you don't have a fucking clue what his is then...

If that's how you feel, then you can always not reply, yet you do - so there clearly IS something to discuss about it.

Oh I'm happy to stand up for 'progressive' ideas when some morons are spouting sexist drivel, it's the sexist drivel itself which is not worth discussing.