Written By: notices and features - Date published: 6:49 am, February 24th, 2014 - 366 comments
Categories: open mike -
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Worthy of Discussion?
Dear Mr Cunliffe
You have made much about bringing the lost 800,000 voters back to Labour. I was a former Labour activist driven out of the party because I refused to recant from Rogernomics and supported Mike Moore.
The Labour Party I spent many hours in meetings and canvassing for was a broad church – small business owners rubbed shoulders with war vets widows, church going Catholic white men with a social conscience were as welcomed as feminist lesbian academics. Pro union sentiment was tempered with the knowledge that the capitalist system generated the profits that socially aware governments could use to help the 10% that capitalism can’t. There was a time when senior cabinet ministers and MPs understood this. When you were elected as leader I thought your time in the business world would help you see that rather than hate and envy John Key’s success that political leaders should encourage as many NZers as possible to emulate this level of success – in much the same way you have achieved in your life.
Instead you have engaged in a left wing bidding war with the Greens that appeals to what is now left of the Labour Party – a harder left activist rump comprising unionists, beneficiaries, academics and the rainbow coalition – constituencies that on a good day comprise 15 – 20% of New Zealand’s population. You have deserted the vote rich centre ground – a place that a man of your background should’ve been comfortable in – more so that the all the three previous Labour leaders.
You are articulate and understand the discipline of government and some of the intricacies of the market economy but rather than offer an aspirational vision of a vibrant New Zealand economy you plump for poorly thought out, market distorting but fleetingly populist government interventions that in your heart you must know will never achieve their stated goals.
The path to power for Labour is not to pander to your left wing base and fight for the left side of the isle with the Greens but to restore Labour back to the broad church it once was when small business owners, white heterosexual males, people of faith and people who desire to succeed in business so that they can use their profits to do humanitarian things feel at home because I can tell you now that there is no place in modern Labour for such people.
EFY: Just be National-Lite, Mr Cunliffe.
Like that will work.
It worked for Kevin Rudd…well it got him elected.
Well said. Winning an election doesnt you will do a great job, or succeed for the majority of the population.
Winning an election is about PR, marketing, branding and manipulation of the message. Whoever is best at that…
National learned a hard lesson in 2005. The truth hurt them. Accordingly they have shrunk from the truth ever since. It’s hard to lie all the time though, it’s harder to remember the truth than the lies. Key slips up. Alot. But the PR, marketing, branding and manipulation works for that too.
National’s strategy is unchanged since 2004, and if you doubt that re-read segments of The Hollow men, instead of dismissing it at the behest of those implicated, read it and flick tot he evidence sections.
This is why we need the political fact check site announced last week.
How about some decent investigative reporters, instead of the current crop of press release regurgitators.
re-read Hager’s Bruce Jesson lecture. It’s very clear what has happened… reduction in journalists massive increase in PR
“presstitutes” was i think the expression some time ago.
I used to be a Labour voter. Into my late 20s.
This open letter is spot on.
You can hiss, spit, laugh, and snarl all you like, and I’m sure doing so makes you feel good, but if you want a future with the Labour Party in it, you’d listen – and change.
When did you vote for them?
Who do you vote for instead? Why?
Are you a white hetereosexual male, religious group of person aspiring to be successful in business?
Voted right up to, and including, Clark’s first term. Then I didn’t vote. Then I voted National.
Male, business oriented, ex-working class.
Thanks for being honest.
What year was your first election?
Gee I am male, business orientate (small business owner) and ex working class and I think the need for a progressive Government grows greater every day …
And I didn’t vote Labour until 2002. Been voting Green since then. Voted National in 1999.
Why the change? Because I started paying attention to what was happening in the world rather than listening only to the slogans and wishful thinking that National puts out.
This letter by Polish Pride is pure bigotry. He obviously doesn’t want society to be inclusive.
Haha. You voted National once. That makes you eternally evil and suspect.
Well, I voted for McGillicuddy once, so…
Draco it wasn’t my letter and wasn’t by me. It was posted on Whaleoil by a poster.
For many on here that I suspect will be reason enough to dismiss it.
If that is the case that will be a real shame as for many who do not pay as much attention to politics this is where it is at. I also don’t think it is an extreme position to take in the current system. I think it is a very reasonable position for a lot of voters and for that reason should be paid attention to. The thing that needs to be asked is how many voters think like this…? I suspect that there may be a significant number.
Like you I have become much more aware of what is going in the world and the failings of the current system. My response is not to vote at all because in my view the current system cannot deliver the changes that are required. This is due to the very nature of the system itself.
Problem is that really the writer of that letter wants labour to be more like, National.
Draco it wasn’t my letter and wasn’t by me. It was posted on Whaleoil by a poster.
Then you need to communicate that and who actually wrote it.
The thing that needs to be asked is how many voters think like this…? I suspect that there may be a significant number.
I suspect that there will be a fairly large number of white cis males who do think like that. They vote National or Act and seem to dislike everyone else being treated as equals.
My response is not to vote at all because in my view the current system cannot deliver the changes that are required.
I’ve thought of that idea but the only way to change the present system without voting is through bloody revolution and I’m not overly keen on that idea. Still, the way that National and Labour are going that may change as well.
white cis males
And if Labour starts using that term in public, it will all be over.
(have a transexual family member – she thinks “cis” is stupid and the people who use it are annoying)
It is easy to forget that many of Labours early heroes were the now disenfranchised middle aged pakehas. It seems to me that anyone who wants to vote labour/socialist should be entitled to a voice without being denigrated. This very restricted view of socialism leaves the middle ground for others.
What disenfranchised middle aged pakehas?
Just because human rights have been extended to everyone else and that work is being done to help those that have been disregarded doesn’t mean that the pakehas have been disenfranchised.
Jesus Christ !!!, this site’s full of constant bloody surprises.
Draco is, without doubt, among the 4 or 5 people here that I find myself agreeing with most often. And now I learn the bloke used to vote National !!! That he voted for the Shipley Government in 1999 !!! Safe to say I’m currently in a state of shock.
you’d think it could be penned by shane jones..or tamihere..(but it’s too well-constructed..did you see jones’ smoking-gun letter..?..
..’holy barely literate mp!..batman..!..’)
..or ‘reactionary/angry white man’ from henderson..
Yep I was hearing that in Tamihere’s voice.
Enough of this bollocks.
Too well written for Whaleslime to have penned it
“Pro union sentiment was tempered with the knowledge that the capitalist system generated the profits that socially aware governments could use to help the 10% that capitalism can’t.”
What……what ??? “……..to help the 10% that capitalism can’t” ???
How the hell could anyone but a McCarthyist fool manically bashing away on his/her 50s Smith & Corona get it so wrong in historical terms ? The “knowledge” fantasised about better reflects the paternalistic appreciations of the few decent old National Party identities like Ralph Hanan, Peter Gordon and Tom Shand than it does the appreciations of the political wing of Labour before the scabs Douglas, Prebble et al came along.
Nah…….it’s Election Year 2014 – The Year of the Troll. We’re going to see more and more of this orchestrated rubbish – “I’d vote Labour except for…….”. Or “I used to vote Labour but……”. This one goes even further. “I was a Labour Party activist……” What ??? Ignore it (just as I haven’t I admit). OK. Call it for the smelly ignorant troll poop it is. Note it only to dismiss it. Then ignore it.
Good comment North. Mind if I borrow it for a post?
Worthy of dismissal, PP. We tried that approach in the last two elections. Time for a return to a genuine ‘broad church’ approach; governing for the majority, not the minority.
Maybe it’s about time the labour party split in two.
The two major factions within the labor party can’t co-exist in the same party.
You cannot have one group who wants to roughly keep the status quo living in the same house as the other group who wants us to become some insular hard left socialist country.
Polar opposite factions within a political party is a recipe for disaster, it’s either one way or the other, you can’t do both.
In BM land Labour is a hard left party intent on nationalising the means of production. You really need to get out more BM.
BM should be more concerned about the massive split appearing in National, between those who want to turn NZ into an authoritarian conservative theocracy and those who want to feed NZ to a global fascist corporate elite.
Been there, done that, BM. And the party is much better for losing the likes of Richard ‘I’ve been drinking’ Prebble and Roger “I’m entitled’ Douglas. Whatever happened to those two, eh? I hope ACT never get desperate enough to invite either back. Oh, wait ….
I was thinking more Labour/Alliance than Labour/Act.
The split, imo, would be for those of the right to finally fess up and join UF… or National. If they can’t bring themselves to do that, they should fuck off.
The split is NOT Labour/Alliance, becausen in that mix “Labour” is National, probably not even National Lite.
You do agree with what I’ve written though.
There’s two groups within labour with really different views on which way the party should go and until that’s sorted labour can’t really function as a cohesive unit.
Having 1/2 the team wanting to play rugby while the other 1/2 wants to play soccer is only going to end in fail.
That’s not what “agree” means.
evidence for half the team BM? A few with loud voices can make a lot of noise but doesn’t mean they are a majority. Like the protesters at Brown’s events?
“There’s two groups within labour with really different views on which way the party should go and until that’s sorted labour can’t really function as a cohesive unit.”
Are you talking about caucus or the Labour party itself?
“I was thinking more Labour/Alliance than Labour/Act.”
That’s not what “thinking” means.
There I was thinking you couldn’t read my posts, given the questions you never answer.
I agree that there are some people who have to go for Labour to be unfettered.
Unlike National though, I wouldn’t be jettisoning all the young ones with promise…
Power at the top of that list…
I can see why Power had to go though, he was probably the one genuine centrist in that party.
I know a couple who have left as National MP’s because they had a conscience.
It’s painted as “deadwood” clear out… but some were definitely not deadwood. Annoying, a block to the message maybe, but not deadwood.
Some were actually there for the right reasons.
Obviously not needed though, when your only ambition is to asset-strip a country before heading back to Hawaii.
I agree that there are some people who have to go for Labour to be unfettered.
Taking a guess what sort of % split do you think Labour is, if comparing the “hard left faction” to the “maintaining the status quo faction”.
I’d say it’s around 50/50.
I don’t know why Simon Power left may be he’d just had enough of politics.
Could also be he had leader ship aspirations but saw what a good job Key was doing,realized the chances of that happening were low and moved on.
The last bit BM, close but not quite on the money, Slippery once He became the leader looked around the caucus to see who among the ‘wing-nut’ Government could become a future threat and quietly gave Power the message that He was going nowhere,
Slippery likes to promote complete and utter ‘airheads’ such as Simon,”they are printing money, they are printing money” as the future leaders of the National Party, but, only if they know their place in the pecking order…
Promoting the airheads is what happens inside a corporation. A few around the top keep control, import any ideas needed from elsewhere, and promote based on empty headed ass licking sycophancy. It doesn’t work very well for corporations, universities, or political parties, but it keeps those at the top safe. It’s also a habit which has crept into the Labour Party, and needs to go, along with the ABC Rogernomes who are addicted to it.
you dont know why Power left politics but you have quite the understanding of the inside of the Labour Party.
Power actually (from his speeches) wanted to make a difference to our prison rates and look at fences at the top not police wagons at the bottom. He knew that each election “law and order” would get rolled out and he would have to talk tough about stuff that is false and known to fail.
e are not unsafe in our homes. We don’t need more people in prison, and our rehab programmes suck. BUT he had to say the opposite in the lead up to each election.
Key has listed law and order as number 2. Why because politicians of both major parties talk it up and beat it up to make us think it is an issue.
Maybe Power said fuck ya for that reason…
Then there are the other “youngsters”. He’s not th e only one.
I’m quite interested to know which of Labour’s policies (or probable policies – not speculative wishlists from commenters on a blog – but actual policies advocated by the party) are indicative of “some insular hard left socialist country”, BM.
Would you give me a list of your top 10, please?
This will one of those questions BM can’t see.
Banning of charter schools
Extra money for their supporters(Baby Bonus)
and quite a few of these since Labour and the Greens are joined at the hip.
This list would be hilarious as a hard left meme if it wasn’t that you are misspeaking about what hard left is. These bog standard policies of successful democracies are not hard left.
As for linking to pete george’s site, that’s a joke too, right?
“These bog standard policies of successful democracies are not hard left.”
And I encourage you to hang on to them, lobby for more like them, and promote them enthisiastically in coming months.
And I’d encourage you to look beyond the Key & Co comparisons of NZ with the US, UK and southern Europe, and start comparing NZ with small socially-minded democratic countries.
None of those are insular.
And quoting Pete George just makes you look infantile.
Which items on that list, if banned, would you want the govt to make legal?
” white heterosexual males, people of faith and people who desire to succeed in business”
Hmmm. What do I read into this ?
..isn’t it the bye-line for rotary..?
..or..a description of the audience in that key leaders’ speech i went and watched..in west ak..
A bit rough on the Rotary members, Phil.
It may be overly full of white middle aged business “men” but the purpose of Rotary is to make a positive difference in the community.
When we were after funding for a school marae, decile 1, 90% Maori, it was the “honkies” in Rotary who fronted up with funding, and legal and planning support, not the local Maori moneyocracy. Something which was definitely noticed by the kids.
Correct. Whereas organisations like Rotary do tend to be populated by those with recognised privilege of some form, they are also people who have chosen to stay in direct touch with and get concrete things done for the community.
That this is the true underclass in NZ. This group has suffered interminably in our society, no protections under the law, few jobs, low pay, and hard to set up in business in NZ… oh Wait!
The bleeding Liberal is gone and has been replaced by the whining white guy earning over $120k per annum who has it hard.
If you want to succeed in business you do not vote for the neo-liberal right craziness. that impoverishes your customers, rises your interest rates above your offshore competitors, raises the dollar to impossible levels and puts up barriers to new businesses to protect right wing cronies.
As that “socialist supporter” Bob Jones says, though not in the same words, business is always better in NZ, when the Government is more socialist. “Labour is good for business”.
The National supporters tend to be the rentiers, the wide boys, the ambitious but untalented, and those who “earned” their wealth by stripping public assets.
It makes me laugh at times, when someone goes on about us taking tax off, “hard working New Zealanders”.
You can be sure that the hardest work that person has ever done, is getting out of his chair and walking to the watercooler.
I would find all that “brown nosing”, “back stabbing”, “networking” pretending to be competent and “kicking away the ladder”, emotionally taxing, but they seem to thrive on it.
Ku Klux Klan maube
” white heterosexual males, people of faith and people who desire to succeed in business”
Hmmm. What do I read into this ?
” white heterosexual males, people of faith and people who desire to succeed in business”
Hmmm. What do I read into this ?
Do white heterosexual males get twice the votes of others?
Why not chase the votes of the women and the young for that more inclusive society.
Is it just me but there seems to be serious “bloking” of attitudes lately across all the media. Any way that letter has a problem Gotta a woman ban going have ya?
“Do white heterosexual males get twice the votes of others?”
Only if they live in Epsom.
+100 Red BaronCV
“Why not chase the votes of the women and the young for that more inclusive society.”
Women make up 50% of the vote (and a lot of young are influenced by their Mothers… or their Mothers like to think so and do their best)…
Helen Clark left a big gap…..and a lot of women are not attracted to Neo Lib economics/ policies
This is a comment from the sewer so needs to be treated with considerable caution.
Another mythological former Labour activist engaging in right wing framing of the situation.
The one policy Labour has released this year is Best Start and appeals to the vote rich centre and has universal application.
And the comment is designed to support a Government that shows it has no interest whatsoever in the middle of New Zealand. All it wants to do is help foreign corporates and give tax cuts to the already wealthy.
+1…”Bugger the Pollsters!”..and ..”Bugger the Polls!”….as Bolger said.
Labour can still win ( and probably will win with the help of the Greens, Mana and Winnie and Dotcom) but it needs to get rid of the old Roger Douglas faces) and bring in new Spokespeople for core issues eg to go head- to- head with Paula Bennett and WIN.
National and Act are going after the 800,000+ non voters by framing everyone on the Left as racist and sexist and rich middle class and out of touch
Yeah exactly MS, more slops washing into the Standard from the sewer, nice to see PP acting as the pimp…
I am on your side -well maybe a bit further to the left – but the question has to be asked why does middle New Zealand support the party which you state “has no interest whatsoever in the middle of New Zealand”?
A heck of a lot of that 40%ish of the electorate who have supported the Nats since Orewa 1 are in “middle New Zealand”.
Looking at the “voting” results over the last several decades it seems there are about a 25 to 30% bunch each, who will always vote Labour or National, though Labour lost a lot during their skid to the loony right, a few more who will always vote one side or the other, and a bunch of swing voters.
This means that whoever wants to get elected as the next dictators, in our rotating dictatorship, only need to appeal to a minority of swing voters. About 20%.
Which results in policies, such as ‘tough on crime’ and unaffordable tax cuts/election bribes which appeal to this swinging group. A group, which, judging by the policies of the main parties, are self interested, greedy and, thick!
Our wannabe Dictators can safely ignore the majority, knowing they only have to cater to the prejudices of the swinging group..
Unfortunately the desire to get votes from this group means an abandonment of principles and a denial of reality. Electing rotating dictators, instead of real democracy, favours the vacuous thieves, we get.
How do you factor the missing 800,000 into that KJT?
I think, a fair few that have given up voting, either, because politicians do not represent them, or, voting for the “other” party does not lead to any real change.
I know many who were Labour voters prior to 1987, and simply cannot bring themselves to vote for National, despite being totally disgusted with both Labours refusal to repudiate Neo-liberalism, and Labours present disarray and incompetence.
Their natural home would be the Greens, who are close to the ideals of “old” Labour, But most peoples only contact with politics is the main stream media BS about Green policies.
I suppose I was asking if you think most or not of the 800,000 would be swing voters, but what you are saying is that they’re more likely to be ex-left wing voters?
From reading the published analyses of Jack Vowles’ NZ Election Surveys (admittedly for elections of the 90s and early 00s – so possibly out of date), I got the impression that non-voters were basically split 60/40 in favour of Left-leaning policies. In other words, by no means all of the 800,000 represent a natural constituency for the Left. A large minority express sympathy for policies generally associated with the Right.
If today’s situation is as it was a decade ago (and I suspect it is), then the Left probably need to be focussing on the 450,000-500,000 who could be considered Labour/Green friendly. And, of course, a section of these will be hardened serial non-voters, almost imposs to mobilise.
Then again, I do remember a casual (but important) comment from 1prent on Open Mike a year or so back suggesting that, in his experience, Labour-friendly non-voters are, in fact, the easiest to mobilise and that those non-voters only mildly tending Left were much harder to get out and so probably weren’t worth bothering with.
I can only go by the people I talk to. However my circle, because of the things I am involved in, and my wider family, are likely a good sample of New Zealanders.
Some tribal National people who have stopped voting., mostly cockies, . They will not vote for Key, and the swath of destruction he is leaving. They are left leaning, in that they have a social conscience, but will never vote for the left.
Winston Peters may pick up some of them.
Most non voters I talk to seem to be left leaning.
Skilled working class, Labours former natural constituency, are actually pretty disgusted with Labour. The retirement age was the last straw for many.
They will not vote National, so they tend not to vote.
However they would return if Labour returned to being Labour.
They had some hopes after Cunliffe’s broken leg speech, but, , I think the dries in Labour, will never let labour return to being a party for people.
Then there are the young people who cannot get work, or who are stuck in McJobs, despite, often, excellent school qualifications, . To them all parties are the same. Mouthing useless platitudes, while they despair.
Some will vote, if they feel that a party had anything to say to them.
Having known Helen Clark, I think, like David Cunliffe, she was constrained by the Neo-libs in Labour. The “Winter of discontent” and the fear it caused in the caucus did not help. I doubt if anyone, no matter what their intentions could do any more than “hold the line”.
Time for a clean out.
Personally I think Labour needs to purge the last remnants of the neo-liberal club.
A group, which, judging by the policies of the main parties, are self interested, greedy and, thick!
That’s the problem right there. There are a large number of middle and lower middle class people who would formerly have given Labour a vote now and then who have bought into this weird secular version of prosperity gospel nonsense peddled in self help books and sports apparel commercials. That’s where all this silly “life choices” nonsense comes from. Labour seems to have underestimated how wildly popular this is.
Of course, wealth is just around the corner if you work hard, no matter if you’re a barely literate moron being exploited by a multinational corporation.
“40%ish of the electorate who have supported the Nats since Orewa 1 are in “middle New Zealand”” source?
Tracey, do you dispute my assertion or just forgotten the past 10 years of politics.
General Election 2005 39%
General Election 2008 45%
General Election 2011 47%
With the interim polls generally inflating their actual support.
I dont assert anything, you did. You asserted 40% of Nzers are “middle NZ”. You need to define your paraneters and then quote your source.
“I dont assert anything”
I never said you did. Have another look at what my question.
Now back to what I said which was “A heck of a lot of that 40%ish of the electorate who have supported the Nats since Orewa 1 are in “middle New Zealand”.
Meaning since Orewa one around 40% of the electorate has supported National. Now all of that 40% is middle New Zealand, but a lot of them will be. Middle class, middle income earners.
The question remains, why are those middle class, middle income earners, voting for National. What is it that attacts them to that party?
Fucksake, I thought Polish Pride had actually sent it – but instead he’s plagiarised this drivel?
Its a comment I saw on whale oil and as I said at the beginning posted it because I thought it would be worthy of debate especially here on the standard? Apologies if I have created confusion in posting it as I did. I was rushing out the door to get to work this morning so didn’t give too much thought to how it would appear.
As it was, I merely thought you were being intensely stupid, and put a bit of time into thinking about how to point this out. But it turns out you were merely shoveling ambergis.
I’m now less inclined to read your comments.
I’m flattered you were inclined to read them in the first place 😉
I have a general rule of thumb that I’ll read the comments of those who not only see the things that are wrong but more importantly have given serious thought on how to fix them.
It really is better to attribute if you cut and paste, even if you can’t link just say it’s not yours and where it’s from. Otherwise it’s plagarising/stealing, and it creates confusion in the discussion.
This isn’t about what is actually happening. Labour is still fluffing up your cushions and bringing you your slippers, as is only proper and normal. Your comfort is important to Labour. Your people are still “the people”. Even if the one-percent must be obeyed first, yours are still the voices next down in the hierarchy of value, even now when there is some diversity acknowedged.
It may be a good sign that you feel things might be actually be changing in more than just window-dressing. But sadly, you don’t really have anything to worry about yet.
Rest assured Polish Pride. The Labour Party values your time and this call is important…
“I was a former Labour activist”
During what years were you an activist and what were you activating/advocating for? A change from what to what? Genuine questions not a pick at you.
….i’d like to test my psychic-powers here..
..just a mo’…
..he was a rogernome..(it is a ‘bloke’..eh..?..)..who moved to act…
..(am i close..?..am i close..?..)
Apologies Tracey – I read this comment yesterday and thought it would be an interesting post for debate on the standard. The comment is not mine but I can see how it would resonate with many voters in my position.
I posted it as I was rushing out the door this morning so didn’t give thought to how it would appear. I should have put it in quotation marks.
“The comment is not mine but I can see how it would resonate with many voters in my position.”
Given the prominence this comment had, I think that was a pretty stupid and significant oversight on your behalf.
that’s the pot calling the kettle a socialist, Mr “GST in NZ is 10%”.
Probably was. Hindsight is always 20/20
So this fictional poster on the sewer is meant to affect Labour’s approach to this year’s general election???
First posted on WO by someone called ‘kiwiinamerica’. So Phil Ure’s prediction ain’t far off being correct.
..he is the rightwing clown who posted massive treatises @ kiwiblog on why hillary clinton would win the democratic nomination against obama..
..and then screeds of ‘evidence’ supporting his thesis on how mccain wd beat obama..
..i had so much fun laughing at him..and i gave him a special ‘always-wrong-award’…
..and he wrote this pile of bullshit..?
..as i said..’hilarious..!’..
Funny how instincts can be so accurate: I picked Polish Pride as a weasel shill from the start. Just something about that insincere tone, the querulous inanities.
Trying to appease shitheads like Polish Pride cost the Left the last two elections. Worthy of discussion?
“Funny how instincts can be so accurate: I picked Polish Pride as a weasel shill from the start. Just something about that insincere tone, the querulous inanities.
Trying to appease shitheads like Polish Pride cost the Left the last two elections. Worthy of discussion?”
read the comment above (1.8.2). Keep working on your instincts though, they are quite a way off the mark.
I am sure you have absolutely no clue how much of a dis-service comments like that do for the standard and the views of the left. But it does give at least some insight into your own charachter.. either way you have yourself a lovely day now.
If you’re going to smear Cameron Slater’s trash around don’t be surprised if you get a strong reaction.
PS: I am neither a representative of the Left nor The Standard. Those are exactly the sort of weasel words I was talking about.
Really!? Thats a very strong and emotive reaction from someone who doesn’t consider themselves to be representative of the Left or the Standard.
An insincere tone I may appear to have, but that is more from not being emotionally attached to either left or right wing policy in the current system and an understanding that neither has the ability to solve the problems we face as a society.
regardless of my views you will never see me refer to anyone that takes the time to post as a shithead or any other personal attack.
In my view, It simply shows a lack of respect for ones fellow man, an inability to communicate effectively and possibly an ego.. but then given your thoughts on me, what I think isn’t really going to matter one little bit now is it.
Vacuous drivel. Your emotions aren’t the only thing you’re detached from. I note that “the government can’t solve anything” fits perfectly with right wing “small government” rhetoric.
It is not the government (nor the size of it) that is the issue. The issue is with the left vs right political system with its opposing ideologies…
Yeah, if only everyone could forget all that ideology about inequality, climate change, employment law, human rights and see things your way.
We need better airheads.
My way solves inequality, poverty, war, climate change.
Employment law and workers rights are paramount as are human rights.
It also solves the Left vs Right political paradigm and the problems that come with it.
My way One Anonymous Bloke would be the most natural system for mankind and can be backed up by unbiased systems analysis based on who the system is for and the purpose of the system that we are all subject too.
Based on your comments thus far, I suspect that these are concepts you will at best struggle to grasp.
So I have no idea what perception of me and my ideals you have concocted, but it is truly impressive that you could have missed the mark by just how far you have.
“We need better airheads”
What we need is people who can think outside the box and who can think for themselves…. feel free to start anytime now by the way, after all now is as good a time as any. I know its hard but just give it a go anyway. I’m sure you could do it if you really wanted too and it only takes a little more effort than what you’ve shown thus far today.
First off though go away and refresh yourself with R vs L ideology cause it appears you’ve failed to understand that also.
Your way involves a lot of handwaving, but little in the way of practical steps either to achieve that state or operate it once achieved.
It also sounds awfully like communism, but without the guts to call it so.
McFlock You are talking about the system that all humanity lives by. There are always going to be some similarities. It would be naive in the extreme to think otherwise.
Capitalism and Communism through their implementations both have big government and the use of currency among other things in common. Does that make them the same system? No of course not.
As for a lot of hand waving, it is a relatively new concept and needs a bigger conversation as to the best way of transitioning from where we are today to a Resource Based Economy. But in short here is an example of the how the different systems would solve a problem.
Lets take wood as the resource and consider its use in keeping us warm. Imagine a deep forest, and a small society within it, living in huts that they need to heat.
In capitalism, we all fight over the wood, some people end up getting all the wood and then sell it back to us.
In communism, everyone gets an equal amount of wood.
In a Resource Based Economy, we build a solar thermal farm and heat everyone's hut .
Under RBE the goal is to actively find solutions that free people from having to work. I’m sorry but I haven’t seen that under any implementation o Capitalism or Communism.
There’s plenty of information on RBE on the web and plenty on how it differs from both Communism and Capitalism.
But again McFlock we could just continue doing things the same way we always have because that just seems to be working out so well for everybody…
Yeah, it’s communism (everyone has their needs met). You’ve just waved your hands to say “and nobody will have to work”.
The thing is, it’s very easy to say “solar farm”, but someone has to develop and make that solar farm. And then someone has to point out that the tree canopy reduces the farm’s output by 60% (forest, remember?).
Go and do some actual research McFlock. All your doing is showing your gnorance on the topic.
Capitalism and Communism both have big governments and use currency, By your logic Capitalism must be Communism.
you’re the one presenting the idea.
Maybe you should learn how to present it with something more than handwaving.
I don’t give a damn either way – so far you’ve only demonstrated a willingness to repeat the mistakes of the past.
Yes sorry Tracey… and woman.
Is this a joke?
The people who are honest about keeping to the failed policies that PP advocates, the ACT party, poll less than 2%.
As would National and a good part of Labour if the “truth in advertising” rules, applied to politicians.
“small business owners, white heterosexual males, people of faith and people who desire to succeed in business”
More like an ACT party requirement.
I think Labour is struggling to return to its restore itself, actually, back to the reason it came into being in the first place, and to emerge from the ugly rogernomics blip, which it had no mandate to go near and was an affront to their supporters. What’s the point in continuing to go down that road to hell, PP – if you believe in all that crap just vote National or Act, don’t sacrifice a party trying to re-establish its ethical base.
I myself stopped voting Labour when I watched, at a Labour meeting, the finagling that went into getting the horrible Richard Prebble to have his own way in Auckland Central. I gave my vote to Jacinda because I think she is highly intelligent and ethical and I was trying to help keep the blond out, but otherwise I vote Green.
“Flatlining, plummeting” didn’t see these words to describe National polling last year when it was not doing so well.
Flatlining is the most obvious manipulation, implying Labour is dead, what whores these journos are
“Labour limping, Greens in freefall – poll
Labour is flatlining in a new opinion poll, with their support partner the Greens plummeting five percentage points. It comes as leader David Cunliffe was busy investigating murmurs of party dissatisfaction with his performance.
The latest TVNZ-Colmar Brunton survey has National on 51 per cent, which would deliver them 64 seats, enough to govern alone. It follows the Fairfax Media-Ipsos poll which put National on 49 per cent and is the same as the 51 per cent result in last week’s Roy Morgan.
The TVNZ poll held Labour steady on 34 per cent, but the Greens fell from 13 per cent to 8. This would give the left alliance 55 seats.”
Oh gawd another day of trolls thinking they can sap the morale and resolve of progressives.
Who, the sub-editor who thinks that “steady” = “limping”?
Xmas news desert followed by relentless “upbeat” propaganda since New Year, I’m not surprised the Right has seen a lift in the polls.
They have a Genesis sale, a John Banks trial, and (maybe) KDC’s evidence of Key’s lies. I say maybe because there’s so much of that around already even if KDC hits his target.
I don’t think the economic bad news is over, either.
Then there are the poll contradictions. Labour on 34% is pretty consistent with the previous trend. Are the Greens really only on 8% because of one poll result where all others are putting them on 10% or more? I doubt it.
I don’t usually comment on polls because they are so very biased by selection criteria (ie those with a landline who at home and can be bothered talking to coldcallers), then rejigged “to align with Statistics New Zealand population counts for age, gender, household size and ethnic identification”. However, they are still more statistically robust than self-selecting online polls such as those employed by the NZH or TDB. But if we’re going to discuss it, then we ought to address the poll results themselves, rather than Fearfacts reporting of them.
Firstly Note (in the poll’s own words):
“The data does not take into account the effects of non-voting and therefore cannot be used to predict the outcome of an election.
Undecided voters, non-voters and those who refused to answer are excluded from the data on party support. The results are therefore only indicative of trends in party support, and it would be misleading to report otherwise.
Publication or reproduction of the results of this poll must be acknowledged as the “ONE News Colmar Brunton Poll”.”
Then the sample size for the party vote question was nominally 1007, but reduced by 10% for “don’t know”, and a further 3% for “refused” to 834. This would increase the 95% confidence interval (ie results will be out by more than this at least 1 time in 20 polls) sampling error to nearer +/- 3.5%. This assumes a “simple random sample” rather than a systematically biased one of course, so the true margin of error may be closer to 5%.
Gotta do some toddler wrangling – will continue later…
Stop posting facts. It confuses the regurgitators
Well the trend of the Dim-Post bias corrected tracking poll demonstrates much of what I was going to say anyway:
My opinion is that the Green Party caucus had best make some big policy announcements before the next lot of polls come out. That way when their numbers rebound they can feel it was due to their skills rather than a mere statistical artifact.
I appreciate these comments Pasupial. We need more analysis from people that understand statistics.
I wondered if Colin Craig’s attack was timed to take the attention away from the Green’s solar power announcement.
Whatever the reason the Greens and Labour are better off sticking to policy.
If this truly reflects how NZers feel, then it is indeed a sad sad day.
Does anyone know how a person could find out if Mr Brownlee’s 4 properties in Liam and Fendalton (or 3 if one is the family home) are being rented out? And then compare the rent to, say, the end of 2010?
“If this truly reflects how NZers feel”
The Greens haven’t actually dropped over a third of their support in a single poll.
Green support has been unlikely to drop due to a couple of meetings with DotCom. I speak as a Green supporter in that. It hasn’t changed my view of the party.
True Tracey, the ‘wing-nuts’ are suggesting that the left vote has swung to the right by 10%, laughable and only worthy of increased derision for those suggesting such…
That puts the whole poll in question IMHO, especially as it’s roughly the same amount of increase for another party.
The only relevant information i believe to have been portrayed by that particular poll that was worthy of mention was the fact that there are some very clever kids who possess some great artistic skills in Slippery the Prime Ministers electorate,
Portraying Slippery’s head attached to the arse of a donkey makes the highlighted mural painted on the side of the school building a classic and having Him sign it in the glare of the television lights was a master stroke…
Where can I find this mural (or a picture of it)?
Lolz, if you live in Auckland you can go over there and take your own pic, i did not even catch the name of the particular primary school but i believe it to be in Slippery the Prime Ministers Helensville electorate…
I will still be voting Green.
The Dotcom meetings haven’t changed my view of the party or Russell Norman, I’ve long thought Russell was a poor leader.
Any particular reason for the ‘poor’ mark as far as Russell is concerned…
We probably shouldn’t bother to have an election. A sample group of 400-1000 is enough for me.
This is probably what the right wants anyway, a board of 400 CEO’s and bankers deciding our elections, so let’s cut out the punters and have an election by poll, no chance of manipulation aye?
Key has deftly outlined the election issues for everyone. The last few weeks Nat Ministers are starting to frame the election with a repetitive meme… Note the way Key frames it as though he is trying to help Labour. MOST importantly look at the chestnut he has as number 2 on his list of important issues
” Key said Labour’s problem was the party was focusing on the wrong issues.
“Those issues [Kim Dotcom and state asset sales] aren’t the really big issues. That’s the point, isn’t it?
“The big issues are the economy, law and order and health and education and our programme’s working and the results are good,” he said. “
“…education and our program’s working…”
Thank you Jim, all of us to a woman and man are all going to pack up now and go home as it is obvious that we have lost and it’s only February,
Actually forget the above while you cling to the best piece of bullst i have read this year, fking retard…
Roy Morgan had National on 48 not 51
Vote Cunliff get Norman Kiwis finally getting the message
Another poor sap who has trouble distinguishing noise from signal.
National Government exposed for a gigantic leap in spending on contractors and consultants. A rise of tens of millions since 5 years ago.
Hearing Bill English trying to justify this tax payer handout by saying “contractors and consultations offer good value and specialist techniques to deal with things in the public sector”.
This is an outrageous waste of taxpayer money, the aftermath of cutting the public service to the bone, pathing the way for the ticket clipping agencies to come in and rort the crap out of the place.
Good to hear DC and Norman both getting stuck into the Government. Keep going at it boys, there are votes in it!
The same National Government pattern as the 1990’s, sack 1000’s from the public service claiming to be doing so to save the taxpayer money,
Then!!! hire on the National Party members as ‘CONsultants’ with contracts costing the taxpayer double and triple what the previous public servants were being paid to accomplish the same ends,
The large mass of the public are a bit slow to click on to the rort of spending their tax dollars to line the pockets of the National Party hierarchy, but, click on to it in the end they will…
You don’t need to hire National Party members, just people who work for the consultancies owned by National Party members, which take > 50% of the consultant rate.
If they were not value for money they would not be engaged on contract.
Really, wouldn’t they? Michael Swann (ODHB) et al says you’re a fool to think so.
A significant number will be the same people, just as contractors (with an overhead) rather than employees.
This gambit (reducing headcount by turning employees into contractors) is by no means restricted to the public sector.
So all of a sudden the public service is incapable of inefficiency just because it contracts out rather than employing people directly?
You’re an idiot.
We’re not saying that engaging these people is worthless, we’re saying that it was cheaper to hire them directly rather than as contractors.
I have had experience on both sides of this argument. The cost to maintain an employee is up to 3x annual wage. I am not making a value judgement about this, only providing the numbers. The benefit of using a contractor is that their overhead stops when they complete, and you can easily change skill sets which is not always possible with an employee. Most people just look at the charge out rate with out realising the real cost comparisons.
I would expect (but could be wrong) that those contractor numbers would be inflated by the Christchurch event.
Of course they would. Novopay ring any bells? Contractors fuck up often, as do CEO’s but they have nifty little clauses in their contracts to limit the consequences for them. I am sure you have such clauses in your latest imaginary job, given how much time you spend on blogs.
Short notice for me. But definitely worth going to for those that can: Guy Standing talking at Auckland Uni this arvo.
Guy Standing, author of The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class in 2011 who spoke at several events in New Zealand early this year, is coming back to NZ in February 2014.
His new book A Precariat Charter: From Denizens to Citizens is due to be published in April 2014. See here. This will focus more on ‘what can be done’.
Auckland: Monday 24th February, 2-4pm, The University of Auckland, Owen G Glen Building, Grafton Road, OGGB 5 on Level 0. Hosted by University of Auckland and Auckland University of Technology.
Guy Standing, author of The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class in 2011 who spoke at several events in New Zealand early this year, is coming back to NZ in February 2014.
His new book A Precariat Charter: From Denizens to Citizens is due to be published in April 2014. See here. This will focus more on ‘what can be done’.
Auckland: Monday 24th February, 2-4pm, The University of Auckland, Owen G Glen Building, Grafton Road, OGGB 5 on Level 0. Hosted by University of Auckland and Auckland University of Technology.
Also speaking on the same topic in Wellington on Wednesday, 26th Feb:
” Wednesday, February 26, 12.30-1.30pm, Lecture Theatre 2, Ground Floor, Rutherford House, Bunny St”
i have tried to point out before my brief-summary/explanation of the ills of labour…
..in that people look at them..and just think..clark-govt..we’ve lready been there/done that..
..and i also offered my solution to this bind labour find themselves in..
..in that either they have a cleanout of those clark-faces..(which won’t happen..’cos of the hubris of those clark-faces..)
..or they have a resolute mea culpa for their neo-lib sins..
..and a raft of policies that forever bury the image of labour as that clarkist neo-lib govt…
..but sadly..i also don’t see that happening..
..’cos those neo-lib/clarkists still control so much of the party apparatus..
..so i guess labour will just stumble on..
..and i will tell you for free what will happen to labour/cunnliffe in the election campaign..
..if they don’t do that mea culpa/new/seachange-policy-promises..thing..
..there was a preview of it in parliament last week..
..where in my commentaries on q-time @ parl i had to record victories for both key and english..
..over a sullen/silenced labour…
..and how did key/english do this..?
..they attacked labour on their record of nine years in office..
..key used the tool of the salvation army report on poverty..from 2008..
..after nine years of clarkist-labour..
..and what a litany of neglect it is/was..
..as it detailed what nine years of that clarkist/neo-lib labour govt resolutely turning their backs on/ignoring/stigmatising the poorest..
..and english did the same thing with an economy-report from that same year..(tho’ the poverty-report was the most powerful..)
..now..i’m not going to bang on now about the subtlties/nuances of those perfidies of/from that clarkist-govt..(much as i feel like doing so..)
..i’m just going to point out to labour..that if they do neither of those earlier detailed options..
..and are just counting on a couple of more middle-class aimed policy-promises…
..that they will be hammered by key/national over that shameful-record..
..and this is what they have to renounce..and promise to put right..
..for any hope of snapping out of their current doldrums..and of forestalling that upcoming caning from key/national..
.(.over ..irony of ironies..the neo-lib-ness of that clark-govt..and what it wrought..)
(..i mean..when the most exciting thing from labour recently has been jones with his over-egged dick-waving..
..and the only other item of note from labour has been parker offering to lawyer-up to defend norman in his libel false-war with chem-trails col..
..there are clearly ‘issues’..)
..labour need to articulate a clear alternative/vision..
..and at that..they ain’t succeeding..
..i’m not saying they won’t be able to get their shit together..
..but they had better make it soon..
..and that policy mea-culpa/promise-bag must be part of that..
Yep pretty much Phil, a very astute analysis, those vegan sausages must be good for the grey matter.
Thanks for that piece of defeatism phill, it got my ‘scroll on by’ finger warmed up for the morning, now where’s Penny to really get things pumping…
If you really want to get things pumping I suggest you contact the mayor of Auckland.
Yawn another voyeur fixated upon what Len does in His private life…
….only lasts 2 minutes……
Jeez, first you complain that he’s wasting his precious Mayoral time rooting around, now you’re complaining that he’s not spending enough time rooting around.
Some consistency, please. 😉
did you speed-read while scrolling ‘on by’..?
Yep…there might have even been something of interest hidden in the script…i don’t tho think my life will be materially damaged if i missed such a gem…can’t tho say the same about reading through your dis-jointed squirts of invective…too much of which i suggest would give anyone brain damage…aah now a picture begins to form…
@ philip ure …Clark was a helluva lot better than Goff.!!!!
…Clark actually saved the Labour Party from oblivion after Rogernomics!!!!( and was never appreciated for that)
….and those faces you want to get rid of ….are actually Rogernom faces!!!!
…Clark inherited them( she inherited a sick Neo lib Rogernom Act Labour Party) ….so dont blame her!!!!
….Time now for the Labour Party to put forward fresh new Spokespeople faces ( and relegate the old Rogernom faces to the shadows)
….Labour needs a fresh new look!….GO to it Labour Party people!
..clark continued the neo-lib/rogernomics..
..she overturned nothing wrought when she was a minister (albeit a junior) one in that cabal of asset-selling mad-people..
..she did nothing to reverse what shipley/richardson did to the poorest..
..in fact..apart from he ongoing stigmatising of the poorest ..(‘deserving-families’..remember..?..)
..she cut the incomes of the poorest even more.(ending ‘allowances’..remember..?..)
..and this is what is now coming back to bite labour/those current labour people..
..firmly on the arse..
“Clark actually saved the Labour Party from oblivion after Rogernomics”
What are you talking about?
Specifically what part of Rogernomics did the Fifth Labour Government reform?
@ phil ure and Enough is Enough
…Labour would have been dead in the water without Helen Clark….pulling in the woman vote…..
Many left Labour for good after Rogernomics and went to Jim Anderton, Winston or Greens.. (….i was one who used to street campaign for Labour and who jumped ship…..and i was surprised Labour survived after Rogernomics)
….Helen Clark did the best with the cabal that was left to her….i was surprised she survived the leadership for so long with Phil Goff breathing down her neck
….Helen Clark was one of the FEW who never supported Roger Douglas or Rogernomics
….i find it interesting that certain inside Labour people wish to attack Helen Clark and blame her for everything…when she kept the leaky tub afloat for so long by sheer competence and brilliance.
Helen Clark critics should GO JUMP OVERBOARD and join Mana…….Go on join MANA and GET YOUR HANDS DIRTY and become an ACTIVIST… instead of bitching and blaming a woman who won three elections and saved us from NACT for so long
Noone is bitching or moaning about Helen Clark. Where is there an attack on Helen Clark? Stop getting so emotional.
The point being made is the neo-liberal revolution which occured 30 years ago is still the economic system which we are living in and have been for the past 30 years.
No government in the past 30 years has reversed what Douglas and Richardson did between 84 and 91.
…so go join Mana…Hone and Sue Bradford intend to do the deed!…(and no I wont calm down)
…Mana and the Greens are where the activists go
intend to do what deed?
Where what activists go?
I know of activists in the ACT party? What on earth are you trying to say?
@ Enough is Enough….now you are playing dumb…but i will spell it out for you just in case you need more help
By Mana Party doing “the deed”is meant …getting rid of Neo lib economics and bringing in a genuinely grassroots socialist revolution…..from the bottom up ….like the old Labour Party movement
….and by “activists” i mean real grassroots activists on the Left like Bradford
( Do you really know activists in the ACT party”?!…maybe Roger or Richard or Rodney or John?!….golly…..say no more….so this is why you are so critical of Helen Clark!)
When was I critical of Helen Clark?
Ok not specifically critical like Phillip ure …but still supporting his arguments never-the -less and throwing Clark in with Roger Douglas , Rogernomics and the Rogernoms still in the Labour Party
….when Helen Clark was one of the few who tried to remain aloof from Rogernomics along with Jim Anderton( who finally left and set up in opposition …and then later rejoined when he saw Clark keeping Labour afloat)… and of course Winnie opposed it from the outside as did the Greens in the Alliance
“The point being made is the neo-liberal revolution which occured 30 years ago is still the economic system which we are living in and have been for the past 30 years.”
My argument is:
Helen Clark was not part of that original Roger Douglas revolution and she did not agree with it…she inherited the damaged Labour Party still inhabited by Rogernoms….she kept the Labour Party afloat and viable…..It remains to be seen whether the Labour Party will or can go back to its original roots before
the neo-liberal revolution of Roger Douglas, Richard Prebble et al
Mana ( and the Greens )are the option for those who want the old Labour Party values back now.!…to turn Labour around is a gamble because it still carries its baggage ….but to blame Helen Clark when she was the one who kept it afloat is quite wrong imo
..all i am pointing out..is that despite year after year of surpluses..
..clark both lifted not a finger to help the poorest..
..she also stigmatised/demonised them/further cut their meagre incomes….
..these are irrefutable facts..
..the history/record of neglect of the poorest/sickest/weakest..of that clark govt…
..and pointing out that these facts are the stick that key/national is going to use to deal to cunnliffe//labour..
..in the upcoming election-campaign..
..and that if labour don’t present some seachange-policies..
..that they will have no answers to the upcoming attacks from key/national..
..that is all that i am saying..
Helen Clark did more than Douglas or Richardson to fix neoliberalism in place. She took an economic philosophy that was hated by many and made it look respectable. In my view, she was really the one in Aotearoa who convinced people that there was no alternative. She concreted it in and firmed up the foundations. It was obvious to me, beginning with her time as Minister of Health, that she was a fervent fan of Tina.
Don’t bother telling me to jump overboard, either. I haven’t been on board the leaky Labour hulk since Big Norm died. But then again, I see reality where you see chemtrails.
@Murray Olsen @ philip ure
(derrrh..Murray Olsen…..dont get bitchy…that was a joke ha ha….about the chemtrails ( chooky joke)…although i do keep an open mind about chemtrails…there are some reputable scientists who think there have been experiments done using chemtrails to influence weather…use your imagination a wee bit more Murray Olsen and loosen up a little please)
…well i am guessing you are an old Communist and a Mana voter like phillip ure… and good on you!
….because although I agree that Labour under Helen Clark and financial management under Cullen could have put more of the surplus into social welfare ….taken as a whole Clark kept Labour afloat and on a steady course for 3 terms under very difficult circumstances
……you are not surely suggesting it would have been better to have had a NACT government in place?…or Roger Douglas or Ruth Richardson at the helm????!!!!
…now that really would be self-defeating and CRAZY
(quite frankly i can only put the sustained direction of attacks solely at the feet of Helen Clark as misogyny)
I have never criticised her feet, nor will I prostrate myself before them in worship.
What I will say is that you live in a very binary world, where the options seem to be Labour or whatever inhabits the far, far right. If any criticism of Helen Clark for anything whatsoever means I’m a fan of Douglas and Richardson, and misogynist to boot, well then, all I can say is you’re welcome to your world. That approach has a lot more to do with Prebble or MacCarthy than anything I’m interested in.
Your disconnected posting style might be worth reading if you offered rare and valuable insight. But you don’t. So why would a reader invest time learning a new way to read?
Also, your style takes up more screen real estate than necessary, which forces people to scroll, which is annoying. Perhaps you feel it is some statement against English orthodoxy, but really it’s just a barrier to communication.
given the clearly adverse reaction you are experiencing..
..i would advise you to close yr eyes tight..
..and just scroll past..
That’s what I do
done that a lot in yr life..?
lol philip ure….generally i find you amusing and worth reading….
John Key gives Prebble a tongue bath on Radio Live. Starts about 1min 30s.
That and the trolling level hotting the redline already, it is going to be a strange year in politics..
That article is very insightful and deserves some thought.
For those of you who constantly fight the inclusion of white heterosexual males you are forgetting their intelligent caring wives like me.
Disrespecting and even hating people just because of their race, sex or sexuality is unacceptable in New Zealand, that includes disrespecting our 1.5 million white heterosexual males.
heh.!..that ‘sally anne’..eh..?
“..For those of you who constantly fight the inclusion of white heterosexual males..”
i would so so like to see an:..
..oppressed ‘white heterosexual males’ march up queen st..
..(maybe (gomer pyle impersonator) chem-trails col could lead the march..?
..that laws-man-person by his side..?
..(tho’..’queen’st?..they might want to rethink their root..(oops..!..of course i meant route..)
“..we’re white..heterosexual..and we’re not gonna take it anymore..!’…?
..’free the whms..!’..?
..’whns..!..break yr chains..!..you have nothing to lose but yr audi/golf-club membership..!..’
..’free the loafer..!’..?
..’i like white bread..!’..?
and of course..for the boomers..
..chem-trails col is the spitting image of that aw@..shucks!/goofy deputy..
..in that andy griffith tv show..
i have an open mind on chem trails…us chooks have definitely seen them in the sky …Colin could be on to something there…they might be some sort of super-sonic Arc angels trails leading to heaven…a sign from heaven that the Messiah is about to arrive? ( or else they could be a HAARP experiment, as my friend in America assures me…and a sign that global warming has indeed arrived )
…darls bring out those philip ure vegan sausages to prove it is not so to Sally Anne
Aw get back in the kitchen where you belong, snigger…
I have a dream, that some day a white heterosexual male will lead the Labour Party, and, baby Jesus willing, even become Prime Minister under a Labour government. Can I get an Amen?
and the National Party
Yes, they are indeed downtrodden.
” fight the inclusion of white heterosexual males”
Sigh. They ARE included, that’s the point. SOME seem to think that because they have a little less than they might have had before, or perceive they have less, that they are excluded. It’s called sharing. I am sure you taught your kids that?
For your reading pleasure – oh and some of the 85 people they talk about, holiday here and own land. Don’t see Winston complaining much about them buying up parts of the country. http://dissentingdemocrat.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/the-85/
Thank you gentlemen, not in the kitchen I am at work. Hubby cooks better than me anyway
Best tell Him to get back in the kitchen where He belongs then, and, my sunny-side up eggs weren’t cooked this morning, tell Him to put a little speed on will you…
I would like to see YOU tell him that, I really would
Sally Anne, Lolz, really??? would He perhaps show me His caring intelligent heterosexual nature with a little assault or just become abusive,(the Alice Cooper song, ‘some folks like to feel pain’ springs to mind, is that His attraction to you),
My first instinct was to simply state ”with pleasure” and add address please, but, as Lprent rightly frowns upon such behavior,or lack of it, we can scratch the last bit,
And, i want lightly browned toast under my eggs too…
I have to go but you have made my day setting the toaster now
..will you marry me..?
Even Key doesn’t think Norman should apologise. Looks like Crazy Craig doesn’t have many allies on this…
Yeah Craig becomes an interesting specimen for psychologists the more He opens His mouth, via TV3 news we got the the bizarre Craig version of events,”i don’t think that gays should have to hide in their closets”,
Interviewed by the sympathetic Paul Henry tho, and, obviously having been ‘instructed’ on the modern language use of being ‘in’ or ‘out’ of the closet Craig then appeared to make the claim that He fully understood both the figurative and literal meanings of such phraseology,
In light of both statements from Craig which are contradictory we can only view Him as a ‘piss taker’ giving every appearance of manufacturing personal slights as the basis upon which to gain publicity,(in my honest opinion snigger)…
Wow, Key truly is the expert on everything.
I used to be a Labour voter, too. Not now while the pandering to the crazy Greens continue.
My vote will go to a common-sense party and at this point in time it is NOT the Labour Party.
Did you perchance vote for Labour between 1984 and 2011?
Who did you vote for in 2008, 2011 and who is this “common-sense” party that is not Labour, that you have in mind?
You’ve left so much unsaid… I hope it was just fore-play.
Tracey, sorry to disappoint you, but, i think that one has just shot the whole load ‘its’ been saving for quite a period of time…
I did vote Labour in 2002, 05, 08 and 11. I cannot do it this time; not while we embrace the ideas proposed by the lunatic Greens.
I might vitiate my vote or, Heaven forbid!, vote for the Nats. Yes, my disappointment with Labour is that serious. I wish we had Helen Clark back as leader.
Which particular ideas? Be specific. If you can’t be specific, then why are you wetting your pants?
you voted for Labour when it would go into coalition with the greens… I knew you couldnt bring yourself to tell us that you had voted national.
You missed the point, Tracy. Never before the Greens have influenced Labour’s agenda so much.
Read about the Green’s visceral loathing of mining and oil, and you would agree with me Labour cannot find agreement with this bunch of crazies. The same goes for their position against new roads. The Greens should be playing a minor role, never dictating our agenda. Clear enough?
No evidence, just rhetoric and hyperbole. Labour has already articulated clear differences between Green and Labour positions in the areas you mention.
I read about John Key pushing the same line as you and I wonder why he needs a scab to do it for him.
..i think chem-trails col could be the man for you..
..there is no ‘pandering to those crazy greens’ going on there..
@ adam 9
24 February 2014 at 9:30 am
For your reading pleasure……………
adam9 – That is very sobering reading. I am disgusted really. Now that this problem has been highlighted; how about a solution?
I can tell you two things: the ultra wealthy wont give up their wealth without a fight in which they will use the services of the poor who will volunteer in droves; and secondly the ultra poor will not get richer by having children they cannot afford to feed. It doesn’t take an education to know this.
The answer lies somewhere in the middle which is exactly where New Zealand is today. We are world leaders in many respects. No surprise why so many want to live here.
Sally Anne you little Eugenicist who will then judge the wealth point at which ‘poor people’ will be allowed to have children in this Utopia of yours,
Rather than decry what is in effect Nature itself would you not be better to be advocating for a full employment economy where all are paid a living wage and voting for those who would propose such a society…
Have to catch you another day on that; life and all that
Yes i can imagine that in your brand new Utopian world using the boss’s computer for other than work might get you just that, life that is,
Only takes a ‘wing-nut’ 3 or 4 comments to ‘out’ themselves as such here at the Standard, i can’t say you have broken any records today,
Phillip wants to take you off of Hubby, if you accept can i have Him as my personal serf, His cooking skills will be much appreciated, although by the sounds of Him he will need both speeding up and some intensive anger management…
“the ultra poor will not get richer by having children they cannot afford to feed”
What percentage do you think had the children before the redundancy that moved them from low or middle wage to ultra poor?
More people are a redundancy letter away from struggling big time than seem able to comprehend it.
Folks. On Friday karol put up a article “Rock Star – No Depression” Shorts in a comment, linked “Listen to Us” by Homebrew which was released prior to the 2011 election. We had a little chat about that most excellent song.
Brett Dale jumped in and threw a bucket of cold water over everything and asked how much funding they received from nz on air, to produce it, as a way of demeaning the success and initiative of this band.
I corrected him and let him know they didn’t receive a cent and linked the source for that info. I had a brief back and forward with him but left it there because I had better things to do. I checked in on Sunday a.m to see if how that chat was going and blimey, it was STILL going! I see others took up the argument with Brett Dale and that I had abandoned TS Comrades, leaving them to it! So apologies to those of you who took it up.
Just to say, as a way on explanation for my abandonment, I’m not really interested in engaging with the likes of Dale, confused, BM, etc and especially not SSlands (and there’s others I can’t think of at the mo). I find it fruitless and annoying and have to deal with folks of that RW ilk enough IRL without being drawn into their world on line as well. I find that giving them oxygen by replying only encourages them. I visit this site for purposes of education, political pulse checking and to find a sense of solidarity.
In saying that I do enjoy reading the witty retorts thrown their way and appreciate that others may want to engage in sport with these types. Sadly despite all the intelligent conversation directed their way, they haven’t learnt a thing over the years.
Good on those of you who make the gallant effort, it seems never ending.
Good on you for the effort you did put in. A DNFTT (do not feed the trolls) approach may be beneficial for election year.
Remember that they are not only trying to disrupt our conversations, but to put off the many silent readers of TS from going through the threads.
Hi CV, good point about the non commenting readers. It may be frustrating for them and they may be discouraged and give up on an otherwise enlightening topic du jour because the t….s have high jacked it and given it the RW BS treatment.
I started reading TS post 2011 election so am not sure what it’s like during campaign season. I can say though when Pete George was around it was verging on infuriating trying to read a thread with him blathering on at every opportunity. I loved it when there was a consensus among contributors to give him the DNFTT treatment. His power was diminished in a flash, which also had the effect of cleaning up the threads and allowing for free flowing reading.
I think there is merit in this approach, but then again I’d miss my frequent chuckling at bad12’s sharp and comedic replies………….as seen today, for instance…………….
I am noticing a constant flow of RWNJs. who seem to be monopolising the site. And they fill up the spaces between thoughts as they don’t have any of their own, just a desire to sneer at others who attempt thought and wish for change to better policies for the country.
I’m not going to bother to do much more on here which is a pity. I did think this would be a space for people who wanted to be enlightened, swop ideas, information, grow mentally and also think strategically about winning the election. I see very little that fits that description. And the RWNJS are entertained by so many TS people who seem undiscrimnating in what they discuss, who with, and uninterested as to what advantage.
Someone said ‘we are defending our values’. Is this against the barbarian hordes.? What good is engaging with them going to do anyone. The RWNJs are being allowed to set the agenda for discussion. I find it infuriating and I can’t be bothered with such naivety and stupidity so I won’t be around much. But I won’t be missed because what the core group here like is to merge into a neighbourhood group of goodies and engage in wordy sneering exchanges with the baddies.
Warbles! You WILL be missed! By me!
As for the you- know- who’s. How about bypassing entire chunks of discourse with them – latch on to what you find enlightening and worthy of engaging in?
Don’t let them get you down. You’ve much to offer, and if they put you off, they’ve won.
Hi Rosie. Thanks. I do have to look elsewhere though for some reasonably objective discussion. As for having to search around for crumbs under the RWNJs droppings, no thanks. If I find any interesting stuff I’ll drop it in to break up any freezing effects that have jammed the free flow of ‘ideas’.
Very true Rosie, and greywarbler, i hope your travels bring you back this way often.
It can be a much more constructive day when we dnftt. One could say it can even be bountiful. In general, dnftt is essential for making progress on serious topics when wandering around the zoo we call the political blogsphere. There is a vastly improved communication that occurs across the boards when there is a dnftt reality. I too have openly asked that people dnftt, that we actively refrain from encouraging them, just a couple of weeks ago if memory serves. I think I lasted almost a day before I gave in on that occasion.
They are just so helpless. They see the dnftt word shapes appearing on the glowy box thing.
They recognise it means no dinner, so they sit there. All doe eyed and whimpering and pathetic and you find yourself grabbing a few scraps from the larder to sustain them another day. Later, you round a corner and there is a nip at your ankle. As you turn, a whole pack jump you and drag you into their nest that is festooned with sedimentary layers of purged cud. Attacking you with poisoned barbs they inject their toxins, suspending all rational activity and you flail helplessly at their inability to follow logic or identify contradiction. Thankfully the sanity gland of most victims kicks into overdrive and secretes reservoirs of antidote, repelling the affects of the tr–ls’ bio-toxic discussion points. As you climb out of the lair, lazily scraping off the congealed gizzards of their vomitus, you wonder at it all. Time after time you ask yourself why you bothered and think surely it would be easier to rid them from your mind for good.
There is a cost to eradicating the pest though, a distinct environmental emptiness. Not exactly as severe as visiting a deforested jungle, more akin to a forgotten item on a shopping list. A steady disquiet suggesting you are not getting the full experience. A feeling markedly similar to watching a blockbuster movie, sans junkfood.
To be fair though, the blogsphere and the media it feeds off, is a complex environment full of all sorts of critters. Big ones, small ones, silly ones and tricky ones and then there are some as thick as a brick and half as useful. We live in a world where Paul Henry is once again on our screens so we cannot deny that even the most absurd of nature’s creations have a role.
Tr–ls do contribute, there is no denying it. But be warned brave travellers, like all magical and truely rare moments in nature, you will spend months waiting for it. Ever hopeful and eager, you will patiently loiter to witness the revelation and spectacle of the event. And like so many of nature’s wonders, you blink and you miss it. Thankfully with modern technology we are more likely to capture these fugacious moments. Some record penetrating illumination and brighten the darkest of subterranean caverns, dazzling us with their crystalline potential. Other times the transient noise we mistook as an echo of agreement is nothing but a precursor to an avalanche of idiocy that takes out everything, including the camera.
Naturally there are some tr–ls who will actively spoil the scene no matter who says what to whom about whatever. They are boisterous and clumsy but thankfully have the attention span of senile goldfish. The serenity of researched facts and peer-reviewed data are not for these tr–ls. Empirical proof, despite its strong voice, does not drown out the ever-present mating call of the puffchested splittongue. You hear it regularly across the blogsphere, booming out in endless repetition, “i know what i am talking about because i read/heard/saw/smelt/swallowed something someone said somewhere and I choose to interpret it in a prejudicial and fundamentally flawed manner”. This monoto-noise is usually accompanied by the much witnessed ‘perceived-effrontery’ dance. A thrilling adventure in cognitive dislocation where facts that dispute the message are decried as attacks on their intellect and/or person and the tr–ls run away as quickly as John Key skips to a photoshoot. Lastly though, we cannot ignore the reality that some tr–ls have mastered fire and just like to watch the world burn.
That was so funny and I am sure Rosie enjoyed it too. Some good thinking going on there. I am just rereading as I want to take in all the points you have made.
However I stick to one point – they are blocking the tubes and need to be flushed out.
While they might spark discussion, they also tend to lead the argument and time spent on their obssessions and provocative statements is time taken from what should be spent on our ideas on the way forward. Arguing with them is as empty as the ones on Monty Python. They bloody well should pay TS for giving them such a good time and a sense of purpose in their individually anomic, and otherwise intellectually barren lives. Once they started turning up, it was look out for the neighbourhood. The arse-it values were sure to rise.
Your comment is a tour de force, or in any form you care to tour in. And it will not be fugacious, it will remain with us for ever, or at least until the election. Tr.ls may seem
relatively innocent, but to express more flights of fancy, they are dangerous little leprechauns, will’o’the wisps who lead us astray and interfere with clear thinking. And there are only so many hours thinking time till the election. So they are malign really because we have a lot to lose.
freedom, have I told you lately I love your style? I think I have recently, or words to that effect. Your style fits well with the manner in which I absorb information. It also makes me smile.
I must say after saying what I said above at 14, I could not help myself, (so weak I know) and posted a comment at Sally Anne’s expense, something to do with nutella and phillip ure.
There was further scandalous outpourings from her (her?) a bit later to do with people not being made redundant these days. I started to type but saw what a hypocrite that would make me so deleted and cancelled the reply. Others naturally took it up – it really did need correcting. After that, it was time for a cup of tea and a think about letting go.
Keep up the good work
“..something to do with nutella and phillip ure..”
now..i wd just like to nip in the bud..any developing urban myths..
..about me and that sweet sweet substance..
..i haven’t ‘used’…’the nut’..in over 20 yrs..
well that is slightly reassuring phillip, although you did plant an image in my mind last week, that has been hard to shake, especially during the weekly shop, when the image became disturbingly more tangible. My purchase of pic’s pb, so close to……….nutella, with all it’s different sized jars!!!
Incidentally if you do find love with Sally Anne and partake of the jar, after a long absence, please consider the buy NZ made option, the “100% nutz “brand. They do a chocolate and nut spread. Quite palatable by all accounts I’m told.
i’m more a ‘pics’ peanut butter and jam kinda guy..
..hope that doesn’t ‘disturb’ next weeks’ shop/this weeks’ partaking..
Unfortunately it is what happens heading into an election year. I usually just start picking off the most egregious examples when moderating and start steadily give out longer and longer bans until the noise diminishes.
You should see the ones who are too stupid to make the cut for the first comment. There is one trying at present that currently has about 40-50 ‘comments’ that didn’t pass the first comment cut (basic anti-troll intelligence test) and went straight to spam. They have to get one intelligent comment through before the system allows them to make them without a moderators eyeover
We seem to have a bit of an onslaught since we started writing a few more posts on Cameron Slater’s many defects. They appear to be quite a lot more stupid than the ones who come off Kiwiblog’s sewer.
lprent – You do have one helluva job! (lolz about the Slater observations)
Thank you for all you do
(basic anti-troll intelligence test) or BATIT.
Or BATTY (basic anti-troll terminal yoik).
Yoik from urban dictionary –
The act of calling wenches foul names, in a futile attempt to overcome whiskey dick.
“They raise their wooden pints and they yoik and sing,
and they fight and dance ’till the morning”
yoik ? They’re not as interesting as a yoik.
+1 Rosie. Every now and then I have a bite but the constant to-ing and fro-ing is boring.
For God’s sake STOP FEEDING THEM FOLKS. IGNORE THEM. When they go too far – as they inevitably will in an effort to get a response – then lprent will dump them.
Danyl’s bias-corrected poll update.
Nat – 43.9%
Labour/Greens – 42.1%
It all speaks for itself. National definitely trending up. Labour trending down. New Zealand First probably trending up (National ruling them in?). The Greens probably down (Norman meeting Dotcom?)
The graphs indicate the trend movements began a few months before Xmas.
[lprent: Removed whatever half arse punctuation there was here. <blockquote>text</blockquote> is better than you inventing your own quotation system. Otherwise use single double quotes at each end if you don’t want to use html. ]
And now for the real news, the ROCK-BOTTOM economy,
Gross government debt 82 billion bucks and rising, does the IMF have an automatic trigger, 100+ billion dollars??? where they move in to protect the interests of the Governments creditors, looting everything in sight including superannuation funds to protect the ‘printers’ of dollars elsewhere in the world,
Government books still in the red by a massive 1.8 billion bucks, given the tax take the only way this Government of shysters is balancing the books is to use the loot from asset sales in a sleight of hand game of smoke and mirrors,
Business tax take ‘slow’ by 179 million dollars in six months, write off another 179 million bucks to tax evasion/avoidance that the IRD cannot collect as the shyster Government has sacked all the workers from that organization capable of enforcing the business tax laws leaving only the skeleton crew to plunder the workers of PAYE and GST,
Rock-Bottom economy part 3 coming to the economy near you and all you have to do is cast a vote for Slippery’s National Government of shysters,liars and fools…
“The Nanny State idea goes together with claims that the country is over-regulated, that businesses are strangled by the red tape of bureaucracy and that individuals and the economy will only be able to thrive when they are unleashed from these stifling restrictions. This rhetoric has been highly influential in New Zealand for a whole generation. But is it true?
The obvious test is to lift our heads and compare New Zealand to the rest of the world. My reference point for this is the far right think tank in Washington DC called the Heritage Foundation. For decades it has lobbied the US government for policies such as more nuclear weapons, less social security and lower taxes. Each year the Heritage Foundation produces a world-wide survey that ranks 184 countries according to how close they are to its preferred economic policies. Known as the “Index of Economic Freedom”, it judges each country according to its “financial freedom”, meaning how free banks and finance companies are from local laws and regulations; its “labour freedom”, meaning things such as how free companies are to pay low wages and end employment without compensation; its “investment freedom”, meaning how few restrictions there are on foreign companies; and also business freedom, trade freedom, monetary freedom and so on. More “free” means good, less “free” means bad. It’s clear where they stand.”
Bruce Jesson Lecture
“does the IMF have an automatic trigger, 100+ billion dollars??? where they move in to protect the interests of the Governments creditors, looting everything in sight including superannuation funds to protect the ‘printers’ of dollars elsewhere in the world,”
Have you not heard of the ‘protective’ measures our government/banks have introduced, commonly referred to ‘hair cuts’? – Not sure what Bad12 was referring to but these ‘hair cuts’ appear to be policies along the lines of what Bad12 was talking about.
Not quite blue leaopard, ”haircuts” are authorized by Governments after the excrement has become hopelessly entangled in the air movement device again forcing the Trading Banks into or close to insolvency, the relevant Government then allows the trading banks to steal a percentage of any monies held on account with the banks,
The IMF in the guise in which my above comment refers to them move into a country when their Government debt has reached a judged level of not being able to be paid to secure Government and citizens assets so as to protect the creditors of such a Government,
A grand little protection racket worthy of the Mafia considering a large part of this present Governments borrowing is of the ‘just printed’ kind that Slippery the Prime Minister so deplores when it is suggested that New Zealand as a sovereign nation should have bailed itself out of the Global Financial Crisis instead of attempting to borrow us all into the third world on a sugar rush of borrowing other countries just printed scrip…
The IMF has no problem with New Zealand’s current Crown debt, its outlook, or the strategy for managing it. No problems. At all. We are an exemplar to the rest of the world.
There are some issues around private debt, hence the Government’s broad rebalancing strategy.
BTW it would help your communicaions if you adoped a less demented writing style. You do not have the intellect to make abuse funny. You need to be a Paul Keating to land that. You simply come across as a crazy person.
Exactly SSLands, the IMF hasn’t got a problem with Slippery the Prime Minister and Bill His Minister of Watching Widening Fiscal Deficits taking the Government gross debt up into the 100 billion + range,
Come the next ‘Crisis’ the IMF will simply don the jackboots under the suits and move in extracting major shits and giggles from the onlooking world banking community as they loot the place in an effort to secure the lenders interests,
No different from a little firm of company receivers SSLands,
Your advice concerning my writing style or lack of one has been read laughed at and will be ignored…
How fucking ruuuuuude.
Compared to December’s Treasury forecasts, core tax revenue including GST, income tax and corporate tax receipts are $600 million below forecast. ” Second month in a row.
Treasury forecasts always overestimate National’s policies and underestimate Labour’s.
That should probably be a subject of some investigative journalism.
I could “earn” $60.00/week by reproducing. Why not just take less tax off me. Seems a bit silly really.
Lol. Allyson is added to the list, re my point at #16.
“Me me me me me me me me me me.”
That was a political message from the National Party.
“Meme meme meme meme meme”
That was a political message from the National Party
Allyson, you can multi task then, you should remain as barren as your comment is, would seem to stop at least one ‘birth for money’ occurring…
You are a very unpleasant person.
Nice of you to notice, i am in fact on my ‘best behavior’, and, in fact am capable of a stream of far more glowing niceties should i believe a particular comment warrants such…
Bad12 tends to get emotional in the face of increased infant mortality and callous disregard. Sometimes it leaks out, like prejudice from a Tory.
I’ve also had a gutsful of selfish and callous bigotry such as that exhibited by Allyson. It disgusts me how low they’ll stoop.
I quite agree that Allyson’s comment about how people breed for money is both quite vile and ridiculous ($60 a week doesn’t cover the cost of a child!).
And I can understand being upset by that.
But looking down at this Open Mike for today, Bad12 has thrown around barren and being in the kitchen and so on. All of it the language of unpleasant sexism. Now, I suspect he doesn’t mean it in such way. I suspect his joke of getting back into the kitchen was exactly that: a sarcastic joke.
But using the language of sexism to make a joke where the punch-line is still in the effect the oppressed party (even if the oppressed party is vile or perhaps lying about who they are) is still reinforcing the language of sexism.
And makes for unpleasant society just as much as people who accuse people of breeding for money.
Wah wah wah, aw look it’s the speech police in the form of Disraeli Gallstone, save it for someone that will likely be impressed by your invective Disraeli, i am far from it, impressed that is,
Notice how the commenter i directed the ‘get back in the kitchen’ comment at took it in the vein that it was intended, and, as the comment was not directed at you who really gives a shit about your pathetic sensibilities, i sure as hell don’t,
There’s something sexist about telling an obvious shit to stay barren is there???, please do tell us all more…
“There’s something sexist about telling an obvious shit to stay barren is there???, please do tell us all more…”
No but it is extremely rude. You will simply alienate yourself from all thinking people if you keep up this vile invective. If you want to be taken seriously I suggest you resolve to change your ways.
SSLands, although unintended your comment is truly humorous, there is hope for you yet, probably about the time your boss sacks you for using His computer for non work related ‘amusements’,(note to self: have to drop narc note in the mail box),
i will have to assume that you include yourself in the category of ‘the thinking person’ which is the source of amusement at your most recent of comments,
Felix of all the commenters has an appropriate means of addressing such a whine, it starts with a Ha–ha–ha and continues on in the vein for quite some time,
i will leave you and Disraeli Gallstone to masterbate over the niceties of my sexism or otherwise,
Please note: i have again misspelled masturbate so as to give you two something further to whinge about like beaten dogs in my absence this afternoon..
bad12…thanx for a good laugh!
You must hate WO and KB then.
For the life of me I can’t find your response to Allyson’s comment?
I think this comment speaks for itself.
I hope, maybe in a couple of years time, you might realise where the damage may come from your comments like that (it’s a cycle of approval that such imagery is fine to use as an insult to put people in their place or invalidate their opinions).
(I’m also making an assumption of you being a person of tender age based off your spelling and reading comprehension. I apologise if that assumption is wrong.)
Gall stone, yawn, simply drivel, and, as my answer to you on yesterdays ‘open mike’, put there this morning for your enlightenment states, i have no problem with comprehension unless it is that of deliberation,
Be a good little child and go fetch for a read wont you…
I’ve already read and responded to it this morning. Hours ago.
So, umm. You seem to amazingly make yourself look more stupid with each post. That’s quite a talent. Come back when you’re a little wiser.
Good speed, sir.
DG, can I please state that as a “barren woman” (child free by choice) I was not insulted or offended by bad’s response to Allyson.
I was however annoyed by Allyson’s breeding for money comment. I believe that she stated that in order to set off an aggro conversation, for her own thrills.
Kind of embarrassing for her though, continuing on with this RW path of ignorance around a)the nuts and bolts of Labour’s baby bonus policy and b) the advantages of such a policy.
Did you direct your initial reaction to Allyson’s post or wait to chastise bad? bad offends me at times however the adding of “snigger” to his comment was surely as good as adding (sarc)?
“I quite agree that Allyson’s comment about how people breed for money is both quite vile and ridiculous ” then go take her to task.
Way to bring out the haters…. It seems you get attacked for making a good point. You are not alone here, some of us agree with you
What hypocrisy, to spread “breeding-for-a-business” bigotry and then accuse others of hatred.
I reject the vile prejudice that you display, the wilful ignorance that stains your politics, your fact-free anecdotal sloth. You should be ashamed of it and yourself, but since you lack even that basic human morality, here we are.
n.b. You may be unwittingly flattering Sally Anne and her ilk, One Anonymous Bloke. It might not be ‘wilful’ ignorance; having related to people who work advising local businesses, the general impression I get is an expression of shock at the lack of understanding people here in NZ have of basic income and expenditure calculations to work out profits.
@ Sally Anne
Allyson’s is only a good point if you don’t understand basic budget calculations; that is to balance your income with expenditure
To spell out the point: having a baby causes additional expenses – when these expenses are taken into account – you don’t end up with an ‘extra $60 in your pocket’.
It is distressing to think that there are people out there, such as yourself and Allyson, who do not have such basic budgeting knowledge. And so much so that you would print your ignorance here for all to witness.
…I guess the prevalence of this lack of simple mathematical skills is how Nact manage to have so many people believing that our economy is on the up and up…..
1) Allyson sounds like she would soundly beat you in a math competition.
2) She didn’t say the new parent would get an extra $60 in their pocket she indicated the $60 would come from someone else’s pocket (and that does not include the administration). Obvious really.
3) Basic budgeting knowledge? Does a $32 million dollar budget count?
4) The economy is indeed on the up and up; that’s an indisputable fact. Remember there is a lag with these things so some of the credit goes to the Clark government.
blue leopard – I’m sorry to say but your prejudice has blinded you to reality and your insulting remarks make you look small. There are people of all sorts who vote Labour; all your remarks do is alienate some of us.
lol top marks for fantastical thinking, there Sally Anne – for getting points 1 & 2 out of Allyson’s “I could “earn” $60.00/week by reproducing. Why not just take less tax off me. Seems a bit silly really.”
Re point 3. It is not the amount of numbers you count – it is how effectively you manage the numbers them that makes the difference between sound budgeting and not.
Re point 4.
You must hate the $55b govt debt which is climbing daily?
Sally Anne, ”the economy is on the up”, i do like a laugh but the Rock-Bottom economy is only on the up in the sense that it is up to it’s neck in debt…
Are you referring to me Sally Anne, looks like you have given the cold shoulder to Phillip Ure’s offer, good choice i might add, He could never satisfy your needs like…oh lets discuss that on another day Lolz,
My skin and cranial cavity are way too thick to be deterred in the least by the likes of SSLands and Disraeli GallStone and i keep them busy which means that they are not wrecking the more serious aspects of Posts here at the Standard and in the brawl that has been my life so far they have all the effect upon me as very small sucker fish would…
+100 …you do great work for all of us bad12
bad, are there always so many haters on this blog? or are they just misogynists? I’ll give you credit for at least being open Philip would make a girl smile; I like that.
Hate, no no no, Hate is far to strong an adjective, when you have been a commenter on the Standard for a while you will see in different guises,(different user-names), the same old right wing fallacies trotted out time after time ad nauseum,
At first commenters tend to debate the issue with ‘the other side’, but, saying the same old same old to the constant stream of ‘under–bridge–dwellers’ becomes a pointless repetition at a certain point and they simply become the tools of a sporting occasion,
Good to see you defending your sister Allyson, She would obviously adhere to your beliefs surrounding only those with an amount of wealth being able to have children which is in fact the underlying message inherent in Her comment,
”Why not just take it out of my tax” is all too suggestive of ”and those on benefits shouldn’t get any” as the next comment racked up in what is obviously a small mind,
And you thought you had escaped the eugenics inference encapsulated in your previous comment on the matter didn’t you…
Had to look “eugenics” up, does that make me silly? It sounds like no more than evolution to me. Hubby will know more. Our after sport evening discussion is decided
Ps. I don’t include you in the haters; something you said made sense…. somewhere lol!
Sally Anne, i shudder to think what occurs in your mind, and, deciding on stupidity or otherwise i will leave to others, for all i know you might be a genius at playing the piano or something,
So you know nothing of any workers redundancies of the past couple of years and you think eugenics sounds like evolution, this does start to walk me down the path where the only conclusion i could possibly reach begins with stu, or, lean me toward Tracey’s view that you are simply a man taking the piss for your own amusement,
Evolution for your info is humans adapting to certain conditions in their surroundings where eugenics is humans in search of a superior race making decisions about who can have children based upon a set of criteria that they control,
So when you begin to advocate that only people of a certain income should be allowed to have children you are in effect advocating eugenics which is a truly fucked up ideology which would have for instance stopped Slippery the current Prime Minister from being born along with a whole demographic of the rich and/or famous, while in a society practicing eugenics Nick Smith for instance would have carte blanch breeding rights…
“Philip would make a girl smile; I like that”.
Well, you’d have to get to know him first……………..and I would suggest that when you go to his house and reach for the nutella to spread on your toast, give it a good sniff. You don’t know where it’s been………………
So your only objection to the policy is how the $60 gets to someone?
Interesting…. Kathryn Ryan interviewing an American woman Professor on American culture ….and amongst other things the very dangerous backlash against feminism….. and women’s rights to control their own bodies and fertility..In the USA family planning clinics are being dis-established and this is a continuation of the right wing moral majority and Catholic onslaught against abortion clinics
The Catholic Church has always opposed contraception for women!….a standout from the beginning amongst all the other religions …it was opposed to womens’ rights to fertility control, contraception and abortion ……and it continues to be opposed to womens’ rights to contraception
The great American feminist Gloria Steinem drew parallels between the Christian Right, the Roman Catholic Church and Nazism – particularly in regard to womens’ rights to contraception, work outside the family, their role inside the family as breeders, mothers and wives, and issues such as abortion, homosexuality and feminism….
( ‘The Nazi Connection’ Research done at the Woodrow Wilson Centre of Smithsonian Institution. pub. ‘Speak Out Against the New Right’ (Boston, Beaon Press, 1982)
….seems like these battles of misogyny and oppression of women are never won entirely but must be re-fought each generation
Take any cult and examine the birth story of its figurehead. If the birth story involves a sexless conception or a virgin birth or a vagina-less delivery, that cult is predicated on a fear and mistrust of women.
Back again but just for a minute – replies follow:
bad12 – That insult to Allyson was creepy; disappointing
Phillip ure – Can you cook?
Tracey – You do know people with jobs can vote Labour don’t you?
Oh dear, lunch break, Bye
@ Sally Anne…philip ure can cook the great ‘philip ure Vegan Sausages’….we all want to buy some but he is being very coy
“..Phillip ure – Can you cook?..”
i certainly can..am contemplating a cook-book..writing one..
..are we negotiating here..?
..i’ll bet you he can’t make you laugh..like i could make you laugh..
..you know that is true..
..(and you must like dogs..)
..and i’m looking for a ‘stand by yr man!’..woman..
..and you seem that..
..(until of course..you run off with me..eh..?..)
Love Vegan; it has to be prepared right though. I leave it to the professionals at the local vegan café I bet you would make me laugh. Oh well another time maybe x
yr breaking my heart here..
(aside:..’she ‘likes vegan’..she ‘likes vegan’..!..)
..don’t worry folks..!
..i’ll take care of the political-education side of things..!
..she’ll be singing ‘the workers’ flag is deepest red’..
..(between laughs/giggles that is..)
You leave the internet to take a lunch break???
Anyway you seem to be having some comprehension problems. Your response above attempts to address this question i asked you. I have put it in bold to help you see it.
Either she’s wasting her employers time, or she is paid to be an online troll.
oe is a he being a troll during work hours… who knows.
Oh! hello Tracey
The answer is – I have no idea about the timeline of redundancy or children first; does anyone?
Does that make Allyson wrong though? I don’t think so.
Who gets made redundant these days anyway? And any employer I have had would take personal circumstances into account I’m sure.
Honestly I have never been terminated from a job and probably never will so its best to seek advice from somebody who has.
How is it even possible to be “ultra poor” in New Zealand? If we meet anyone like that we should refer them to WINZ I think.
Who gets made redundant these days anyway?
So. Out. Of. Touch.
Seriously, you ask if the concept of social mobility makes Allyson wrong (which it might very well do, depending on the extent), then you implicitly argue that the “ultra poor” might not even exist in NZ (therefore, yes Allyson is wrong).
But the reality is that tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of NZers have been made redundant in the last 5 years. Most of them avoidably, if the government really were “business friendly” and “good economic managers”, rather than asset-strippers and looters.
+100…it is a shame and a disgrace
Seriously Sally Anne, you have no idea about the trail of redundancies across New Zealand in the last 3 years???,
Whats it like inside the bubble you appear to inhabit???,” you are alright so who cares about the rest of them” the motto is it???…
Ahhhh Sally-Anne. rst time poster having a love-in with Phil and bad and yet still Just reads like a white guy pretending to be a woman.
It makes Allyson’s comment unfounded and with no basis in fact. It assumes people become poor and have children not the other way round due to circumstances changing.
Good for you at your certainty you will never be made redundant. Is your husband your enmployer? If yes, you might want to consider the divorce rate is very high and is a kind of redundancy.
I see prebble is back.
another swingeing lawyer who never made anything but knows how to work the legal system.
will the voters of Epsom let prebble get away with installing an ACT faction intent on wrecking the education system?
I see him on tv last night with abig dog.
he must be compensating for a small willy.
lol….i heard Prebble’s Peugeot once blew up in Waikanae…
(Peugeots have a habit of doing this….they dont like NZ unleaded petrol)
…he should have been using rail….ooops he sold New Zealand Rail
“I see him on tv last night with abig dog.
he must be compensating for a small willy.”
Cripes, what does that mean for those of us who don’t have a dog?
…maybe they have a little kitten?
or a small dog..?
..does the inverse apply..?
Prebble is back…
Maybe the media will stop calling him the former Labour Minister and call him ACT’s fundraiser… Is Bassett still alive? Now Prebble cant be used as a former Labour Minister, they might have to trot out Basett?
So now everyone knows Joky Hen lives in Parnell and D.C. lives in Herne Bay.
But does anyone, including Blinglish himself, know where he lives?
Karori, Dipton … ???
I’ve never seen him at the local Countdown…
A F/B friend shared a thread of Don Brash’s. At first I was highly annoyed as it was an unpalatable thought reading what the forgotten Don was up to. Anyway curiosity got the better of me. What gave me a laugh was Don is replying with serious answers to someone who uses a Golly Wog as his profile photo.
Reading further down Brash is waxing lyrical about the return of Richard Prebble to head the campaign and how they need to raise 1 million dollars for the election fund. Another laugh was since they rejected their major sponsor from standing in Epsom they now have to go out cap in hand looking for donators.
The final laugh I got was Brash talking about getting 6-7% of the party vote. Currently polling 0 perhaps Don should be a little less ambitious and settle on trying out poll the other dead duck United Future.
^ thought of Sryland on the above made me laugh a bit longer
I thought “Prebble aims to bring in 9 ACT MP’s” particularly hilarious:
Oh and folks! Speaking of “the other dead duck, United Future”. Do ya’ all know that Labour has announced it’s candidate for Ohariu???
I didn’t. I found out yesterday through the Ohariu grapevine but in fact it was announced last week:
Given that the electorates of Epsom and Ohariu share the dubious honour of propping up our government I thought this announcement would be BIG news. Instead,we hear about Prebble’s return. So TV3, cheer leading for the right and conveniently playing it down in Ohariu, as in not a peep, just cos, you know, some one might give Dunne a run for his money?
Or does the Labour Party want to keep it low key? Where’s the trumpets?
and if you put anderson labour party in google, the labour party site doesnt even come up…
I know, it’s curious isn’t it? Almost as curious as the media silence…………I have a lot of questions floating around in my mind but don’t want to jump to conclusions, given I live in the electorate and may potentially end up volunteering my support to the campaign.
PS. A different google search came up with this:
“Labour picks hopeful to take on Dunne
Labour will tomorrow confirm Virginia Andersen as its candidate for Ohariu to take on UnitedFuture leader Peter Dunne. Her uncontested selection comes after former Labour staffer Deborah Mahuta-Coyle, who works for the Petroleum Exploration and Production Association, pulled out of the race. Ms Andersen has worked for the Office of Treaty Settlements, police and as a private secretary and senior political adviser with Labour in Parliament.”
Er, well I’m glad the oil company staff member pulled out of the race…………geez.
It doesnt make news on the labour website… and labour party is a top of google search for one of their hopefuls. online stuff can be controlled by labouor…
I pointed this out on 11 February 2014 when you raised the question about Ohariu.
I guess people don’t bother following their own comments…
While I do not know either Cole or Andersen I’, very disappointed that we are getting our candidates from the narrow gene pool of the Parliamentary Precinct. We have far far far to many internal staffers becoming MPs. That is one of the reason that we have few great politicians on the front bench.
Interesting words from Mr Neikrie. to our common question ‘Well what do you think of NZ’?
Jamie Neikrie from USA writing on Scoop ‘Go with the Flow’ on 10/Feb/14
….But I have found that the Kiwi attitude and outlook goes beyond sheer approachability. New Zealand is a culture defined by adaptability and it pays off….
New Zealand also has no written constitution and a unicameral legislative system. Such a style of governance allows the country to adapt quickly to the times, but the lack of checks and balances can also be its downfall. In the 80’s, the Fourth Labor government inherited a country that had been under the “cradle to grave” welfare mentality since the 30’s and responded by embracing a wholly capitalist system, privatizing industries without any market control. Political scientist Jack Nagel wrote,
Between 1984 and 1993, New Zealand underwent radical economic reform, moving from what had probably been the most protected, regulated and state-dominated system of any capitalist democracy to an extreme position at the open, competitive, free-market end of the spectrum……….
I think that New Zealand’s political and social flexibility is more than a byproduct of its geography and sociography. It is a cultural norm, ingrained in the country as deeply as stubbornness is imbedded in New Yorkers.
During my stay here I will continue to examine the roots of this phenomenon. Perhaps it could be a result of Maori culture. But until I learn, cheers New Zealand. Don’t ever stop adapting. Way to stay sweet as. Am I using that right?
I doubt it is down to a culture that many attempted to destroy and many still vilify.
DC on RNZ tomorrow with Ryan. No idea what time I would guess between 9 and 10
Last week with Key it was first up after 9oclock news.
Yes David Cunliffe on till 10am after the 9am news.
On the government behaving with integrity with your private data.
Britain’s NHS is to have an extensive database which will be most useful for medical information and science. http://www.statschat.org.nz/
But saying that it can be anonymous as personal details won’t go in apparently isn’t right as it can be reversed to get them.
This is from The Telegraph –
Worse still, the Telegraph has a story claiming that 13 years of complete British hospital records were sold to insurers, who used them to improve risk estimates and increase premiums. This is a problem because one of the key guarantees of the system was going to be that data wouldn’t get to insurers. The data release was under the old rules, not from the new proposed database, but it still is Not Helpful if you’re trying to persuade people not to worry.
never watched it but I am sure he gets paid outof his contract . sigh
But there might be legal chickens coming home to roost from his days as editor of one of the hacking scandal papers.
Now this does sound dodgy
meh just looks more like bad business processes and invoicing to me, both parties need a bot of a kick up the bum but i don’t think there’s anything more than that.
Of course not snort
where the fuck were you when the stadium was being planned?
James Forsyth @JGForsyth
Lynton Crosby 2 tell Tory MPs to stop rebelling+get in line. Will warn tonight’s party meeting that Labour is the beneficiary of Tory splits
The crazed Bible Banging Right’s cesspit is bottomless ? Looks like it.
the donkey mural, for those interested http://postimg.org/image/5bbd8t991/
Hayden, oh Hayden, idelgus has found the donkey mural for you…
The Donkey’s name is Brucie and i have long put forward the suggestion that Slippery the Prime Minister covers the large bald spot on His head with the soft hairs plucked from the anal crevice of a Donkey named Brucie,
Lolz, the proof of the assertion is in the picture…
Abusing people and getting away with it
The Panel, Radio NZ National, Monday 24 February 2014
Jim Mora, Finlay Macdonald, Jordan Williams
First topic on today’s show: the tragic death of Charlotte Dawson, and the concomitant problem of cyber-bullying. Right near the end of twenty minutes of discussion, host Jim Mora assumed his most caring tone and said: “You can’t just roundly abuse people and get away with it, can you?”
In fact, you can abuse people and get away with it—if you’re an extreme right wing commentator on Jim Mora’s radio show. In 2007, that cranky old ACT loon Michael Bassett was a guest on the Panel. In the course of a typically crazed, marginally coherent rant, the old monster took the opportunity to snarl that Nicky Hager was “a Holocaust-denier.”
Intrigued by Jim Mora’s newly developed concern for decency and propriety, I sent him the following reminder of one of the more shameful episodes from the bad old days of the Panel….
In 2007, Dr Michael Bassett made the mad and dishonest assertion that Nicky Hager was “a Holocaust-denier”. He was a guest on your show when he told that outrageous lie. Neither you nor the other guest uttered a word of protest. It is encouraging to learn that you are now quite concerned about people like Dr Michael Bassett roundly abusing people and getting away with it.
Your one of the reasons I have given up on the internet.
A poor sad confused fellow writes:
Your [sic] one of the reasons I have given up on the internet.
So what are you doing on the internet then?
Brett is presumably referring to his blog, which I for one miss, if only because he was often quite sound on cricketing issues.
edit: Not too shabby on football either:
Has Brett ever heard of the concept of “resilience”?
Te Reo Putake:
Thanks for the kind words, Ive done with the whole internet, (except keeping
in touch with family, and watching modern family)
So seeya all, and have fun.
And the crowd erupted in gales of tears as Brett dale slowly, with slumped shoulders left the auditorium for the last time,
Scraaaaaaaaatch–in the real world tho enthusiastic cheering greeted Dale’s imminent departure from the pixelated world of cyber space, not long after the loud sound of Ha–ha–ha was heard through-out the net…
Cheers, Brett, best of luck in the analogue world. You’re not alone; my ex has been internet free since about 2000. Hasn’t bothered her in the least. Reads books and phones real friends. Nice.
All the best Brett. You’re one of the few righties who comment here I actually like.
Ka kite brett – you were a unique voice here and I appreciated that – hope it all goes well for you.
I’ll miss you too Brett. Good luck with the costume stuff.
Sniff, sniff, whats this then, a fear filled election bribe from Slippery the Prime Minister raising the minimum wage to $14.25, betcha Slippery cannot point out in the unemployment figures the 2000 people he claims will be made unemployed by this,(much needed i admit), raising of the wages of those who earn the least,
The last word on this of course has to go to the insightful young woman earning that minimum wage, ”its still not enough to live on so you needn’t have bothered”,
i agree with Her, Slippery the stingy little toe rag has just caught the minimum wage up with where it should have been last year with the mingy raise it got from the PM then…
The Cabinet takes a decision on the MW based on a recommendation by the Minister of Labour. The submission is not from the PM.
Of course he can’t point to the 2,000. Don’t tell me. You think it has zero employment impact?
Plus it is hardly an election bribe. The rate has increased every year since they took office.
Referring to the PM as a “toe rag” is totally disrespectful. You just don’t get it do you?
SSLands, Totally disrespectful??? hell yes i do get it, why do you think i made the comment, in my world respect is an earned quality, Slippery the PM has as yet failed to earn any here,
Yawn, SSLands most here will remember your sudden absence from the Standard the last time you instigated a debate on the minimum wage and what effect it has on employment with a bullshit link,
For about 3 weeks after that SSLands i posted a link or two every day showing that the minimum wage has no effect on employment, but, of course you had tucked tail and run presumably to play in the sewer like a coward,
Would you like me to start again tomorrow with the series of links to various studies that show that raising the minimum wage effects employment not one iota, the profit will probably be in you tucking tail and scarpering again which might make it well worth the effort…
Making people work for $14.25/hr is disrespectful.
But then you think actually fucking people over is more polite than a slightly red word or two, you unregenerate failed attempt at humanity.
Given that he refers to a lot of women as “breeding for a living” and Colin Craig in my opinion refers to how promiscuous young women are (BTW who are they actually being promiscuous with- oh that’s right promiscuous young men) I think that’s a pretty small comment
SSLands, your other point, ”Of course He can’t point to the 2000”, exactly my point, if it cannot be proved then Slippery the Prime Minister and you are simply bullshit artists…
the fucker can’t even point to the other 168,000 jobs we’ve been promised for 5 years.
whoops – calling the pm “fucker”, so disrespectful. Frowny-face at me.
I meant “lying piece of shit”.
Lolz Mac, just soooo disrespectful…
The Standard is proudly powered by
WordPress. Theme by Mummybot.
139 queries. 1.481 seconds.