Your bank statement for sale

[Brett]

Go ahead and enjoy corporate feudalism

Communism bloody idealogy. Typical NZ attitude. If you think differently, you must be somehow broken. I suggest not wandering too far from the commune pal. (Your hemp sandals might start rubbing.)

Seriously, you're bemoaning corporates having "power" and the "nationalist" government...and yet you want to give the government MORE power?? Yeah...and I'm the unenlightened one.

[short-circuit]

Communism bloody idealogy. Typical NZ attitude. If you think differently, you must be somehow broken. I suggest not wandering too far from the commune pal. (Your hemp sandals might start rubbing.)

Seriously, you're bemoaning corporates having "power" and the "nationalist" government...and yet you want to give the government MORE power?? Yeah...and I'm the unenlightened one.

Perhaps you wouldn't all have such a fear of goverment if you didn't keep electing such utter retards

....but then I guess parliament is supposed to be representative of its constituents

[Brett]

Perhaps you wouldn't all have such a fear of goverment if you didn't keep electing such utter retards

....but then I guess parliament is supposed to be representative of its constituents

Typical, blame everything on the government...I may not want them to have more control over me...but ultimately not everything is their fault....(or is everything someone else's fault? - a point you seem pretty determined to portray in your defense of that useless slug of a mother who let her kids be smashed to death).

Don't worry...soon enough you will be left with only like minded individuals in NZ. The rest of us will have finally had enough and fucked off.

My bike's got a flattie...damn gubberment at it again.
Weather is shit, gubbermint must be using their secret technology to mess with the atmosphere.
I hope you have your tinfoil helmet on short circuit.

[short-circuit]

Typical, blame everything on the government...I may not want them to have more control over me...but ultimately not everything is their fault....(or is everything someone else's fault? - a point you seem pretty determined to portray in your defense of that useless slug of a mother who let her kids be smashed to death).

Don't worry...soon enough you will be left with only like minded individuals in NZ. The rest of us will have finally had enough and fucked off.

My bike's got a flattie...damn gubberment at it again.
Weather is shit, gubbermint must be using their secret technology to mess with the atmosphere.
I hope you have your tinfoil helmet on short circuit.

You can't have it both ways downsy. At the begining I said Nationalise banks and control the financial sector (that would be an end of thread solution).

This government is hardly going to do that. I didn't elect this bunch of fuckwits so no I am not responsible for the direction we are headed in.

You are not seriously suggesting that western governments over the past 30 years have not be working in corporate interests are you? The deregulation of the financial sector most certainly is the governments fault...and that of the fuckwits that swallowed their ideology.

[Brett]

You can't have it both ways downsy. At the begining I said Nationalise banks and control the financial sector (the would be an end of thread solution).

This government is hardly going to do that. I didn't elect this bunch of fuckwits so no I am not responsible for the direct we are headed in.

You are not seriously suggesting that western governments over the past 30 years have not be working in corporate interests are you?

Downsy...LMAO. At least you're a funny fucker!

How do I want things both ways? I don't want the govt controlling our financial sector, I don't trust politicians because they primarily look after No. 1, but I also don't blame them for everything going wrong either.

Nationalise banks = government ownership. Government having total controlling power over NZ financial sector = bad idea, same way only having one retail bank iN NZ is a bad idea. Tell me, how many government bonds do you have?

[short-circuit]

Downsy...LMAO. At least you're a funny fucker!

How do I want things both ways? I don't want the govt controlling our financial sector, I don't trust politicians because they primarily look after No. 1, but I also don't blame them for everything going wrong either.

Nationalise banks = government ownership. Government having total controlling power over NZ financial sector = bad idea, same way only having one retail bank iN NZ is a bad idea. Tell me, how many government bonds do you have?

I already know your preference is to be sodomised by corporations instead (with no redress whatsoever)

[mashman]

Baaa me? Baaaa YOU.

Oh no you didn't , no no, baaaa YOU If all you can see is capitalism or communism then you bought the propaganda. Both tell you what you can and can't do. Both remove your choices. Both remove personal freedoms. Both have so many things in common it makes me laugh that a person could prefer one over the other... it's still a bunch of people limiting what we are capable of by using money as a tool to keep the sheeple amused whilst they go about the important business of fleecing the sheeple (should that be de-fleecing?). Under either of these systems, those whom control the money supply are the masters and the govt is just a puppet show. Competition then comes down to how much money you have, how well your advertise and market, how cheap your product is with quality of product coming a distant second. Money needs to make money etc... for the cycle to continue, people to be fed, housed, watered etc... I know this now. The budget constraint that this brings has a massive knock on affect to the economy and when the fucktards decide to turn off the money tap, which they did 5 or so years ago, mayhem ensues.

Under "my" system. Freedom of choice becomes everything and not a price point war, competition for competitions sake with everyone sharing ideas so that we all leap forwards instead of crawl. There are many more ways of running economies. The current system is fucked and has been since day 1 and is getting more and more fuckeded as we go along. This does not have to be the case, not by any means. So baaaaa to you (or somefink like that)!

[Akzle]

Don't worry...soon enough you will be left with only like minded individuals in NZ. The rest of us will have finally had enough and fucked off.

i eagerly await this day. please take your politicians and cops with you.

[mashman]

i eagerly await this day. please take your politicians and cops with you.

+1 and some chars... would if they'd be considerate enough to hurry the fuck up too.

[davereid]

.......those whom control the money supply are the masters and the govt is just a puppet show......

That is exactly what has happened here.

The Privacy Act restricted this sort of trading of personal information. It limited the ability of credit vendors to determine who was a good target for their credit product.

So the lobbied for a law change and got amendments 4 and 5 passed.

This effectively bypasses the Privacy Act for them. As soon as you "give them consent" by hooking up to electricity, the phone, gas or any service provided on credit you are fucked.

And try getting any of those services without credit. They are either vastly more expensive, or are simply not available.

Credit vendors lobbied for this change, claiming it would mean they could make better lending decisions and offer credit to individuals who had previously been outside the scope of traditional lenders portfolios. The USA had this kind of system and US lenders were entirely able to make poor lending decisions, so the former claim is clearly bullshit.

The latter claim I accept, its certainly been a great way of finding new clients. Lenders can now clearly identify poor people with a good repayment record who have room to take on a bit more debt.

The lenders also claimed that it would help them make better lending decisions. There is no evidence that that will happen. Making it easy to stop repaying poorly offered credit products would have been a better way of doing this.

[Akzle]

That is exactly what has happened here.

The Privacy Act restricted this sort of trading of personal information. It limited the ability of credit vendors to determine who was a good target for their credit product.

So the lobbied for a law change and got amendments 4 and 5 passed.

This effectively bypasses the Privacy Act for them. As soon as you "give them consent" by hooking up to electricity, the phone, gas or any service provided on credit you are fucked.

And try getting any of those services without credit. They are either vastly more expensive, or are simply not available.

Credit vendors lobbied for this change, claiming it would mean they could make better lending decisions and offer credit to individuals who had previously been outside the scope of traditional lenders portfolios. The USA had this kind of system and US lenders were entirely able to make poor lending decisions, so the former claim is clearly bullshit.

The latter claim I accept, its certainly been a great way of finding new clients. Lenders can now clearly identify poor people with a good repayment record who have room to take on a bit more debt.

The lenders also claimed that it would help them make better lending decisions. There is no evidence that that will happen. Making it easy to stop repaying poorly offered credit products would have been a better way of doing this.

logic has no place in KB arguments. tits or gtfo.

[mashman]

That is exactly what has happened here.

The Privacy Act restricted this sort of trading of personal information. It limited the ability of credit vendors to determine who was a good target for their credit product.

So the lobbied for a law change and got amendments 4 and 5 passed.

This effectively bypasses the Privacy Act for them. As soon as you "give them consent" by hooking up to electricity, the phone, gas or any service provided on credit you are fucked.

And try getting any of those services without credit. They are either vastly more expensive, or are simply not available.

Credit vendors lobbied for this change, claiming it would mean they could make better lending decisions and offer credit to individuals who had previously been outside the scope of traditional lenders portfolios. The USA had this kind of system and US lenders were entirely able to make poor lending decisions, so the former claim is clearly bullshit.

The latter claim I accept, its certainly been a great way of finding new clients. Lenders can now clearly identify poor people with a good repayment record who have room to take on a bit more debt.

The lenders also claimed that it would help them make better lending decisions. There is no evidence that that will happen. Making it easy to stop repaying poorly offered credit products would have been a better way of doing this.

Aye... an all in the name of giving credit where credit is due... or should that be debt? I still larf that these fucktards believe that a financial solution to a financial problem is the way to go, although I'm not really surprised at the utter lack of stupidity given the TOscars of this world.

Maybe we're gonna have to wait for another round of boom and bust before the stupid fuckers and the sheeple wake up and realise that it just doesn't work... and that they are the ones causing the majority of the damage to the people of the world, oh and the planet too, oh and that they're responsible for the lack of innovation and human advancement. Brainless brians the lot of 'em, spouting the party line because they feel that they need to defend the reason that they voted a particular way fuckin morons.

[Brett]

Oh no you didn't , no no, baaaa YOU If all you can see is capitalism or communism then you bought the propaganda. Both tell you what you can and can't do. Both remove your choices. Both remove personal freedoms. Both have so many things in common it makes me laugh that a person could prefer one over the other... it's still a bunch of people limiting what we are capable of by using money as a tool to keep the sheeple amused whilst they go about the important business of fleecing the sheeple (should that be de-fleecing?). Under either of these systems, those whom control the money supply are the masters and the govt is just a puppet show. Competition then comes down to how much money you have, how well your advertise and market, how cheap your product is with quality of product coming a distant second. Money needs to make money etc... for the cycle to continue, people to be fed, housed, watered etc... I know this now. The budget constraint that this brings has a massive knock on affect to the economy and when the fucktards decide to turn off the money tap, which they did 5 or so years ago, mayhem ensues.

Under "my" system. Freedom of choice becomes everything and not a price point war, competition for competitions sake with everyone sharing ideas so that we all leap forwards instead of crawl. There are many more ways of running economies. The current system is fucked and has been since day 1 and is getting more and more fuckeded as we go along. This does not have to be the case, not by any means. So baaaaa to you (or somefink like that)!

Of course there is a world of grey area in between both idealogies, not questioning that at all. I also don't question for one second that things are not currently optimally run. I still however do NOT think that giving government more control is a good idea. In fact, this is in support of your ideal for greater freedom of choice. Power to the people I say. This does not occur by greater regulation and/or govt control.

[Brett]

i eagerly await this day. please take your politicians and cops with you.

With pleasure...but when all of the entrepreneurial people keen to start forward thinking businesses have gone (along with a major underpinning of the future tax base), we'll see where this leaves you. FYI - I'm NOT talking about corporate fat cats, I'm talking about the SME's that account for 50%+ of NZ's economic base.

[Brett]

Aye... an all in the name of giving credit where credit is due... or should that be debt? I still larf that these fucktards believe that a financial solution to a financial problem is the way to go, although I'm not really surprised at the utter lack of stupidity given the TOscars of this world.

Maybe we're gonna have to wait for another round of boom and bust before the stupid fuckers and the sheeple wake up and realise that it just doesn't work... and that they are the ones causing the majority of the damage to the people of the world, oh and the planet too, oh and that they're responsible for the lack of innovation and human advancement. Brainless brians the lot of 'em, spouting the party line because they feel that they need to defend the reason that they voted a particular way fuckin morons.

But on one hand you're preaching freedom of choice, and then when those of lower social economic and/or financial literacy make poor choices you change tunes?

I am no more a fan of politicians which ever colour flag they choose to fly than any of you guys are. However I also refuse for them to have the blame for every undesirable occurence lobbed at them. They make some pretty shit decisions as well as some decent ones, but ultimately people are also greatly let down by their own poor decision making. The issues in the financial markets that spooled up from about 2006 and caused all of that shit in 2008 are a product of greedy financial institutions, but also of people making poor choices (ie ...I'll get a 110% loan for a house even though I only earn peanuts and use the extra 10% to buy a new car because everyone knows property prices always rise over the long term...Yeah right. Yes this was spurned by a loosening of lending regulations, primarily amongst US lenders...and this caused unwise people to make foolish choices, but it also provided more competition in the market place and thus some cheaper financial products for consumers in general.
I argue that instead of legislating and more government control, we need greater consumer education.