No - Example - We were 'sold out' by our own kind around the campaign for ACC.... Then again that's Politics.
Interesting to note that the ACC fund is doing well, with bumper returns.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/brian-fall...ectid=10706732
No - Example - We were 'sold out' by our own kind around the campaign for ACC.... Then again that's Politics.
Interesting to note that the ACC fund is doing well, with bumper returns.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/brian-fall...ectid=10706732
Actually your pal Stoney is a classic example of discussion on this site.
He didn't agree with what I said about ACC Privatisation, therefore he's has concluded that I must be:
1)A National Party Stooge.
2) In the pocket of the Insurers.
3) not deserving of a KTM.
(I am in fact only one of those options)
And just to make sure that he's not exposed to anymore contrary opinions, he's put me on ignore.
An abusive person with a closed mind - don't we already have enough of those in Gummint?
That result was a combination of the investment turnaround and lower than expected claims.
The recovery of the investment market is no surprise, but the fact that they had $500m less claims than expected (and that they levied for) is fucking annoying for a person with three bikes over 600cc...![]()
You mean that he has an opinion, voices it in an emotive manner and in certain respects won't give up his "beliefs/principles" without a fight... I could level the same at yourself, but won't, although I kinda just did, but I'm sure we're mature enough to move passed that... damn him, he sounds like a frikkin tyrant and should be put down immediately
. Me and Stones have our differences, don't we StoneY
, but that doesn't mean that we can't agree a common ground for the common good, or even, heaven forbid, cede to one anothers arguments
...
The pair of you have just demonstrated one of the main things I detest about government. Letting the personalities get in the way of the debate. Not everyone on here does that, which is why i'll still hold that KB'ers could govern![]()
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
I didn't think!!! I experimented!!!
Emotive responses ... maybe
I tend to operate on the level of basic TRUTH thats all
ACC is a nof fault situation yet bikers are being penalised for a lifestyle choice
The myth of the 70$ cross subsidisation - 70$ x 2.15 million = (anyone have a calculator?)
A SHITLOAD more than the $63,000,000 and change our injuries bill was in the year 80/09
I dont need to rest my case on this one, 9,500 of us made it on the lawns of Parliamnet
Just ride.
Just a point on this one, as sooooo many people still don't get it...
That bill of $63M was not only for all injuries in 2009...it includes all injuries from previous years still being covered. The problem with this is that from 1999 , levies were raised to cover projected costs of injuries sustained in (whatever) current year. So jump forward 10 years and Nick the Prick and ACC threw out that $63M as though it had to be paid from the current year's levies.
The real injury cost in 2009 was $24M.
Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks