Face facts, Nats

33 comments on “Face facts, Nats ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Kaplan 1

   18 August 2011 at 1:55 pm

   By sand do you mean their collective arse?
   Watching the nats try and spin there way around this makes me feel physically sick. Watching the polls continue to show that a large portion of the population either don’t care at all or simply don’t care enough to want to vote these clowns out makes me feel even worse.
2. tc 2

   18 August 2011 at 2:14 pm

   Be careful statistics NZ…..your masters may ‘realign’ you with this inconvenient truth. Via some more of those ‘consultants’ the nats wheeled into treasury and other areas.
3. queenstfarmer 3

   18 August 2011 at 2:23 pm

   What explanation(s) has Labour given for the 250,000+ people without enough work in 2008, after 9 years of it being in Govt?
   • D13 3.1

     18 August 2011 at 2:33 pm

     YEp, another 115000 is a lot better. Thank goodness younare a queenst farmer and not a rel one.
     • queenstfarmer 3.1.1

       18 August 2011 at 3:07 pm

       another 115000 is a lot better

       You really think so?
       • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1.1

         18 August 2011 at 3:17 pm

         Jeez, do you not get sarcasm without a fucken great flashing sign to point it out to you? What a muppet.
         • queenstfarmer 3.1.1.1.1

           18 August 2011 at 5:19 pm

           iro·ny:
           a : the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning

           b: you missing the sarcasm in my reply to a sarcastic comment

           (and yes, it is the lowest form of wit).
           • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1.1.1

             18 August 2011 at 9:27 pm

             Gee, and here’s me thinking you were the lowest form of wit.
   • Tiger Mountain 3.2

     18 August 2011 at 2:54 pm

     You can drop the “they did it too’ shtick Queen St sheep shagger, the figures were regularly trending down under the Labour led administration. There was precarious employment, part timers wanting more hours and all the rest during Labour’s term but things were demonstrably improving.

     National has to take responsibility for now.
     • queenstfarmer 3.2.1

       18 August 2011 at 3:09 pm

       You can drop the “they did it too’ shtick

       Where’d I say that? Just asked a simple question. You appear to take exception to such things. You have though provided 2 explanations:

       1. “precarious employment” (not quite sure what that is)
       2. “part timers wanting more hours”

       I’ll see if any more are put forward.
       • The Voice of Reason 3.2.1.1

         18 August 2011 at 3:19 pm

         Precarious employment is what you’ve got if you don’t lift your game, Queenie.
   • Colonial Viper 3.3

     18 August 2011 at 5:14 pm

     The explanation qstf is that Labour bought into the neoliberal bullshit of a ‘natural rate of unemployment’ and the expectation that ‘market forces’ would deliver the results most beneficial to society in a timely fashion.
4. Marjorie Dawe 4

   18 August 2011 at 4:13 pm

   The work test is one hour a week. Thats a crock because it should be measured on who is earning enough to survive on.
   I know of so many people whose greedy overseas bosses expect them to do 4 hours work in 2 1/2 hours and then grizzle if the work isnt done to a high standard. Then the workers end up working four hours anyway and getting paid for the 2 1/2.
   The bosses have forgotten who made them wealthy in the first place and should learn to share their good fortune.
   • TightyRighty 4.1

     18 August 2011 at 4:48 pm

     making claims like that is an incitement to disbelief. Not many people are in a salaried job that only requires 2.5 hours at a time. That could be the only way people are working four hours and only getting paid for two and a half. Unless you mean that people are salaried for 60 hours pre week and are actually working 80. there can be many reasons for this and most people pulling these hours are happy to in the expectation of getting ahead in their chosen line of work. Wage earners get paid on an hourly rate, so your claim is dubious. unless you can provide some proof. Seeing as you know of so many people doing this, it shouldn’t be difficult.
     • Marjorie Dawe 4.1.1

       18 August 2011 at 4:50 pm

       I work for a union and yes this is common. You could try being a cleaner for whom English is a second language. The other group I can immediately think of are the ethnic restaurant workers. You can find some good examples in the Employment Relations Authority or search sweat shops in the Herald. Many of these people are too frightened to speak up because they are fearful that their bosses will sack them and tell immigration.
       • TightyRighty 4.1.1.1

         18 August 2011 at 5:08 pm

         Then report the boss? As a union worker, shouldn’t your primary role to protect the interests of workers? I don’t doubt it happens, I doubt it’s as widespread as you claim it to be. If it’s so rampant, there would be even more court cases than there currently are. what you are talking about is akin to slavery and the people responsible need to be disciplined to the full extent of the law. You could play your part by naming and shaming them. This could be a good opportunity for you right now even.
         • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.1.1

           18 August 2011 at 5:10 pm

           Fuck exploitation and the supporting of exploitation.
         • The Voice of Reason 4.1.1.1.2

           18 August 2011 at 5:49 pm

           TR has just unintentionally pointed out why the fire at will legislation is so bad, though it’ll probably take him a few minutes to understand the connection.
         • Marjorie Dawe 4.1.1.1.3

           18 August 2011 at 8:32 pm

           Maybe you should talk to your cleaner!
         • Marjorie Dawe 4.1.1.1.4

           18 August 2011 at 8:40 pm

           The trouble with that is that most of the time, and if they are challenged, the bosses pay enough to shut the workers up in a confidential mediation settlement. If you have no money it is hard to turn this down. Then these unscrupulous bosses move on to intimidate their next vicitm. Maybe you can help out by talking to the Thai guy who brings you a meal or your cleaner. We should all be responsible for others dont you think.
   • Vicky32 4.2

     18 August 2011 at 5:24 pm

     The bosses have forgotten who made them wealthy in the first place and should learn to share their good fortune.

     As if that’s ever going to happen! Their egos won’t let them believe it…
5. mik e 5

   18 August 2011 at 4:46 pm

   K road drag Queen National just love it when they can picl on some under privileged group thats why they like high long term unemployment , it helps their cause of keeping wages down and breaking unions, and making productivity look better because the more skilled are in a jobs.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     18 August 2011 at 5:12 pm

     Yes the media and average wage look better when you push the bottom end off the cliff.
6. Afewknowthetruth 6

   18 August 2011 at 5:33 pm

   I might as well state the obvious, since no one else has.

   We are in a post peak oil world, which means that global economic contraction is inevitable. The days of new jobs and wage rises are pretty much over. What we are currently witnessing is a frantic looting of the till by those at the top, and the conversion of fiat money into tangibles while fiat money still has value (gold now around $1800, up 50% from this time last years)

   Since peak oil began to impact we have witnessed rising unemployment throughout most of the developed world, and it will get a lot worse until the entire system collapses.

   China was able to keep its bubble economy going for a while via internal demand, and that kept employment up in Australia -digging up the place and shipping it to China for processing into waste. But now even that game is pretty much over.

   Of course, the truth is so unpalateble to most people they just carry on regardless, pretending the truth is not right there in front of them.

   And, needless to say, we have clueless ‘idiots’ in charge (either that or they know perfectly well what the situation is and want to make the most of it before the proles wake up).
   • Shona 6.1

     18 August 2011 at 6:11 pm

     Not entirely accurate AFWKTT. Aussie is investing in itself. Not all it’s mineral wealth is shipped off to China. There is still and will continue to be for the next 10 to 15 years a large number of jobs for skilled workers. It is very ,very expensive to live in unsustainable environments places like Western Australia I agree. BUt the number of enormous projects that have been given the go ahead boggle my brain at times.
     examples . The gas pipelines that are starting now in Queensland will eventually criss cross Australia to W.A., N.S.W. S.A. and Victoria. Also there is the continuing development of desalinisation plants in the major cities.Offshore deepsea oil drilling continues apace with new leases being given every few months for the North West Of W.A.
     My offspring reckon that some nights in the workingmen’s clubs in Perth it’s like every race on earth is represented in the crowd waiting for the all you can eat for $10 buffet.
     I do not understand why the USA is not investing in itself and rebuilding it’s crmbling infrastructure.
     Likewise NZ.
     • Afewknowthetruth 6.1.1

       18 August 2011 at 6:49 pm

       Yes, Western Australia is still booming. There are still minerals and fossil fuels to be got out of the ground and shifted around. It may take a decade for it to come to a stop. But nothing alters the long term reality. And if the financial system and the food system go down quickly, those minerals are not going to help.

       Can’t help but notice the Aussie share index was down again today and will probably never return to its all-time high of 6500.

       Infrastructiure is the problem by the way, and ‘investing’ in infrastructure is another way of pouring money down the drain. Nothing industrial functions without oil. Hence the desperation to extract it from remote and difficult places. And the more oil we burn, the worse the environmental catastophe becomes. It’s a ‘no win’ situation.
       • Shona 6.1.1.1

         18 August 2011 at 6:58 pm

         So tax the frigging bankers and the wealthy to rebuild and upgrade the infrastructure, train the younger generations and fund research for alternative energy development. Othwerwise it’s an old age of ever increasing violence for us all.
         • Ianupnorth 6.1.1.1.1

           18 August 2011 at 7:55 pm

           I agree Shona; the right don’t like the concept of borrowing to improve infrastructure (they’d rather borrow for tax cuts in the hope they will get some back via GST).
           Whilst there is spare labour available all the pressing infrastructure jobs should be done.
           On a different note, at least QSF fronted and had a say – those other eejits (Gosman, Higherstandard and Chris73) are yet again missing in action when there is credible evidence of the damage being created by their pals in government.
       • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.2

         19 August 2011 at 2:37 am

         Nothing industrial functions without oil.

         Incorrect. Quite a lot of industrial processes can function without fossil oil. What they need is electricity and if we have renewable electricity, which we do, then those processes can continue.
7. Marjorie Dawe 7

   18 August 2011 at 8:37 pm

   Keynesian economics and Fordism had the right idea. Investment in infrastructure and people came up trumps but some got too greedy along the way. People who became newly affluent forgot where they came from and started to look down on others who hadnt done so well. Its always a shame when the measure of doing well is monetary and not about the wellbeing and participation of most of society.
8. vanakast 8

   19 August 2011 at 4:51 am

   I would almost be willing to pay for the regulars of this site to take a level one course in economics and statistics; most of you seriously need it.
   • Lazy Susan 8.1

     19 August 2011 at 7:14 am

     Care to elaborate? A good starting point would be to list any specific points that have been made here that you disagree with and explain why. Or is that vacuous nonsense seriously the best you can come up with?
9. Bored 9

   19 August 2011 at 7:30 am

   I dont blame National: they have been true to their own supporters, and their own “principles”. The blame must go to the voters of NZ who deliberately refuse to see Key as what he is. To them he is the nice man with the smile who will steer us through treacherous waters.

   What the voters need to realise is that as Key lounges on deck in deckchair the pumps he is supposed to operate have been idle, water is flooding the bilges, and the whole ship is in peril. The Nats dont care, they like the first class on the Titanic own the lifeboats.

   You the voter have deliberately allowed yourself to be thrown into icy waters.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS