Is John a spineless pussy or what?

[Brian d marge]

I agree, and ACC is neither a community approach, nor user pays really. That's my point. I think the split is greater than 80/20, and the ones who don't obey the rules think that's just fine, and it appears that TPTB agree with them.

How about this for a start:

If you are in an unregistered vehicle and have an accident, you are not expected to pay for your own treatment, as that would be patently unfair.

However you should be expected to pay the usual fine for no rego, and you should also be expected to pay the cost of registering the vehicle from the time it was last registered to the the time of the accident.

Even this would not come close to providing the same contribution as those who have paid all the way through (unless maybe you tacked on interest & inflation too - but I wouldn't I'm not that much of a baby-eating ogre), but somehow it would also be seen as unfair to the driver of the unregoed vehicle I'm sure.

Anybody know what the ACC levy is for jetskis btw?

agree here , though I personally would look at the cause of why the person has no WOF /Rego ..

to expensive? I think most people , even the dropkicks would have a legal vehicle if they could

Also i never understood fines , if you have no money , there is no point in asking for more .. ( heres a shovel go dig me some broad band , ya skuzzy !)

I often feel like people get pissed off when they see others taking advantage , or being percieved to , and they themselves are having to work all hours just to remain afloat .

Just imagine if everyone was well cared for and had enough money , suddenly poeple wouldnt worry about the dropkick so much

We have built a consumerist , accusitory non sustainable society .IMHO which can be changed

Instead of pinging someone for 104km/h then handing out a 20 fine , give em demerits , ten demerits , you get comunity work

not an organisational night mare as some comunity work need to be done constantly , such as recycling ( the sorting of the plastics ) or a Government farm , raising food for ,,hospitals

And for that we need a Leader of men ,,,,John.......... John Bull



Stephen

[Ocean1]

you get comunity work

Make me.

[MSTRS:Me]

...you get community work

That i s a sensible option.

Make me.

Then you get a week inside. But not in lieu...CW still stands and must be completed.

[Ocean1]

Then you get a week inside. But not in lieu...CW still stands and must be completed.

Have you had anything to do with CW schemes?

They don’t work like that, they’re a sort of achievement black hole, you get bonus points for failing to turn up. They’re far from being anything resembling work, the cost is hideous and any changes accidentally made in the work area are always to the detriment of the supposed task in hand.

If they can’t make it work for apprentice criminals they won’t make it work for someone who simply refuses to pay a usurious and arbitrary tax. Especially for those that are paying for the same alleged service several times over.

Fuckem.

[pete376403]

I mean I can prove all of my work,I paid tax , etc

how come we cant account for JK when those massive trades went through

and why hasnt the media latched on to this like a bulldog

oh I remember the media made a promise to national

Stephen

You, or your employer can provide work records if they want to, or if they have to (court order, IRD, something like that), but I doubt if they would hand over business records to a journalist making enquiries. It's probably not in M/Ls interests to volunteer this info, and there's no way the NZ government, or its agencies will be asking. And would a foreign company pay any attention to the NZ govt anyway?

[Smifffy]

Have you had anything to do with CW schemes?

They don’t work like that, they’re a sort of achievement black hole, you get bonus points for failing to turn up. They’re far from being anything resembling work, the cost is hideous and any changes accidentally made in the work area are always to the detriment of the supposed task in hand.

If they can’t make it work for apprentice criminals they won’t make it work for someone who simply refuses to pay a usurious and arbitrary tax. Especially for those that are paying for the same alleged service several times over.

Fuckem.

The moll did a lot of work with various SPCA's around the country, and from time to time they would get CW peeps along, particularly if they had a refurb underway or something.

It usually went like this:

• Dudes turn up - late
• Dudes have a smoke, and talk about what's for lunch
• smoko
• 1 dude puts on a boil up - needs a couple of other dudes to help peel & clean etc.
• Rest of the dudes txt their mates, ogle/harass the volunteers, complain to their supervisor about the lack of tools etc
• Argument then punch up
• Boil up is served, voluptuous or blonde volunteers invited to join
• Everyone helps with dishes and agrees it was a good feed
• Smoko
• Pack all the gear back in the van
• Leave - early
  

The next week half of them don't turn up cos they can't be arsed.


True story Bro.

[Ocean1]

True story Bro.

You missed the bit where they biff a few brand new scrub cutters in the river.

[MSTRS:Me]

...

• Dudes turn up - late
• Dudes have a smoke, and talk about what's for lunch
• smoko
• 1 dude puts on a boil up - needs a couple of other dudes to help peel & clean etc.
• Rest of the dudes txt their mates, ogle/harass the volunteers, complain to their supervisor about the lack of tools etc
• Argument then punch up
• Boil up is served, voluptuous or blonde volunteers invited to join
• Everyone helps with dishes and agrees it was a good feed
• Smoko
• Pack all the gear back in the van
• Leave - early
  

The next week half of them don't turn up cos they can't be arsed.


...

Fucken'ell.
PD sure isn't what it used to be.
Seriously, where's the deterrent and who is running the show?

[oldrider]

The moll did a lot of work with various SPCA's around the country, and from time to time they would get CW peeps along, particularly if they had a refurb underway or something.

It usually went like this:

• Dudes turn up - late
• Dudes have a smoke, and talk about what's for lunch
• smoko
• 1 dude puts on a boil up - needs a couple of other dudes to help peel & clean etc.
• Rest of the dudes txt their mates, ogle/harass the volunteers, complain to their supervisor about the lack of tools etc
• Argument then punch up
• Boil up is served, voluptuous or blonde volunteers invited to join
• Everyone helps with dishes and agrees it was a good feed
• Smoko
• Pack all the gear back in the van
• Leave - early
  

The next week half of them don't turn up cos they can't be arsed.


True story Bro.

Par for the course down here too! (may be with out the punch ups perhaps)

Just a nice ride in the van to take up most of the day!

Crime pays, only in New Zealand. (IMHO)

[MisterD]

It is interesting how poorly informed people are about the Greens, and the rabid fear people have of the party that is probably the most committed to the wellbeing of New Zealanders out of all of them. I am politically reasonably well informed (my first degree was a political science degree), and I vote Green because they make sense.

There are basically 2 groups that have a particular fear of the Greens: the religious right, who are surprisingly influential and business lobby have worked hard to discredit the Greens out of fear of having to engage in environmentally responsible business practices. In other words, not trashing the environment in the pursuit of money. They are both very well funded and have run extremely clever PR campaigns over the last few years that have managed to convince Joe and his mates at the pub that the Greens are a bunch of interfering softcocks who want to impose extra taxes and take away their freedom. So Joe et al vote National, who have just raised ACC levies and GST, and are always looking for new laws to pass while taking away constraints on government behaviour.

Oh come on, they Greens are a bunch of idiot far-left control freaks getting elected on the strength of the international Green brand. I reckon that they'll struggle to get 5% without the authentic Green presence of Jeanette.

As an example of how intelligent their policies are lets take their stance on cellphone towers and the dangers of radiation.

Here's Wussel having his arse handed to him on that subject.

[shrub]

Oh come on, they Greens are a bunch of idiot far-left control freaks getting elected on the strength of the international Green brand. I reckon that they'll struggle to get 5% without the authentic Green presence of Jeanette.

As an example of how intelligent their policies are lets take their stance on cellphone towers and the dangers of radiation.

Here's Wussel having his arse handed to him on that subject.

What is "far left", and what is it about them that makes you feel they are either idiots or corntrol freaks? In many ways they are actually more interested in individual freedom and autonomy than any of the other parties. They expect the business sector to take responsibility for their actions, and Sue Bradford wanted to do something about child abuse by drawing a line in the sand though, and the propaganda machine has convinced Joe and his mates at the pub that this means the Greens want to take away all freedom.

Interesting that the Greens are the most supportive of motorcycling of all the parties, and "get" that bikes are not just another way to travel.

[MisterD]

What is "far left", and what is it about them that makes you feel they are either idiots or corntrol freaks?

Idiots? Pretty much everything that comes out of Keith Locke or Catherine Delahunty's mouths...Russel tries so hard to appear sensible and rational but then you read something like his science understanding-free blog post on cellphone towers and despair.

That's just the stuff that they'll say in the open, never mind the times when their real thoughts about culling the dairy herd, limiting peoples ability to have children or having half the seats in parliament controlled by 15% of the population sneak out.

In many ways they are actually more interested in individual freedom and autonomy than any of the other parties. They expect the business sector to take responsibility for their actions, and Sue Bradford wanted to do something about child abuse by drawing a line in the sand though, and the propaganda machine has convinced Joe and his mates at the pub that this means the Greens want to take away all freedom.

Sue Bradford wanted to push her social engineering agenda past the front door of peoples homes...it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that it would have no effect on actual child abuse and that's exactly what we've seen come to pass.

That's why people see them as control freaks because they push laws that impinge up on the freedoms of normal law-abiding people and have no effect on the people that ignore current legislation. Exactly the same as microchipping dogs and the current campaign to lower the BAC limit to 0.05.

It's a shame really, because this country could use a proper, rational, actual Green party that would work with any government to be a moderating influence (as they do in the home of MMP, Germany).

[Ocean1]

Sue Bradford...

Couldn't bring myself to read further, was momentarily indisposed.

Was talking to a very senior paediatric clinician at dinner t’other day, possibly the countries’ leading early childhood learning specialist. I was attempting to wind her up about that hideous troll’s legacy by suggesting I manage a particularly recalcitrant 2 year old of my acquaintance by way of a good old fashioned spanking. “Good idea she said, I do”.

Made my day.

[shrub]

Couldn't bring myself to read further, was momentarily indisposed.

Was talking to a very senior paediatric clinician at dinner t’other day

No, of course you didn't read any further - why get all the info when you have enough to support your misconceptions.

I was having a beer with a (moderately) senior police officer just before Xmas, and he said the repeal of section 51 was brilliant because it gave him and his colleagues another tool to deal with potential problems rather than getting frustrated with the reasonable force defence, knowing that it was only a matter of time before they had a seriously damaged child on their hands. He also said that there wasn't a cop on the beat that would prosecute good parents for a gentle smack.

[MSTRS:Me]

...He also said that there wasn't a cop on the beat that would prosecute good parents for a gentle smack.

A gentle smack, eh? That's what one gives to a mate/child/pet to display affection. It's normally called a pat.
A smack, on the other hand, for punishment/correction purposes should not be 'gentle' - otherwise why would you bother?