clinton, I can only hope that next time you are out of your house, some a**hole comes round and steals everything you own. Being a loser socialist though, you probably don’t own anything, as you’ve never got off your pimply butt to actually earn a respectable living and get ahead.

Having been the victim of two significant crimes this year, this is right now a hot issue for me. Having lived in the same place for a long time and not had any crime ever, for me personally it has increased tremendously.

And worse still, I had one of your horrible ilk tell me recently, that one of these crimes was ok, as these “down and outs” “need these chances to get ahead”.

I loathe, actually hate, anyone who is defending the current “crime wave” we are having in this country. If I ran into you smith, I would perpetrate some of mine own crime on you, for good measure.

Horrible little puke. Keep defending the indefensible.

IrishBill: that’s a ban for life and I’ll be asking Steve if he wants to lay a complaint with your ISP for threatening him.

Yep. Here…

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sundaystartimes/4700052a6619.html

So is this a dirty trick, as some claim? And if it isn’t, what does count as a dirty trick? Rees’s trick was just a prank, says right-wing blogger Cameron Slater. “I think that a dirty trick should be somewhat hidden, and malicious in the way that you’re doing it.” Google-bombing was “a puerile trick and it’s something I do, and I would accuse myself of being puerile.” It would be malicious if the entry was “rapist” instead of “clueless”.

I couldn’t resist….

And the sheer quantum of partisan pu pushes it over that fine line.

And the holier than thou attitude smudges to ruin.

But as you say it a lefty blog… so what can be expected? Certainly not a full and complete picture on any particular issue. blah blah. still, a bit of fun ay..

Often the case yes, though I think there is genuine substance in this particular debate.

We have to disagree on some things though. Labour somehow doesnt borrow for tax cust but the nats do (do you seriously believe anyone believes that?).

Yes I do. National will announce their package next week. If it includes borrowing, they will get pinged for it by some media (though most will just go ga ga over the lollies).

The problem many posters on this site run into imo is the uneven application of standards e.g. the nats lie but the labs dont. haha. nats borrow for cuts but lab doesnt. haha.

It’s a partisan blog pushing lefty labour movement perspectives. It’s not exactly hiding the fact is it. But there’s a difference between partisan an puerile.

thats when the puerile response is forthcoming, annoying all and sundry but completely deserved.

Nope, you can do better, and you know you can do better.

I agree a level of debt is prudent for a few purposes such as spreading costs over the generations and the productive us of money etc. It is just degrees that are being disputed.

We have to disagree on some things though. Labour somehow doesnt borrow for tax cust but the nats do (do you seriously believe anyone believes that?). Tax cuts as an increased expense or decreased income.

The problem many posters on this site run into imo is the uneven application of standards e.g. the nats lie but the labs dont. haha. nats borrow for cuts but lab doesnt. haha. thats when the puerile response is forthcoming, annoying all and sundry but completely deserved.

captcha” bambino likewise. ha ha

A certain level of government debt is considered usual and desirable – you don’t pay it off if the money can be used more productively in the economy. That’s what Labour have done, brought the debt down to this acceptable level, and given tax cuts. Compare with National who can only fund their wild promises by raising the debt level again – borrowing for tax cuts.

Actually r0b, it is not borrowing for tax cuts at all (either party). It is borrowing for govt expenditure. And a drop in income is not expenditure (except it seems in left circles, somewhat bizzarely, but not unexpectedly).

Bit late to start trying to get sophisticated now vto! Yes it is borrowing for tax cuts, that’s exactly what it is. That is true whether nor not tax cuts are regarded as expenditure or drop in income (a separate question).

Therefore I can only sensibly believe that Nat are going to increase benefit levels in order that they can tax me enough to give me my $50 tax cut.

Why didn’t they just say that instead of keeping us all guessing?

The Greens are calling Labour to use the Cullen Fund take back the South Island power lines leased to Wachovia Bank now taken over by Citigroup for next to nothing with most of its debt covered by the US government. The Greens are too polite. Time to take it back with no compensation!
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0809/S00657.htm

Craig Norgate’s buyin to Siver Fern Farms stymied for lack of bank capital. “Mr Norgate says a number of banks that had committed to participate in funding the transaction had since been unable to finalise their credit approvals in time for today’s part-settlement”. Give us a few weeks he says…
New capitalisation of a single desk meat industry can be done by public investment from the Cullen Fund. Such social investment will carry with it social responsibility of the industry.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/pgg-wrightson-can-t-settle-silver-fern-farms-deal-35906

Instead of using our taxes to bail out the collapsing private sector, we should be demanding that public money is invested as equity which carries the right to plan the economy for peoples needs and not banksters profits.

Let’s hear how Key and Clark are facing up to this global credit crunch.

Whose eyes are shut?

Labours did not borrow for tax cuts (it is still paying off the mortgage and buying a new car out of income).

Can you really not spot the difference? Open both eyes and try again. See it now?

What Rakaia George said above is correct, and SP is twisting things AGAIN to suit his own politics. And it seems you are too by selectively selecting.

Sometimes my comments may be a bit puerile but it is only response in kind.

Cullen has also borrowed for tax cuts. But carry on and spin it (I mean lie) – its election time after all.