Piss off, steveb64, that sounds far too intelligent to ever work
That lottery idea would rock, get some intelligent, "real" people in the house not only professional politicians.
Piss off, steveb64, that sounds far too intelligent to ever work
That lottery idea would rock, get some intelligent, "real" people in the house not only professional politicians.
Motorbike Camping for the win!
Oh, do you mean me or the "un-named person" who screams "lefty lefty lefty" every time someone says anything counter to his extreme-right authoritarian views?
Hitler was a "lefty" compared with you and you seem to lack the intellect to understand that "right wing" does not mean "right way".
Motorbike Camping for the win!
Is the last guy on this thread and the one who shouts loudest the winner? Is that how it works?
Its very lucky for you that a clone of General Augusto Pinochet didnt run this country for a couple of decades. That would be a definition of right wing, extremely so. Not too dissimiliar to the pin up boy of many extreme left leaning thinkers, ''Uncle Joe Stalin''
I have spent the whole morning replying to business e-mails, to that end I had the intellect to realise that it was going to be more profitable than arguing with unreformable pseudo communists.
Nothing more to say other than wishing you a good day in generating tax for the current ruling politburo
As opposed to generating tax for your own Conservative pack of control freaks?
Personally, I'm spending my time trying to work out ways of getting authoritarian extremists - across the whole Left-Centre-Right spectrum - out of power in order to restore our lives.
Personally I'm sick of the whole Labour/Green Nanny-state and I'm sick of National's "I-wanna-Be-Like-George-Bush" mentality and the even nastier nanny-state that would engender should they get in power next term.
If the whole fucking lot of them - National, Greens, Labour and Act - all died tomorrow I'd be drunk for the following week.
Motorbike Camping for the win!
Can't fault that actually.
I'm not a total anarchist (in the correct sense of someone who believes we are all inherently good and public-spirited and therefore need no governance), I do believe there are some laws required for the protection of people from the greed and violence of others, but we do not need the level of laws we have now and the existing disparities within them (cruficy a business or individual if some mouth-breather injures themselves through being careless using their product and then let of some bugger who beat a little old lady half to death on the grounds that he's not responsible for his own actions, being from a broken home and all).
We do not need the government in our bedrooms, living rooms and workplaces telling us how to think and behave. We do not need laws that restrict our rights to ridicule or protest against idiotic politicians and policies.
Regrettably I can see the recent laws re not ridiculing the government and the "anti terror" law blossoming under National into our own version of the US "Patriot Act".
I poll towards the left because I believe in state funding of schools, medical services and certain historical/cultural/artistic things (museums, certain galleries etc), not because I support the idea of allowing people to sit on the dole/dpb for their whole lives.
And as to what the government has done to our schools, I believe the NZQA should be merged with OSH so the wastes of oxygen can be driven to suicide by OSH (who can then wipe themselves out in the same way - good riddance to both.)
I want my kids growing up with a quality education, not the NZQA-based shit.
Motorbike Camping for the win!
Mate, what you want is STV.NZ Ditched the upper and lower houses.. Way back when. Can't remember. The memory got lost betwixt the beer and the wine. The room is still there. Its got a piano in it.I would like to propose a 'dual house' parliament, with the lower house having 100 seats, and the upper house 50 seats.The royal commission on changing the voting system did recommend a 2.5% threshold. However by the time the change became law, it has mysteriously mutated into a 5% threshold.Lower house is comprised of 'list' MPs, no 5% threshold, 1% of vote gets you 1 seat. 10.5% gets you 10 seats - 45.9% gets you 45 seats.Heh, you'd never see that one happening. Too much vested interest in keeping power concentrated within the 'in crowd'Unfilled seats get filled by a lottery taken from enrolled AND voting citizens. Simply tick the box for your party vote, then on a SEPARATE form fill in your name and contact details if you want to be eligible for 'the lottery' - and a nice MP's salary. And it would be nice to have some MP's who were not professional politicians!Why entrench the position of PM in law?PM to be selected from party with most MP's - taken from upper and lower houses. BUT - PM must be a member of the upper house.Actually, the Americans elect the whole of the lower house every two years, and do elections for a 3rd of the Senate seats during those 2 year elections. It's a good system that, as we have seen of late, goes some way to at least question and at best halt a bad executive.Move elections out to 4 yearly (helps reduce long term costs), and have an elected 'El Presidente' chosen 2 years after the main elections. (Yes, I know that's what the 'merkins do, but they're allowed to have the occasional 'good idea').Oh hello, that is also an American way of doing things. 'Crossing the floor' as it is called here is not such a drama there.Oh - and secret ballot voting in parliament - members should be allowed to vote their conscience, not as they're dictated to - either by party higher ups, OR peer pressure (aka bullying).
MMP, which I do agree with mostly, served to entrench the party further in NZ politics. The MP is there because of their colours, not because of a group of people could identify with the personally. It must be crap being an MP in such a position and not realistically being able to cross the floor without fear of loosing their job.
Anyway, just chucking some random info out there.
Possibly due to a difference in understanding in terms? To me, "Conservative" = akin to the UK Conservative party which is extreme right (practically zero state funding of anything) and well up on the Authoritarian scale which I equate with loads of invasive and restrictive legislation.
Ironically, in England at the moment a shift to the conservative party might well get rid of a lot of the nanny-state stuff they're complaining of as New Labour is currently only very marginally left of the Conservatives but significantly more Authoritarian.
Here, however, a "conservative party" a la UK would be as right wing and a little more Authoritarian than National.
When you use the term "Conservative", that is what I envision. It could well be your definition differs.
National, Destiny and the UK New Labour and Conservatives are occupying positions on the Political Compass that equate to the area occupied by various Republicans. And the USA is so inherently right wing that even their "Democrats" are mostly Centrists, tending to right authoritarian.
Me, I'm "Republican" in that I firmly believe that NZ should become a republic but I hate to use the term due to its association with the modern equivalent of Benito Mussolini: GW Bush and his pack of rabid fascists.
Motorbike Camping for the win!
me....i just hate labour, and want to see them out!
Helen Clark was even unpopular as a child...... her mother used to have to tie a sausage around Helen's neck to make her dog play with her
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks