It’s official – Key wants Rogernomics!

18 comments on “It’s official – Key wants Rogernomics! ”

• Comments are now closed

1. the sprout 1

   25 October 2008 at 12:20 pm

   ooh hooray! more trickle-down piss-on economics.
   privatize profit and nationalize liability.
2. Johnty Rhodes 2

   25 October 2008 at 2:01 pm

   Vote Helen, get Jeanette, Norman, Pita………

   [lprent: Ah my favourite troll pops up again. Vote National get a yellow tuttu and Douglas (the green zombie)]
3. Ianmac 3

   25 October 2008 at 2:05 pm

   Sir Roger was not well received by those at last Sunday evenings Economic debate on National Radio with Kim Hill. In fact none seemed to back his ideas including Bill who would be forced to forgo Min of Finance should Act get 3 MPs. Hardly a small number of parties going in the same direction??
4. StephenR 4

   25 October 2008 at 2:24 pm

   Beat up. ACT means Rogernomics with or without Roger Douglas.
5. DeeDub 5

   25 October 2008 at 5:13 pm

   What did Douglas actually INVENT? Rogernomics is just standard Friedmanite sh*te with a Kiwi axesunt…. sdtop giving the creep credit he doesn’t deserve!

   Captcha: vittles plenty

   That’s southern fired trickle down economics!
6. appleboy 6

   25 October 2008 at 5:15 pm

   interestng how the right twist things so bizarrely. National would be a 4 headed monster and Labour would have 4 or 5. Big deal. How stupid is Key. How does one additioanl party if needed make a difference? He wants the public to believe that National , ACT, United Future and the Maori party are 4 closely aligned parties?? I seriously think Key has lost the plot..maybe the stress is showing as this is seriously warped thinking..
7. NeillR 7

   25 October 2008 at 7:27 pm

   Lynn, what do you have to say about Labour’s downward trend?
8. NeillR 8

   25 October 2008 at 7:36 pm

   Oops, can you delete that – i posted in the wrong thread. Cheers.
9. Killinginthenameof 9

   25 October 2008 at 9:05 pm

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Key

   Does Mr Key think his middle name wont go down well with his standard constituents, especially while Lockwood busy courting the racist vote?

   (id correct it myself but I don’t have an account and wouldn’t be able to correct a semi protected article right away either)
10. Ari 10

    25 October 2008 at 9:50 pm

    KitNo: What’s his actual middle name, (is it Jewish or Austrian or something?) and do you have a reference?

    I don’t mind correcting it. That said, I don’t think he should be at all ashamed of such a middle name. There’s nothing wrong with Jewish or Austrian heritage 🙂
11. Robin Grieve 11

    25 October 2008 at 10:24 pm

    Roger Douglas was that Labour guy from way way back sometime in the 80’s wasn’t he? Did he leave the economy in as much mess as Helen Clark and Michael Cullen are?
12. Pascal's bookie 12

    25 October 2008 at 10:47 pm

    Yeah that’s the guy Robin. He left the Labour party and started a little glee club called ACT.

    The Labour party spent the better part of a decade in the wilderness for his sins, and the National party adopted a watered down version of his economic policies, which are modeled on those of the Republicans in the US. The results of those policies can be seen by watching all those economic indicators head south.

    If the National party wants to govern, they will be doing so with his Roger’s glee club. That’ll be ok, Tim Ellis reckons, because there is little difference between Douglas’ glee club and National. (policy wise anyway, clearly the National party are shabbier dressers and fewer honest)
13. Robin Grieve 13

    26 October 2008 at 8:43 am

    You got a relly distorted view Pascal’s Bookie. We have just had a decade of tremendous economics, government coffers awash with cash, public servants employed to try and spend all the money, That was all down to reforms by Douglas. Do you have any idea what keeping all those subsidised jobs would have done to this country. How expensive clothes and cars would be now had it not beem for those reforms.
    So now after 9 years of a Labour govt the economy is in the toilet and you blame a Labour guy from the 80’s. Try looking a litle closer at the absolute mismanagement by Clark/ Cullen. He will have to be the absolute worst Finance Minister in History.

    And before you whip up Ruth Richardson remember the state the Labour Govt left the country in before she took over to fix it up. Made worse by the fact that Labour lied about the countries finances. Sounds like it’s all happening again.
14. MikeE 14

    26 October 2008 at 9:25 am

    How ironic that MMP could see Roger Douglas in parliament watching Helen Clarks validectory speech!
15. Draco T Bastard 15

    26 October 2008 at 12:12 pm

    Robin Grieve:
    It’s you with the distorted view. Some of what RD did in the 1980s was good but that doesn’t mean that they were all good which is the view you seem to be taking. Yes, the reforms did bring down inflation but they also brought in higher poverty and a stagnating economy. This is why the Labour led government of the last few years haven’t dropped everything he (and National in the 1990s) did but have made changes to increase R&D, improve the power of workers in their relationship with employers and a few other changes that will allow the economy to become more dynamic. These changes take time to bed in and actually make a difference.
16. Greg 16

    26 October 2008 at 12:29 pm

    If Roger Douglas has been so bad for New Zealand why has Helen Clark not reversed all his policies? In fact I struggle to think of many that have been.
17. Killinginthenameof 17

    26 October 2008 at 1:54 pm

    Ari
    October 25, 2008 at 9:50 pm

    KitNo: What’s his actual middle name, (is it Jewish or Austrian or something?) and do you have a reference?

    I don’t mind correcting it. That said, I don’t think he should be at all ashamed of such a middle name. There’s nothing wrong with Jewish or Austrian heritage “

    Sorry, sources are conflicting, I may be wrong on this one, no big deal. As you were!
    .
18. Pascal's bookie 18

    26 October 2008 at 2:31 pm

    Robin, if you want to try and blame the current global economic meltdown on Cullen, be my guest, but I’m going to ask you to show your work.

    If instead you want to argue that the global economic meltdown is irrelevant to our situation, I’ll ask the same thing.

    What is undisputed by you so far is that the economic theology of Douglas, that was halted in this country post Richardson, and slightly reversed under Cullen, was continued in the states under Bush. Tell me how that’s worked out for the US taxpayer and the global economy.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS