Congratulations 48%

[Ocean1]

If there was an option available of "No Confidence" and it won the election...

I think you'd find, (if you altered your non-reading philosophy for a while) that a vote of no-confidence already has a perfectly servicable definition. I suspect you'd also find that the whole concept is largely irrelevant for a Westminster system of government.

It might be used in a coalition where a majority stake-holder is undertaking to make changes a minority partner doesn't support. Here that'd be a funding and supply issue. If the majority partner can't rustle up enough support for a supply bill it's fuckt, you can't run a country without funds and there'd be an immediate election.

If you don't have confidence in any of the available candidates in an election you have the option of forwarding your own candidate. Simply failing to vote might not actually prevent you from complaining about any subsequent government but it sure as fuck makes your complaints a deal less valid.

[SPman]

that's what they've been doing the past few years, cutting services, merging departments, becoming "more efficient" etc... tis a shame that under those circumstances, tis the non dead wood that bails

I have a sister who works in the EQC (not on earthquakes). Prior to Christchurch, the main workforce was a tight-knit group of about 25 people, all skilled and competent,who all enjoyed their work. After ChCh.....the place has ballooned to over 1200 people! Reams of Business Analysts, an HR division, managers being appointed all over the place..people being transferred in from ACC and WINZ, complete with attitudes...the "core" 25 being marginalised and pushed to one side as "corporate climber" types scrabble about trying to build their little empires! Half the original skilled core have now left. The IT manager was replaced with 7 new IT guys, all on a higher salary than he was on! Her closest compatriot starts a new job in Brisbane in the new year (on twice what he was on) and she has been offered a similar job - which she's seriously thinking about, although it means packing up and moving. All those remaining hate their jobs and workplace, now, and are all looking for the door. The hard won core of experience is being lost, and no one seems to give a shit - this under a Nat. Government who are "cutting back the Gov. Service" and making a more efficient sector! Under Labour? probably no better.
The point of this post? Probably none, but those who rant on with "typical left wing stereotypes" are as deluded as those who rant on contrary wise. What is lacking in Governments around the world, is empathy with their population! The people who voted them in. They are looked upon, often from both sides, as an inconvenient impediment to business. The more ideological and business oriented the government, the less empathy. The less empathy, the more people are less inclined to vote.

"The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression."
-- H.L. Mencken

[mashman]

I'm not bitching at all ... quite happy actually.

That's not how it sounds.

It COULD be a political party ... if the required funds were put up prior to the election (non refundable ... only if the party doesn't get a seat) Do you think any would front with the money ... ???

As mentioned above, turns out there is a No Confidence Party... but, Who's funding Occupy?

Be one of the 28,000 (random figurethat voted "no confidence" ... you ... not bitch

I care not what the numbers are as I'd be voting my way.

No ... you gave an opinion ...

An opinion as to what the definition could be.

Actually ... I'm quite happy with the way things turned out ...

Me thinks the lady doth protest too much.

As the added cost to the tax paying public ... for no valid result (apart from pleasing a small number of people ...) I fail to see how and why it would happen. Excluding the formation of a "No Confidence Party" of course ...

If it's on the paper, it's a valid result? Cheaper than an inquiry trying to find out the same thing after the fact.

I was referring to the policys for the individual that you mentioned should be introduced. WHATthis entails ... I have no idea ...

What policies for the individual? didn't realise I'd put up any form of policy along those lines.

And break your voting tradition ... don't do it for me ...

Anything's possible

[mashman]

I think you'd find, (if you altered your non-reading philosophy for a while) that a vote of no-confidence already has a perfectly servicable definition. I suspect you'd also find that the whole concept is largely irrelevant for a Westminster system of government.

It might be used in a coalition where a majority stake-holder is undertaking to make changes a minority partner doesn't support. Here that'd be a funding and supply issue. If the majority partner can't rustle up enough support for a supply bill it's fuckt, you can't run a country without funds and there'd be an immediate election.

If you don't have confidence in any of the available candidates in an election you have the option of forwarding your own candidate. Simply failing to vote might not actually prevent you from complaining about any subsequent government but it sure as fuck makes your complaints a deal less valid.

It's not a philosophy as much it is a fact that I am a very VERY painfully slow reader... takes up a hell of a lot of time that I could use for doing other things. I'd be happy with that definition though. I'm looking to vote, not change anything.

Aaaaaand that's why everyone's shitting themselves with Winnie back in parliament?

@less valid. I'd rather not vote on the principle that there's nothing to vote for, than vote because it's the only thing that will give validity to my complaints... sounds pretty feckin childish and pathetic to me... social convention eh.

[mashman]

I have a sister who works in the EQC (not on earthquakes). Prior to Christchurch, the main workforce was a tight-knit group of about 25 people, all skilled and competent,who all enjoyed their work. After ChCh.....the place has ballooned to over 1200 people! Reams of Business Analysts, an HR division, managers being appointed all over the place..people being transferred in from ACC and WINZ, complete with attitudes...the "core" 25 being marginalised and pushed to one side as "corporate climber" types scrabble about trying to build their little empires! Half the original skilled core have now left. The IT manager was replaced with 7 new IT guys, all on a higher salary than he was on! Her closest compatriot starts a new job in Brisbane in the new year (on twice what he was on) and she has been offered a similar job - which she's seriously thinking about, although it means packing up and moving. All those remaining hate their jobs and workplace, now, and are all looking for the door. The hard won core of experience is being lost, and no one seems to give a shit - this under a Nat. Government who are "cutting back the Gov. Service" and making a more efficient sector! Under Labour? probably no better.
The point of this post? Probably none, but those who rant on with "typical left wing stereotypes" are as deluded as those who rant on contrary wise. What is lacking in Governments around the world, is empathy with their population! The people who voted them in. They are looked upon, often from both sides, as an inconvenient impediment to business. The more ideological and business oriented the government, the less empathy. The less empathy, the more people are less inclined to vote.

"The worst government is the most moral. One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane. But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression."
-- H.L. Mencken

Bummer for yer sister.

I agree. Sorry to see that you see things as left and right wing stereotypes. I don't want empathy from my govt, I want sense that benefits everyone, not just those who work, or those who are unemployed, or those who have businesses, or those who exist in a salary bracket, or whatever label is chosen to separate 2 groups. We're just people with different skills and levels of intelligence. Seems a waste to fight against each other instead of for each other... more so where it comes to running a country. Hey ho.

As for your quote. Great generalisation.

[Ocean1]

@less valid. I'd rather not vote on the principle that there's nothing to vote for, than vote because it's the only thing that will give validity to my complaints... sounds pretty feckin childish and pathetic to me... social convention eh.

Fill yer boots, mate. As for a social convention? dunno, probably just me, I can't be fukt wasting my time with people who bleat like fuck and do nothing constructive about it.

[mashman]

Fill yer boots, mate. As for a social convention? dunno, probably just me, I can't be fukt wasting my time with people who bleat like fuck and do nothing constructive about it.

Me neither, especially when they believe they have a right to bleat because they vote . I am doing something constructive about it, it's just nowhere near ready yet... and I'm not the person to do anything with it either... hey ho.

[Swoop]

Yet in a population of only 4 million we need 121 pollies and all their hangers on? --surely the gubbiment shout lead by example

We could do with substantially less.
A workmate had a quick number crunching session and compared us with the UK and their size of parliament. By his reckoning we should have around 55-60 MP's for our population.

Of course there will be others who will claim we really need many more MP's to sit around "representing" us.

[FJRider]

I'd rather not vote on the principle that there's nothing to vote for, than vote because it's the only thing that will give validity to my complaints... sounds pretty feckin childish and pathetic to me... social convention eh.

I dont believe I've read ANY of your complaints, that held any form of validity ...

No point in starting now ...

[mashman]

I dont believe I've read ANY of your complaints, that held any form of validity ...

No point in starting now ...

For a moment there I thought I was losing myself, what with saying I'll vote and all... Thanks for the reassurance

[Brian d marge]

Fill yer boots, mate. As for a social convention? dunno, probably just me, I can't be fukt wasting my time with people who bleat like fuck and do nothing constructive about it.

and what have you done? me I fought and paid for , the arrest of the student loan , been into the beehive , meeting with the then pollies ,, lunch or two at Bellamys , all out of my own pocket , for nearly two years , before I realized d that KIWIS were apathetic

finished my degree , sold the house and left ......

lovely country ruined by the people , well done ,,,a big pat on the back all round

[SPman]

Bummer for yer sister.

She's over it. She's sick and tired of fucking moaning, stupid, people who do nothing to help themselves, expect a government dept. to bail them out, despite their stupidity, then scream like hell, when they don't get what they want despite others in greater need than themselves....a bit like KB, really......

. Sorry to see that you see things as left and right wing stereotypes.

I don't actually see things in left or right stereotypes - I actually see things in what works for the betterment of the bulk of the populace.

I don't want empathy from my govt, I want sense that benefits everyone, not just those who work, or those who are unemployed, or those who have businesses, or those who exist in a salary bracket, or whatever label is chosen to separate 2 groups. We're just people with different skills and levels of intelligence. Seems a waste to fight against each other instead of for each other... more so where it comes to running a country. Hey ho.

.
Without empathy, how do you get sense that is applicable. All sense has empathy applied to the problem....in a social scenario, which a government is meant to be, no empathy means the sort of mechanistic, business-like, solutions, that create more problems than they solve. Regardless of what people say, particularly businessmen, Government for the people, is not, and can not be, run purely as a business! Doing so has produced the results we now have.

[mashman]

She's over it. She's sick and tired of fucking moaning, stupid, people who do nothing to help themselves, expect a government dept. to bail them out, despite their stupidity, then scream like hell, when they don't get what they want despite others in greater need than themselves....a bit like KB, really......

C'est la vie... or so them tell me.

I don't actually see things in left or right stereotypes - I actually see things in what works for the betterment of the bulk of the populace.

Sorry, I must have misread the post.

.
Without empathy, how do you get sense that is applicable. All sense has empathy applied to the problem....in a social scenario, which a government is meant to be, no empathy means the sort of mechanistic, business-like, solutions, that create more problems than they solve. Regardless of what people say, particularly businessmen, Government for the people, is not, and can not be, run purely as a business! Doing so has produced the results we now have.

All True. But from a business point of view, keeping your employees happy doesn't necessarily require empathy does it? Putting in a pool table isn't really empathising, ringing the beer bell at 4 of a friday isn't really empathising, providing subsidised this and that to keep the experience and knowledge that a dept has doesn't strictly require empathy to keep your employees productive and engaged? Granted you could argue that keeping your staff happy is empathising, but it could be a cold hard business decision too... Perhaps empathy is required in lieu of "friendly" business practice? Dunno, but that's kinda where I was going in regards to not wanting empathy from my govt. Granted it would go a long way, but then I guess the hardliners won't allow emotion in business, it's not personal apparantly, and as it would seem that they don't have "friendly" business practices, I guess as you say, we've got what we have. Is it empathy that's missing? I'm not overly convinced.

[avgas]

I have a sister who works in the EQC (not on earthquakes). Prior to Christchurch, the main workforce was a tight-knit group of about 25 people, all skilled and competent,who all enjoyed their work. After ChCh.....the place has ballooned to over 1200 people! Reams of Business Analysts, an HR division, managers being appointed all over the place..people being transferred in from ACC and WINZ, complete with attitudes...the "core" 25 being marginalised and pushed to one side as "corporate climber" types scrabble about trying to build their little empires! Half the original skilled core have now left......

On the flip side of this.
Remember when there was a Ministry of Works
They had a "Department of Mines"
They had a dozen or so mines inspectors.

Now its all on one poor sod. And we have more mines/tunnels.

Asked the old man if he would consider the job, his response was "Why the fuck would I take a role at half the pay for twice the work".

Seems to me we like to pay people in NZ more to do nothing, or to cover someone else's arse, more than doing a good honest job.
Polly's are no exception. We pay them, and let the get back into govt regardless of whether they do a good job.

Kinda sad really. No one else gets such a flexible boss.

[swbarnett]

All True. But from a business point of view, keeping your employees happy doesn't necessarily require empathy does it?

Unless you empathise with your workforce how do you know what will keep them happy? Putting in a pool table might work for most but it won't work for all.