Daily Review 22/10/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 pm, October 22nd, 2015 - 13 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

typical argument with a fox news conservative

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

13 comments on “Daily Review 22/10/2015”

  1. whateva next? 1

    picture looks like Key and little across the “debating” chamber

    • mickysavage 1.1

      I presume Key is on the right?

      • weka 1.1.1

        The problem with that image is that it’s about the US. In NZ at least I don’t think you can make the same generalisation about conservatives.

      • whateva next? 1.1.2

        of course, doing his usual “It’s all your fault” rant, whilst Little watches with that bemused, incredulous look on his face

      • whateva next? 1.1.3

        Of course! Little looking on with a bemused, incredulous look, whilst Key rants on “It’s all your fault”

  2. Rosemary McDonald 2

    Sick with cancer?

    Tough shit, suck it up, take a number, get the form signed (again)….and ffs don’t expect special treatment from WINZ?

    The financial ruin caused by you getting cancer….wear it.

    HOWEVER….hot on the heels of this,

    https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/acc-law-change-will-help-superannuitants-after-spouse%E2%80%99s-death

    if you are on Nat Super and your spouse (who is still earning) is tragically killed…you can get paid the super AND ACC surviving spouse weekly compensation for five years!

    Crucifixion?

    You lucky, lucky bastards.

    • weka 2.1

      The disparity between what happens to people hurt by accident and people hurt by illness is massive and it’s long overdue for being looked at. Doesn’t feature high on the political priorities of many people, and not surprisingly ill people are some of the least able to lobby on this.

      • KJT 2.1.1

        ACC extended to illness is long overdue. I believe some of the founders of ACC recommended that it cover illness and accident.

        Tho at the moment National are doing their best to destroy ACC altogether, by accumulating money instead of paying out for accidents.

        • Rosemary McDonald 2.1.1.1

          National fattening ACC up to sell off? Yep, I can see that.

          ACC does has an embarrassment of wealth, and ACC have been arseholes over the past few years…declining claims and curtailing entitlements where they think they can get away with it.

          BUT..there is another side to ACC…clients in the Serious Injury group….usually VERY well looked after, and the disparity between ACC and MOH for spinal cord impairment has finally been examined. Quite shocking to compare the two…one would think you were looking at two different countries, not two types of state funded care.

          I have spoken with professionals who are frustrated that ACC decline claims or stops cover for those who need treatment…and approves claims and continues treatment for those who should be moved off.

          ACC can be quite amenable to litigious squeaky wheels.

          Woodhouse,… “1988, he prepared a third report, “Personal Injury: Prevention and Recovery”,[6] which recommended an end to the disparities between the treatment of accident victims and those incapacitated by sickness or disease.[7]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Woodhouse

        • weka 2.1.1.2

          I didn’t know that about the history.

          Have to say though, I’d rather deal with WINZ than ACC, which is saying a lot.

          • Rosemary McDonald 2.1.1.2.1

            “I’d rather deal with WINZ than ACC, which is saying a lot.”

            I’ve heard many times how horrible ACC can be….speaking to a woman just the other day who got a seriously shit deal over a really hideous Treatment Injury.

            BUT, the true opposite number to ACC is the Ministry of Health:Disability Support Services. Those guys take the top prize for kicking people when they are down.

  3. Vaughan Little 3

    yeah the picture is a major problem. I can’t think of a more arrogant piece of political expression. and it’s confused – I mean the dude on the right is meant to be possessed of religion, but it was Christians who invented the book, simply because their texts were too long to fit well into the scroll format. I could go on. I think I’ll simply offer a different insight every time I see it here. otherwise my comment will go to book length in itself.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts