Johnny’s next big idea

13 comments on “Johnny’s next big idea ”

• Comments are now closed

1. jerry 1

   16 April 2009 at 11:47 am

   Reading O’Sullivan’s article it looks that the businessman taken up with Key appear to represent most of our major existing and future interests in maximising trade under the FTA to China – seems like a fairly sensible choice to me.

   As an aside posts like this do you/this site very little in terms of credibility and just read as a heap of vitriol targeted at Key and NZ business leaders which is a fairly pointless exercise – much like the crap spouted about HC by her political opponents.
2. Daveski 2

   16 April 2009 at 12:08 pm

   Perhaps it’s the lack of a sense of urgency that an election inevitably brings about.

   Perhaps it’s the gap left by SP who was both prolific and attempted to be analytical.

   I think Jerry has hit the mark – it doesn’t matter what Key does or National does, most here will find fault. And, as Jerry also says, there is now just as much irrational hatred here of Key as there was elsewhere about HC.

   Anyway, what does it matter? I can read the about pages and go back to the sewer if I don’t like it here can’t I?
   • Maynard J 2.1

     16 April 2009 at 12:19 pm

     there is now just as much irrational hatred here of Key as there was elsewhere about HC.

     You are crediting the Left with a lot of restraint, then, Daveski. Because here it generally seems to be a scornful view of his abilities as a PM and some light mockery of his flaws and failures. There’s a touch of vitriol too, but few and far between. The Right weren’t/aren’t quite so restrained with their take on HC.
3. Daveski 3

   16 April 2009 at 12:28 pm

   MJ agree not apples as oranges but a similar approach based on political position.
   • Felix 3.1

     16 April 2009 at 12:56 pm

     I don’t know Dave, it seems like there’s a huge gulf between ridiculing someone for the lack of straightness in their policies and ridiculing them for the lack of straightness in their teeth (or in their, well, straightness for that matter).

     Apples and oranges? More like apples and curtains.
4. The Voice of Reason 4

   16 April 2009 at 12:53 pm

   Jerry: I think the point of the post is to identify that John Key has bugger all decision making power and has settled into his role as public face of the government/booster for big business, while Bill English does the nasty stuff behind the scenes and off the front page.

   I guess that if Karl Rove was Bush’s brain, Bill English fills that role here in NZ. Gah!

   As for the credibility enhancing values of the post, the fact that you, me and others are commenting suggests that is a worthwhile post. Got me thinking anyway.
   • Jared 4.1

     16 April 2009 at 6:03 pm

     Considering we are in the midst of a recession, would it not make sense to maximise growth with one of the largest economies by taking the CEO’s controlling our largest industries? I am beginning to suspect that no matter what Key does, it will never be right by the “left” who demonise him regardless of his actions. IF he hadn’t taken the industry exec’s you would be crying foul, and now he has, you are still bitching and moaning. So whats it to be?
     • Tane 4.1.1

       16 April 2009 at 6:10 pm

       Looks to me like a comment on:

       a) The inability of NZ’s so-called business elite to come up with ideas to help the economy that don’t involve feathering their own nests (see the results, or lack thereof, from the Jobs Summit)

       b) The fact that John Key comes up with a newfangled halfbaked idea every week or so, gets himself some headlines, and then every time he’s quietly shot down by Bill English a week or so later in the business pages.

       Are you sure you haven’t missed the point of the post, Jared?
       • Jared 4.1.1.1

         16 April 2009 at 6:22 pm

         My post was in response to that post, and a general critique of the original post regarding the intentions behind taking the businessmen with Key to China. If anything, whilst there was no discernible outcome from the Job Summit, it got businesses talking about the future, not merely making workers redundant for short term balance sheet padding, but how to retain workers without excess cost to businesses where they may not have sufficient work for the worker.
5. MikeE 5

   16 April 2009 at 1:09 pm

   “Tax breaks for the P industry? ”

   As long as drugs remain illegal, they will always have a tax break.
   • Pascal's bookie 5.1

     16 April 2009 at 1:21 pm

     Good point, what’s the ‘Liberal lock’em up party’ doing about that?
6. ripp0 6

   16 April 2009 at 6:27 pm

   I was going to come on and say hadna Eddie gotten a wicked sense of humor.. then I realised Felix and several others needed no such encouragement..

   One, however, I recall mentioned business.. though no one the business of when the cat’s away.. Hence a liitle help from one of your friends.. indeed someone to bridge both sides of the aisle as it were with the salience of so-called bond-banks which made the news today… again. go see, get the laff..
7. BLiP 7

   16 April 2009 at 8:46 pm

   What a great way to celebrate Easter – surround yourself with a cabal of the venal and fly off to do business with communists.

   Classic money changer behaviour, eh John?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS