PM confirms Nov 26 election date

[MisterD]

The trouble is for us is that the kind of voters that can be swayed by a goober dancing about in RWC clothing with a new-age hippy bracelet are not the kind of people I want choosing our PM. Helen Clark had a brain, political nous and dignity - she also had great sense of humour, but it was quite complex which is why you never saw it.

Ah but it's the first rule of sales isn't it? People want to buy from people they like and JK seems to come across as being open and transparent, whereas the only time you felt like you saw the real HC when when she let the likes of "cancerous and corrosive" or "haters and wreckers" slip out. Perhaps she'll lighten up when she finally comes out...

I'm all for having to pass a test and get a licence to enable one to vote though.

(Disclaimer: I have never given my party vote to National and I won't this time either)

[Bald Eagle]

JK seems to come across as being pretty and insincere

There fixed it for you

[MisterD]

Desperate wishful thinking

Likewise..

[shrub]

Ah but it's the first rule of sales isn't it? People want to buy from people they like and JK seems to come across as being open and transparent, whereas the only time you felt like you saw the real HC when when she let the likes of "cancerous and corrosive" or "haters and wreckers" slip out. Perhaps she'll lighten up when she finally comes out...

I'm all for having to pass a test and get a licence to enable one to vote though.

(Disclaimer: I have never given my party vote to National and I won't this time either)

The only problem is he may come across as open and transparent, but in reality he's not. Kind of like John and John's used cars - your best mate and will look after you till the end of time when your chequebook is still in your pocket, but the moment the cheque has cleared he can't be arsed. It will be interesting to see what National do when (if?) the win the election.

[MisterD]

The only problem is he may come across as open and transparent, but in reality he's not. Kind of like John and John's used cars - your best mate and will look after you till the end of time when your chequebook is still in your pocket, but the moment the cheque has cleared he can't be arsed. It will be interesting to see what National do when (if?) the win the election.

Yeah that's the kind of thinking you see over at the Labour Fanzine, sorry, Standard. But he made a whole lot of promises last time...keep WFF, no asset sales etc which have all been kept and this time he's said up front partial sell downs of some assets. He's not going to suddenly jump to some hard-right economic agenda, because a) he wants to go steadily and (in that horrible management-speak) "take people with him" and b) he's pretty centrist / soft-right at heart anyway.

[Banditbandit]

Do tell me who put in place the current level of welfare bullshit we have?

A combination of Labour and National are responsible. Labour introduced social welfare to help those in need in the 1930s .. note "those in need" NOT everyone ...

There was already old age pensions and other things introduced pre-Labour ... The Nats bowed to the middle class pressure "I've paid taxes all my life, I should be entitled ..." and extended the pension scheme to cover everyone - not just those in needs - and at a cost of millions ... Labour tried to Income-test eligibility (would have saved millions) - and the Nats revoked that ... No party is innocent here.

Aww we need to pay all those poor single mothers who got knocked up when they have no money and no education. They're obviously prone to good life choices.

Those poor benificiaries who have been on the dole for years, society has really let them down. We should increase the dole value so it's even easier to actually live on it rather than make it an amount that just covers necessities.

Hmm ... Jenny Shipley, as Minister of Social Welfare, reduced the benefits below the liveable level. Otago University was asked to do some research to find out what the minimum level people could survive on. They offered up a figure, to which Treasury said "too much" and lopped of 10 per cent - and that became the benefit figure. So the benefits were/are 10% below what was an allowance to survive on.

I agree there are issues with the system .. the issue for me is not the actions of the solo mothers, but the effects on the children if the benefit is cut ... or axed.

High level of borrowing from the government to pay bills is a big issue due to NZ's absolutely dire credit situation. National is still going through cutting back whatever bureaucratic crap the Labour party dreamed up to create "jobs". Ooo yay we could all do with more bureaucrats, that's good for the country. Bet if labour got back in they'd start "creating more jobs" for the unemployed and then we'd get another good dose.

Yeah yeah yeah .. go here and read this ...

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/governme...d/jun10/09.htm

Notice in the first table, and subsequent information, that the debt/percentage/GDP figures have been steadily improving but then, in 2008 when the Nats came back to powerr -debt ratios have been sharply increasing ...

Go here and look at this

http://www.ssc.govt.nz/display/document.asp?DocID=7926

Public servant numbers have dropped in 2010 by 0.3 percent since June 2009. A drop of 118 - the first drop in numbers since 1999.

This one gives you the public servant figures as at June, 2008 ..

http://www.voxy.co.nz/national/2008-...service/5/5416

' "In the 12 months to 30 June 2008, the number of public servants increased by 3.6 percent to 45,934. This is the smallest percentage increase over the past eight years," Iain Rennie said.'

118 less Public Servants - yeah yeah massive change ... big deal .. I'll certainly vote for a party that promised massive reductions in beaurocracy and delived a 0.3 per cent reduction

Do you think Labour would cut back spending more than National? No, they'd probably fork out more for votes with some crap about "lower GST at least for fruit". And increase taxes on higher income earners/businesses as labour loves to play the mixing money around society game. I don't want to have some government that penalises people reaching the top in their given profession. That just gives them even more reason to bugger off overseas, which would then doom the economy to crap unless we had an unskilled workforce useful of shoving into mines? We'd borrow more and we'd end up even more in the shits, I would much rather have ACT become the majority power than Labour at the moment.

Just like the Nats borrowed to pay for our tax cuts .. and have increased indebtedness since they took office ...

Key has acted superbly as a leader of the National party,

he is creating a much more efficient governent with the tools available. Keeping skilled professionals in the country to try and get the economy out of its slump as well as increasing prospects for NZ to have greater trade relations with the worlds most powerful countries.

Surely some of you guys remember NZ back in the 60's. Top of the world in education and standard of living next to Switzerland. And now we're in 30th place or something for the developed world.

Wrong ... in reading, maths and science we are FOURTH .. go look here

http://www.geographic.org/country_ra...2009_oecd.html

Interesting who is above us, but more interesting Britain is in 13th and the USA last in 33rd ..

This country has the means to get back up there, and we need someone who truly sees the big picture. Quite frankly Goff seems to live in some tiny little place between here and the next election.

Education is supposed to improve constantly. Not head back into the dark ages, no wonder my girlfriends 16 year old friends can't comprehend anything more than the gossip written within a womens weekly, and one of them already got pregnant and had a kid!

Well, if you will fuck airheads then you have to put up with their airhead friends

I can't remember learning a thing from teachers in Primary other than it was naughty to write stories in class about people being smacked with dildos. I had my own books on maths my parents bought me I just went through. I remember a teacher telling me once a spacecraft started accelerating it kept accelerating forever...

That doesn't surprise me .. most people can not rememebr what they learnt in primary school ... but you've missed the point of primary school education ... ou don't start learning "stuff" until you get to high school ...

Pity they didn't teach you how to avoid the propoganda bullshit ...

[shrub]

YBut he made a whole lot of promises last time...keep WFF, no asset sales etc which have all been kept and this time he's said up front partial sell downs of some assets. He's not going to suddenly jump to some hard-right economic agenda, because a) he wants to go steadily and (in that horrible management-speak) "take people with him" and b) he's pretty centrist / soft-right at heart anyway.

I'm not sure John Key is centrist/soft-right. Or centrist left, or hard right or really anything. Like the used car salesman he is whatever will get the sale. I also don't think John Key has an agenda beyond being PM, and I personally think Bill English and Jerry Brownlee are the Prime Minister. They know that neither of them are electable in the modern world of personality based politics, and when they found John were delighted. He has such a lovely smile, and everyone loves him but stands for nothing; so was the perfect man.

I interviewed English just after the 05 election, and he made some very interesting comments about Brash that left it in little doubt that he didn't like him or how he worked. He also made it clear that he had little desire to be the leader of National but I got the feeling that he is a very ambitious man. I think he is more moderate and a little more pragmatic than Brash, but his personal orientation is significantly more neoliberal than the current National government appears on the surface.

He is also a really nice guy and surprisingly charismatic in person and I have met him half a dozen times over the last few years and enjoyed every meeting. And I can't stand Jerry Brownlee, he's an unpleasant and arrogant cock.

BTW I did not give Labour my party or candidate vote last election and have no intention of doing so despite quite liking Phil Goff (he rides a bike and loves bikes).

[superman]

The trouble is for us is that the kind of voters that can be swayed by a goober dancing about in RWC clothing with a new-age hippy bracelet are not the kind of people I want choosing our PM.

You don't like the majority of society?! What a typical angry old fart.

[shrub]

You don't like the majority of society?! What a typical angry old fart.

No, just cynical. You're young and bitter, I'm old and cynical.

[superman]

No, just cynical. You're young and bitter, I'm old and cynical.

You honestly would prefer Goff? What attributes him to have any better luck when the entire world economy is shite. Easy to attack someone who has to try and get the country through a worldwide slow down.

[shrub]

You honestly would prefer Goff? What attributes him to have any better luck when the entire world economy is shite. Easy to attack someone who has to try and get the country through a worldwide slow down.

I think that's where we differ - I don't see luck having anything to do with it, and if I saw Key having done anything intelligent or positive; let alone "aspirational" I might change my mind. Instead I see him smiling sweetly, mincing about in RWC clothes, finding various vapid Hollywood stars "hot" and wearing an ionic bracelet (completely lacking in any scientific proof).

He's an idiot. Goff is a bit boring, but he's not an idiot.

[Brian d marge]

What they did do was grow public spending to a level that has proven to be totally unsustainable when the inevitable down turn arrived. Nats are borrowing 300 mil a week to try & cover the short fall but it can't go on for ever. When the inevitable cuts come don't blame National , blame the Labour govt.
Labour by trying to right all the damage that they perceive Rogernomics to have caused have recreated the same bloated public sector & subsequent public debt that made Rogernomics necessary in the first place.

you have been watching waaay to much telly

go back and see who was at the root of rogernomic and who actually caused the debt in the first place

report back with cap in hand

Stephen

[MisterD]

He's an idiot. Goff is a bit boring, but he's not an idiot.

Ya reckon?

You're the leader of the opposition heading into election year...you're struggling to compete with a PM seen as younger, fresher and more dynamic...you very obviously dye your hair...and you completely fail to have any kind of prepared response to the inevitable question....so you deny it...then claim your wife told you to do it.

No, he's an idiot.

[shrub]

He is an outstanding manage and was head hunted from a senior role in the private sector to a key role in a government department, and has been in that role for several years now. He has seen costs for service deliveries fall and quality of service grow, but a couple of years ago their funding was cut. His top people, mostly recruited by him from the private sector, got frustrated at being unable to do their job properly and several have since left, either for better paid jobs in the private sector or for Australia.

He is now left with the long term and frequently lowest quality staff trying to do their job with reduced resources including lower staff numbers and increased demand. He has had enough and is going to a much better paid job in Canberra working for the Aussie government.

[Edbear]

Not sure why, but I'm beginning to get the distinct impression that the Pollies and those running the country are actually human beings, a lot like us, really....

Imagine a cross-section of KB'rs running the country, maybe that would fix things up...