Govt’s refusal to listen sparks protests

9 comments on “Govt’s refusal to listen sparks protests ”

• Comments are now closed

1. MikeE 1

   23 April 2009 at 2:30 pm

   “I’m still at a loss as to why the government won’t just ask the ratepayers what they actually want.”

   I’d like if that was how local government worked.

   i.e. ratepayers were asked, as opposed to the general population.

   While we are at it, can we restrict voting for national elections to taxpayers only as well.
   • Tane 1.1

     23 April 2009 at 2:32 pm

     How easily the ‘libertarian’ mask slips. You don’t stand for freedom, you stand for a dictatorship of the rich.
     • Tigger 1.1.1

       23 April 2009 at 8:50 pm

       Hey Mike, why don’t we just eat the poor – they’re obviously not doing anything worthwhile.

       Tane, nicely put.
     • Pascal's bookie 1.1.2

       24 April 2009 at 11:38 pm

       How easily the ‘libertarian’ mask slips. You don’t stand for freedom, you stand for a dictatorship of the rich.

       I know, he’s a joke, but check this out from Perigo…

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0904/S00233.htm

       Libertarians for torture, and against the rule of law, with side orders of every fringe wingnut meme of the week.

       And they come around here, spouting rights talk about a few extra points on the marginal tax rates. Fuck off.
   • Pascal's bookie 1.2

     23 April 2009 at 2:43 pm

     Oh, poll tax, how I love ya, how I love ya,
     My dear old poll tax.

     http://www.mp3lyrics.org/t/tom-lehrer/i-wanna/
2. had enough 2

   23 April 2009 at 2:41 pm

   I’m also at odds over why the Government didn’t ask parents what they thought about having smacking banned.
   • Ianmac 2.1

     23 April 2009 at 2:59 pm

     Your oddness is thinking that the Govt wanted smacking banned. (Though it would have been great if it had asked “do you want the smacking/hitting/thrashing of kids or adults or animals to be illegal?”)
     The Act was to protect children from caregivers who used “reasonable force” as a defence when assaulting kids. Simple. Most people would have agreed to that but some smart arses turned it into an anti-smacking arguement????
   • BLiP 2.2

     23 April 2009 at 3:01 pm

     Well its a bit like asking a businessman if he wants a tax cut, really. I mean, what loving parent would want it to be legal to hit children? C’mon, this is a wind up, isn’t it? You’re just trying to distract the commentators away from John Key’s broken promises and the National Party’s bulldozing of democracy to suit the elite?

Links to post

1. Super City: The Backlash Begins at The Standard: posted on 28 April 2009 at 1:08 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS