The 2017 Election Thread

[mashman]

No, the outcome would be different since the smaller parties would be whittled away and a person's vote moved onto their next choice.
The overall outcome would still retain some representation of the public desire but with fewer voters dissatisfied.

Well, apart from the leftists. They whine and bitch about anything.

MMP is FPPx2. Once for the candidate, once for the party. It's rare that STV bucks the trend of who ends up in parliament, as it usually ends up doing nothing but deciding which list member will be MP for the electorate doesn't it?. Whoever "wins" forms the government, no matter what. It should be National. After all, it'll be the "same" faces that make up parliament, each voting according to their party's preference and so on and so forth. That's what I mean by the outcome being the same. The methodology is irrelevant where, as you point out, whether National/Labour forms a government, almost half of the country will get pissed either way. Let National form the government. The biggest group spoke. They still have to push things through parliament. I'd much prefer they did that on an issue to issue basis instead of back scratching some minor party to get the numbers to push something through.

True... the left while whine about anything that's right.

[Swoop]

All it says is you think the person you voted for is the best option. Isn't that the underlying premise behind STV?

Essentially, yes.
Just that you put your preferred candidates on a ladder. As the voting is counted there will be a few of the candidates, who attracted fuck-all votes, eliminated and the vote then goes to the next on your ladder.

It eliminates the weirdo loonies who get 200votes and probably are a one-policy party attempting to represent the "Midnight Golfers wearing lycra" or something similar.

MMP is FPPx2.

Nope.

[jasonu]

How's that working out?

t.

Great mate. That cunt hillary didn't get in. Job done I'd say.

[mashman]

Nope.

Yup.

FPP
"Each voter has one vote to choose the MP they want to represent the electorate they live in."

MMP
"Each voter gets two votes.

The first vote is for the political party the voter chooses. This is called the party vote and largely decides the total number of seats each political party gets in Parliament.

The second vote is to choose the MP the voter wants to represent the electorate they live in. This is called the electorate vote. The candidate who gets the most votes wins. They do not have to get more than half the votes."

[oldrider]

The majority of NZ'rs are too mentally lazy and politically inept to make the best out of the STV system - this MMP farce is about all NZ could manage!

Game over!

[ellipsis]

...let's start a thread on Religion or Oil or Waving...everyone will know that their post/opinion is infallible and everyone will learn so much more...I can't wait.......

[jasonu]

You would appear to be from the "now" generation - something potentially this serious is worth waiting for.
Bet you wanted to open all your presents as soon as you saw them...
...

No mate. My point is that when the votes have been counted you still don't have a result and with MMP the result could be Labour, that didn't get any sort of majority vote, will be in power because they sucked Winstons cock better than National did. Plus it could still be several weeks before an actual result happnes. That is a shit system.

[Swoop]

Yup.

FPP
"Each voter has one vote to choose the MP they want to represent the electorate they live in."

MMP
"Each voter gets two votes.

The first vote is for the political party the voter chooses. This is called the party vote and largely decides the total number of seats each political party gets in Parliament.

The second vote is to choose the MP the voter wants to represent the electorate they live in. This is called the electorate vote. The candidate who gets the most votes wins. They do not have to get more than half the votes."

Yes, any 2yr old can figure that out.
How it is used and conducted under either FPP or STV creates differences.
FPP is "one giant pool of votes" essentially.
MMP creates the same pool in a different manner.
STV is a more technical approach, so obviously far too difficult for the average Kiwi voter. This method should provide a "happier" voter since their "people's party" vote was a waste of time and eliminated, but their Monster Raving Looney Party vote was then counted and the voter sees this person appearing in Parliament.

Not that a happy voter would be encountered, and certainly not of a leftist persuasion.

[James Deuce]

Yes, any 2yr old can figure that out.
How it is used and conducted under either FPP or STV creates differences.
FPP is "one giant pool of votes" essentially.
MMP creates the same pool in a different manner.
STV is a more technical approach, so obviously far too difficult for the average Kiwi voter. This method should provide a "happier" voter since their "people's party" vote was a waste of time and eliminated, but their Monster Raving Looney Party vote was then counted and the voter sees this person appearing in Parliament.

Not that a happy voter would be encountered, and certainly not of a leftist persuasion.

I don't know why people think there are left-leaning political parties in NZ. There aren't. There are centrist parties that have minor policy differences or no comparable policy at all to call different. Then there are single issues parties like Ban 1080 or NZ First. NZ First's single issue is of course, "How do we keep Winnie's nose in the trough?"

Labour is the party who threw workers under the bus. National is the party who then poured concrete on the bus with the workers under it and chiseled into the concrete, "Thou shalt not have relations with your employer. Nor shalt thou have any measure of financial security or future quality of life to plan for, unless you earn more than $500,000pa. Then thou shalt become one of the anointed ones and be allowed to form political parties called , "I am A TOP. Whee, Look at me Spin"."

I have no desire to distribute other people's wealth. But I also have no desire to point and laugh at those who's ability to have independence from state welfare was removed.

[TheDemonLord]

I don't know why people think there are left-leaning political parties in NZ. There aren't.

Then how do you explain all the Marxist rhetorhic from Labour, the Greens and the Maori Party? Some of them are radically Left wing. Hell, Jacinda wasn't sure if being called a Pretty Communist was a compliment or an Insult

There are centrist parties that have minor policy differences or no comparable policy at all to call different. Then there are single issues parties like Ban 1080 or NZ First. NZ First's single issue is of course, "How do we keep Winnie's nose in the trough?"

I pissed myself laughing at that.

Labour is the party who threw workers under the bus. National is the party who then poured concrete on the bus with the workers under it and chiseled into the concrete, "Thou shalt not have relations with your employer. Nor shalt thou have any measure of financial security or future quality of life to plan for, unless you earn more than $500,000pa. Then thou shalt become one of the anointed ones and be allowed to form political parties called , "I am A TOP. Whee, Look at me Spin"."

Did they throw them under the bus due to Malice, Incompetence or Ideological possession? Because those are 3 very separate scenarios.

I have no desire to distribute other people's wealth. But I also have no desire to point and laugh at those who's ability to have independence from state welfare was removed.

Do those people have an inability to work?

[James Deuce]

Then how do you explain all the Marxist rhetorhic from Labour, the Greens and the Maori Party? Some of them are radically Left wing. Hell, Jacinda wasn't sure if being called a Pretty Communist was a compliment or an Insult



I pissed myself laughing at that.



Did they throw them under the bus due to Malice, Incompetence or Ideological possession? Because those are 3 very separate scenarios.



Do those people have an inability to work?

They aren't radically left wing. Labour have never recanted the Neoliberal reforms they institued. The framework the National party works from within is the one Labour established and when Labour are in they use the same framework. One person does not make a party. I don't know what Marx you studied, but it obviously wasn't the same as the one as the parties above are referencing because I've heard nothing Marxist from them. Taxing the means of production and consumption ever so slightly more than it is being taxed now is not the same as controlling the means of production and distribution and has more in common with Friedman than Marx.

The bus was driven up and parked on top of caucus objections and by the people who created the ACT party. It was ideological possession at its worst from completely left of centre. The ultimate political betrayal for the people who voted for the Worker's party.

There are no jobs for those people. 100s of thousands of jobs disappeared in NZ over the last 30 years and have been replaced by either nothing or casual primary produce jobs or casual service industry jobs. When I left school getting a job was a piece of piss. You could work as hard or be as lazy as you wanted. No one went for interviews unless it was for a job in the Civil Service, and that was just a form filling session. Post sharemarket crash you had to have specific skills and you were suddenly competing for a shrinking pool of jobs. The very Capitalist idea of maintaining a pool of unemployed to keep demand up and wages down runs the job market in NZ. If I apply for a job in the same company in which I work now it is a minimum of 5 interviews before I get to a selection panel. Looking at external jobs, you're either headhunted, or you apply for double figures, sometimes into the 100s of jobs. It is what it is, but unless you are qualified or experienced in a way that makes your skillset valuable in a demand segment of the employment market, even getting a shelf-stacking job is a miracle, and that's casual and you need to bolster it with another one or two casual gigs to pay bills.

If I want a payrise, I need to find another job with another company and work there for a couple of years and then come back to the original company who suddenly pay more than market rate for the same job, despite paying 20-30% under market rate previously. There's no clear cut way to get ahead if you work for a living unless you are really good at something, which is not something I'll ever be, or you get good at farming and laundering money.

[TheDemonLord]

They aren't radically left wing. Labour have never recanted the Neoliberal reforms they institued. The framework the National party works from within is the one Labour established and when Labour are in they use the same framework. One person does not make a party. I don't know what Marx you studied, but it obviously wasn't the same as the one as the parties above are referencing because I've heard nothing Marxist from them. Taxing the means of production and consumption ever so slightly more than it is being taxed now is not the same as controlling the means of production and distribution and has more in common with Friedman than Marx.

It's the anti-capitalist rhetoric that is literally copied and pasted from Marx - the Greens are the worst offenders, Labour have been getting worse and worse.

Taking things earned by the Rich and giving them to the poor - is very much in line with the transitional state to the Glorious Communist Utopia....

There are no jobs for those people. 100s of thousands of jobs disappeared in NZ over the last 30 years and have been replaced by either nothing or casual primary produce jobs or casual service industry jobs. When I left school getting a job was a piece of piss. You could work as hard or be as lazy as you wanted. No one went for interviews unless it was for a job in the Civil Service, and that was just a form filling session. Post sharemarket crash you had to have specific skills and you were suddenly competing for a shrinking pool of jobs. The very Capitalist idea of maintaining a pool of unemployed to keep demand up and wages down runs the job market in NZ. If I apply for a job in the same company in which I work now it is a minimum of 5 interviews before I get to a selection panel. Looking at external jobs, you're either headhunted, or you apply for double figures, sometimes into the 100s of jobs. It is what it is, but unless you are qualified or experienced in a way that makes your skillset valuable in a demand segment of the employment market, even getting a shelf-stacking job is a miracle, and that's casual and you need to bolster it with another one or two casual gigs to pay bills.

There is nothing Capitalist about maintaining a pool of Unemployed - the Less people working, the less people who are ability to buy your product or services.

However - interesting take on the Job market - The internal interviews for a Job - that's a product of HR (which is heavily dominated by far Left-leaning people btw) External companies - well, when I went job hunting 2 years ago, I ended up with 3 final interviews, 2 offers, 6 first interviews - and I think I applied for a total of 30 jobs.

What you seem to be bemoaning is that in order to be desirable (to a business) you have to have something the business wants...

And given that the amount of Education available for upskilling these days is greater than it's ever been - I have little to no sympathy.

If I want a payrise, I need to find another job with another company and work there for a couple of years and then come back to the original company who suddenly pay more than market rate for the same job, despite paying 20-30% under market rate previously. There's no clear cut way to get ahead

Or you tell you manager that unless you get a Pay rise, you'll be accepting the offers from the Slave traders who are calling you. If you provide enough value to the business, they will give you a payrise, if you don't - then you go elsewhere.

I've done both.

If you work for a living unless you are really good at something, which is not something I'll ever be, or you get good at farming and laundering money.

You mean....

That Mediocrity...

Doesn't pay?!?!

Heaven forbid!

Surely then the solution is not to complain about it being everyone elses' fault, but instead work harder at being really good at something? The way you are talking is to suggest that people should be given the world for barely being productive/

[mashman]

Yes, any 2yr old can figure that out.
How it is used and conducted under either FPP or STV creates differences.
FPP is "one giant pool of votes" essentially.
MMP creates the same pool in a different manner.
STV is a more technical approach, so obviously far too difficult for the average Kiwi voter. This method should provide a "happier" voter since their "people's party" vote was a waste of time and eliminated, but their Monster Raving Looney Party vote was then counted and the voter sees this person appearing in Parliament.

Not that a happy voter would be encountered, and certainly not of a leftist persuasion.

Like I said earlier "Same outcome as MMP/STV then." . lol@technical approach. I still don't agree that 2nd or 3rd choice should govern over the candidate that most wanted as their #1. Which, ironically, is what happened in the Porirua Mayor election. 2nd place won it on the final iteration. So the majority that voted for that individual, lost. Silly system, ha.

I'm glad the left don't see some things as right.

[Grumph]

No mate. My point is that when the votes have been counted you still don't have a result and with MMP the result could be Labour, that didn't get any sort of majority vote, will be in power because they sucked Winstons cock better than National did. Plus it could still be several weeks before an actual result happnes. That is a shit system.

What i suspect you're missing is that all the votes have not been counted. There are still over 300, 000 specials to be counted which according to reports may change things by 2 - 3 seats.
Winnie has every right to do as he's said and wait till the final numbers are known. He's promised a decision within I think 7 days of the final numbers.
We may not like it - but take that up with the electoral commission as to why it's taking them so long.


Your much vaunted US system hasn't actually got much done over the last 6 -8 years due to interparty fighting in both houses. At least we've only got one...

[James Deuce]

Puts words in people's mouths so it matches the narrative they want.

I'll make it simple.
The people bitching about the people who "won't" work are judging them against standards that no longer exist, and the bitches aren't aware of what confronts them if they step out of their decade or longer continuous employment bubble.

There's nothing Marxist about NZ politics.

Unemployed people = people dying needlessly of poverty related issues = It's their own fault they deserved it.

Change = no idea what you do for a job, but I have to change tack every two to three years as the stuff I'm good at has disappeared under a welter of automation that has nothing to do with physical robots. It's just how it is, but it doesn't allow you the time to get good, when you have to live as well. The only acceptable answer to a Tory such as your self is "retrain as something useful". The rate of change at the systemic layer of most sedentary jobs is so high that retraining guarantees you are out of the loop long enough to get completely dropped off the back of the boat.

All that other stuff you claimed I said = keep on painting those interpretations that don't exist.