Only chumps tick Tory

128 comments on “Only chumps tick Tory ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Colonial Viper 1

   24 November 2011 at 11:47 am

   Just to break the meme, some of the hardest working, most thoughtful, and helpful NZers I know are Tory and will be voting National this election. And many of them hate asset sales too. Go figure.
   • redeye 1.1

     24 November 2011 at 1:14 pm

     I’d suggest that say’s more about Labour.
   • Rob 1.2

     24 November 2011 at 3:30 pm

     CV , what a gracious comment.
2. Gosman 2

   24 November 2011 at 11:54 am

   Who is this article directed at?

   Do you think there are hundreds, or possibly even thousands, of undecided voters who read this blog to try and decide whether they should vote National or not?
   • Tiger Mountain 2.1

     24 November 2011 at 12:59 pm

     Ve aks ze qvestions! Gosman.

     As for the post, while not exactly groundbreaking stuff, the “Chump” description of tory voters is fair enough as long as it includes any or all of the following kiwi types considering giving their tick to ShonKey…
     politically disengaged/uninformed, suffering from false consciousness, narcissistic, petit bourgeois small business operators and rentiers, aspiration trumps empathy, believe in trickle down sparklies, turkeys wanting an early christmas, young people, workers, students, national super recipients, volunteer sector, sure to have missed someone but you get my drift.

     CV may know some nice torys, I know some with reasonable qualities too, but lack of practical empathy usually sinks them. The point is to vote in line with your interests. Nationals interests are the 1% plus their sycophants.
     • Gosman 2.1.1

       24 November 2011 at 1:47 pm

       Thanks for providing a practical example of the point I made below. I knew I could count on one of you 😉
       • Dan Hansen 2.1.1.1

         24 November 2011 at 2:00 pm

         Lefties are so arrogant…they have just called over half the population chumps for (likely) voting national

         Until they lose that attitude and realise the maybe just maybe PEOPLE DONT LIKE YOUR POLICIES OR BELIEFS and that doesnt suddenly make them evil rich pricks that ” lack empathy” or generally bad people then the labour party is rightfully doomed.
         • Dean 2.1.1.1.1

           24 November 2011 at 4:08 pm

           Actually, the polls show people support CGT, raising the retirement age etc etc and oppose asset sales 5 to 1.

           Voting against your own policy stances (and for a guy who tries to keep his plans secret from you because he knows how unpopular they are) is a little bit chumpy , don’t you think?
           • Gosman 2.1.1.1.1.1

             24 November 2011 at 5:01 pm

             Not necessarily. People might rate other aspects of the policy mix higher. Most people are seemingly placing more weight on National’s ability to guide the country through potentially difficult economic times. That doesn’t mean they are ignorant or chumps. However thinking they are because they don’t share your choice of which political party to vote for make’s someone arrogant wouldn’t you agree?
             • AAMC …

               24 November 2011 at 5:43 pm

               It’s because they have bought into the meme that the right are better managers ofthe economy, despite right wing economic theory having had 30yrs of orthodoxy, with both Left & Right govt’s around the world, and plainly proving itself to have failed.

               Chumps? I would have just said deluded.
               • AAMC …

                 24 November 2011 at 5:48 pm

                 p.s. Steve Keen about to livestream on BBC Hardtalk.
                 http://t.co/hYpRYTHQ
     • Vicky32 2.1.2

       24 November 2011 at 4:36 pm

       “I know some with reasonable qualities too, but lack of practical empathy usually sinks them.”

       Exactly right! The woman I was arguing with yesterday was a perfect example…
3. Treetop 3

   24 November 2011 at 11:54 am

   “Police hiring freeze”

   Will Marshall may find himself frozen out of his job in three years if National get back in. Marshall was appointed for a three year term and not the usual five year term. I think the length of the appointment could affect him standing up to Key regarding the tea tape investigation, and policing budget cuts (delaying recruit training).
4. bob 4

   24 November 2011 at 11:56 am

   I would like to think that everyone is entitled to their view and can be respected for it – regardless of their political leanings.

   Whilst I disagree with labour – I dont think you are chumps for voting for them- its your view (just one I do not share).

   But there seems to be a lot of negativity, but calling people names because they think (and vote) differently does not make them chumps – it makes you one.
   • godder 4.1

     24 November 2011 at 12:22 pm

     Good call Bob
   • Blighty 4.2

     24 November 2011 at 4:05 pm

     So, are you cool about the Tranzrail shares? The secret plan to sell Kiwibank? The secret plan for an ACT coup? Key not releasing the asset sales advice?

     Are you cool with your PM keeping those secrets from you?

     Do you love him despite how he treats you?

     What do you think that makes you?
     • bob 4.2.1

       24 November 2011 at 4:43 pm

       “What do you think that makes you?”

       Personally what “I” think is that it makes me smarter than someone that would vote for the unholy alliance of Labour, NZ First, Mana, Greens.

       Dont “love him” – just think he is the better option for PM (Like over 50% of NZ according to polls BTW), and have the ability to have a conversation about it without turning rabid.
     • Gosman 4.2.2

       24 November 2011 at 5:04 pm

       You mean the secret plan to sell Kiwibank that you have no hard evidence for whatsoever?
       • Blighty 4.2.2.1

         24 November 2011 at 5:54 pm

         Was a tape of English saying he would sell Kiwibank “eventually, but not now” not evidence enough for you?
         • Gosman 4.2.2.1.1

           25 November 2011 at 6:11 am

           You mean the tape from 2008? You are scraping the bottom of the barrel there. I would expect a right leaning political party to want to get out of owning businesses. However what is clear is they won’t do it in the next term.
           • KJT 4.2.2.1.1.1

             25 November 2011 at 9:03 am

             Won’t happen until John Key resigns. After having done his job of turning the country over to the thieves.

             I know well meaning and decent tories/conservatives too.
             The funny thing is, they are, mostly, voting Labour this time. Even though for them it means swallowing a few dead rats. Or bailing out to vote for Winnie.

             I think Winnie is becoming a default option for those who know asset sales and borrowing for non productive wealthy are dead ends. Who still cannot bring themselves to vote for the left after a lifetime of voting National.

             I have the same sick feeling, now, of watching a slow motion train wreck, as I did when Muldoon kept gerrymandering electorates to get back in…
5. Max 5

   24 November 2011 at 12:00 pm

   Only chumps don’t consider the climate in their vote.

   Vote for the party that will do the most to help mitigate climate change and ensure a healthy and thriving future for NZ.

   Who is it?

   Find out at http://www.electwho.org.nz
   • infused 5.1

     24 November 2011 at 3:18 pm

     The climate doesn’t matter until the US and China agree on something. We can do our bit to be tidy and reduce emissions etc, but don’t kid yourself in thinking it’s going to make a damm of difference.
     • AAMC 5.1.1

       24 November 2011 at 5:38 pm

       But the infrastructure we invest in in preparation effects us, and the R&D we could do in order to capitalize on the shift – which incedentally both China and India are investing massively in – when it is forced by the reality of physics.

       Proble is all you Heartland Institute, Koch Bros brainwashed flat earthers can’t see the opportunity, let alone the nessesity through your 19th century vision.
6. Gosman 6

   24 November 2011 at 12:11 pm

   This post just serves to hightlight the disdain for democracy that many on the left have. The intellectual arrogance that if only the poor benighted masses could be as clever as them they would never be stupid enough to vote anything other than for a left wing party. It is best summed up in this opinion piece from The Economist http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-0

   “Refractory disagreement is a bedrock fact of liberal society”.

   You don’t like disagreement then create your socialist utopian Dictatorship somewhere else and see who bothers to join you.
   • Bored 6.1

     24 November 2011 at 12:50 pm

     Read the article, it is what I would describe as misinformation from the pulpit of financial sanctity….you could say, “well they would say that would’nt they”?

     “Occupy” wont go away despite the article, and if you cared to research a little more you might find that “Occupy” contains non socialist views, in fact it has every viewpoint except that of the corrupt financiers they uniformly condemn.

     I am a bit surprised Gos that you are not condemning the blatant kleptocracy of Wall St and the financial sector around the globe, they are the biggest threat to market price discovery, free markets and capitalism in general. For one who sides with capitalism you should perhaps defend it more vigorously rather than leave it to “socialists”.
     • AAMC 6.1.1

       24 November 2011 at 2:46 pm

       I wonder at which point Gossman will see through his banker fog and realize that capitalism is on its way out unless the Tory’s start being honest and fighting WITH the left to control these neo-feudalists.
       • Gosman 6.1.1.1

         24 November 2011 at 3:24 pm

         Leftists have been claiming Capitalism has been on the way out ever since the time of Marx and Engels wrote their little comedy manifesto. This time around it seems to be based on the fact that the Wester economy is in a bit of a recession. The fact that there has been major recessions before and even depressions without the World economy imploding seems to be conveniently ignored. In fact Recessions and Depressions are natural parts of the economic cycle.
         • AAMC 6.1.1.1.1

           24 November 2011 at 3:26 pm

           Well it seems your not a neo-classical after all, given that their model doesn’t account for the potential of Depression. Can I take from that you didn’t subscribe to the “Great moderation”?

           Doubt it!
           • Gosman 6.1.1.1.1.1

             24 November 2011 at 3:40 pm

             I believe in the inevitability of economic cycles and those cycles being made longer and potentially more harmful due to the deliberate actions of Government. A prime example of this is the currrent difficulties the world is facing. Through the mid to late 1990’s there was quite high growth in the US and Europe (and as a result also in places like China and to a lesser extent India). This was fed by a credit expansion and caused Asset price bubbles. The first of these burst with the Dot com collapse of the early 2000’s and the impact of September 11th. Now instead of allowing the market to take it’s natural course and move into a recessionary phase Central banks around the world, egged on by the politicians in those countries, decided to make credit even cheaper to avoid the bad scenario. This just delayed the inevitable and pushed out the day of reckoning.
             • AAMC …

               24 November 2011 at 3:54 pm

               Egged on by politicians? Or beurocrats who had previously and then once again worked in the financial industries that benifited from the govt’s intervention. it’s a swindle Gossman.

               But I’m with you, this time I want to see the invisible hand at work, so it can be discredited forever, as it should have been after it’s first outing and failure in Chile.
               • Gosman …

                 24 November 2011 at 4:24 pm

                 You mean Chile, one of the most economically successful countries in South America whose current President is from the right of the political spectrum and who made his fortune, (and presumably supported) under the economic liberalisation made by the Pinochet regime do you? Yeah huge failure there.
                 • framu …

                   24 November 2011 at 4:42 pm

                   so does that mean your okely dokely with someone making their fortune via an environment of state based murder, violence and terror?
                   • Gosman …

                     25 November 2011 at 8:39 am

                     People have to make a living no matter what odious form of Government they live under.

                     BTW would you like to see Fidel Castro arrested and tried for human right’s abuses?
                 • Bored …

                   24 November 2011 at 4:58 pm

                   Gos, even if your arguments about government interference were correct (and I think there is some validity in them) you have not given thought to the impact of the removal of regulatory frameworks such as Glass Steagall etc etc which have enabled massive credit expansion to occur. Nor do you address the implicit nature of capital and finance to establish monopolies, oligarchies, avoidance of market price discovery etc etc, let alone the absence of law enforcement against kleptocratic behavior. Then there is the corruption of the democratic process by corporate money.

                   In the last 30 years its been a wild west for money and capital and it has done what it always does if left alone. I cannot actually think of any real socialism or government interference that has had any impact on this.

                   Face it Gos, you are dreadfully bad at identifying the real causes of our current financial predicament. Having said that you will be joined by the left in prescribing cures that wont work. Neither recipe can work without growth, and there wont be any aggregate growth worldwide any more.

                   PS Chile is a sore point with me: Kissinger should face trial, Pinochet should have been convicted not for the economic model BUT for acts of violence, torture and murder against the citizens of that country.
                   • Gosman …

                     24 November 2011 at 5:19 pm

                     I believe in the benefits of destructive capitalism. This can only happen when businesses fail. Much of the world’s problem is caused because Western liberal democracy doesn’t like to see businesses fail and try to stop this from happening. All you do then is, as stated above, is delay the inevitable and make it worse. Those regulatory frame works you mention did the same thing essentially. Monopolies cannot last forever even the De Beers cartel is falling apart.

                     I reject your view on growth. Growth is based on increase in productivity. There are more than enough innovations coming on line to increase productivity and therefore growth. I suspect your position is based on the view that the planet is running out of resources. This is simply untrue. There is essentially the same amount of physical resources on the planet as there was when Man first started developing modern societies. They are just in a different form and the demand has changed for them.

                     While I agree that any human right abuses should be prosecuted I am wary of leftists making a big deal of this when formerly Socialists countries have undergone a democratic transition similar to what Chile went through yet not many on the left call for the rounding up the senior members of the former Communist ruling parties and charging them with Human rights abuses.
                   • Bored …

                     24 November 2011 at 7:10 pm

                     Very quickly:
                     * allowing capital destruction fine, should have let the banks go bust and deposit holders lose their cash. I dont think however that unfettered capitalism has any other characteristic than that of a slavering wolf: its best caged and kept well isolated from harmful acts. We call that regulation.
                     * the planet and resources are finite: if you get to the bottom of productivity gains you find they all revolve around energy efficiency: face the facts oil is finite, as are fish stocks etc. Resources can and are used up. Growth dies with resource scarcity, watch it folllow the oil.
                     *I give Dave Brown the Trotskyite shit because the reds cant recognise their intrinsic similarity to extreme capitalists: they are both resposible for homicidal sectarian acts based upon flawed materialist constructs that are remarkably similar. And lethal.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     24 November 2011 at 8:23 pm

                     Growth is based on increase in productivity.

                     Nope. Growth is based on more and larger markets provided by increasing human population. If we didn’t have growing population then higher productivity would result in deflation. This obviously isn’t happening.

                     Of course, a lot of the inflation is caused by the banks printing money as fast as they can but the simple reality is that if you produce more then you need a larger market to sell to. The local “market” (number of people) isn’t big enough to support the productivity that we already have and that’s why every economist and politician goes on about export led growth and export led recovery (the two terms are interchangeable).

                     So, growth is based upon ever increasing amounts of humans and those humans want what every other human has and that results in over use of resources which causes massive environmental destruction. More growth won’t get rid of the poverty, won’t suddenly make everything all right – what it will do is make the Earth uninhabitable (this may already be true).
                 • AAMC …

                   24 November 2011 at 7:34 pm

                   From Forbes re Chile – http://www.forbes.com/sites/jameshenry/2011/09/10/the-other-september-11/

                   “in addition to creating soaring poverty and inequality — were about to cave in on each other, completely bankrupting the country and forcing the nationalization of the entire private sector.”
                   “Many other neoliberal reforms succeeded only in cutting social spending, while sacred cows like mili tary spending and the nationalized copper company were spared.

                   The national copper company, in particular, was famous because of the uproar provoked when Allende had seized it from Anaconda in 1971. But General Pinochet kept it nationalized, partly just because a secret law gave the military ten percent of its profits. That meant that even under the junta, Chile’s largest enterprise and exporter remained “socialist.””
                   “This whole situation finally began to unravel in May 1981 when Crav, a leading sugar company, failed. The crunch came in the summer of l982 when the Latin American debt panic dried up new loans, forcing Chile to devalue and tighten interest rates, a lethal combination. By January 1983 unemployment was thirty percent, and the six top private banks and the country’s two largest private “grupos,” Vial and Cruzat-Larrain, had also both folded.

                   At this point Finance Minister de Castro began to get intense pressure from foreign banks like Chase and Bankers Trust to “nationalize” the private foreign debt. For a while he stuck to his free-market principles, reminding them of his earlier warnings — that such a move would be no more justified than Allende’s nationalizations, and that this was, after all, private foreign debt, freely contracted, presumably with compensation for the risks of default built into the interest rates.”
                   “In the words of one Chilean banker, “Pinochet achieved what Allende only dreamed of — the complete so cialization of our private sector.””
                   • AAMC …

                     24 November 2011 at 7:43 pm

                     P.s. I’m all for lining the human rights abusers on the left up also, I agree with what inspired the Libertarian response, Authoritarianism from Left or Right is equally distasteful, but the economic conclusions that have been drawn from that response are naive, they ignore the reality of powerful vested interests in the world.

                     Horizontal Democracy, stakeholder Capitalism which acknowledges the limits of our planet.

                     But Laissez Faire; invisible hand – human construct, delusion.
   • AAMC 6.2

     24 November 2011 at 3:24 pm

     From one of the worlds most successful
     Capitalists, Pimco’s Mohamid El-Erian to Gosmann.

     “But growth, while necessary, is insufficient by itself, given today’s high unemployment and the extent to which income and wealth inequalities have increased. Hence the third dynamic: the West is being challenged to deliver not just growth, but “inclusive growth,” which, most critically, involves greater “social justice.”

     Indeed, there is a deep sense that capitalism in the West has become unfair. Certain players, led by big banks, extracted huge profits during the boom, and avoided the deep losses that they deserved during the bust. Citizens no longer accept the argument that this unfortunate outcome reflects the banks’ special economic role. And why should they, given that record bailouts have not revived growth and employment?

     Calls for a fairer system will not go away. If anything, they will spread and grow louder. The West has no choice but to strike a better balance – between capital and labor, between current and future generations, and between the financial sector and the real economy.”
     • Gosman 6.2.1

       24 November 2011 at 3:29 pm

       You think there is a better system that can guarrantee higher employment than we enjoy in NZ? Perhaps Sweden maybe? Well not according to this article http://www.economist.com/node/7880173?story_id=7880173
       • AAMC 6.2.1.1

         24 November 2011 at 3:49 pm

         Better system than a casino intent on destroying the biosphere and creating mass civil unrest, gotta be. Problem is the lack of imagination on all fronts, defenders of the status quo.

         You’ve got you head in the sand, Roubini’s tweet from this morning
         ““EZ in recession & even core sov bond markets seized; US investment & consumption down in Oct; China bus conditions at 32mt low.Perfect Storm”

         Yes, we’ve had recessions and depressions. War helped last time, but clearly this time it hasn’t. The other thing that helped was some of your “leftists” coming to power and stimulating through the new deal, this time, the neo-liberal delusion will likely take us down, there are Jo sensible heads to prevail.

         Hopefully there are some in the wings and crisis will create a platform for paradigm change.
         • Gosman 6.2.1.1.1

           24 November 2011 at 3:57 pm

           No what helped was the a huge expansion of free trade and globalisation amongst members of the Western world post WWII. But if you want to think it was ‘Big Government’ that solved the problem keep up with that fallacy.

           By the way did you check out the statistics in that article on Sweden? You must have found it interesting that the only real growth since the 1950’s in employment in Sweden is amongst the Public sector Is that really the leftist prescription for a better world – to make most of us Public servants? If so then how depressing is that?
           • AAMC 6.2.1.1.1.1

             24 November 2011 at 7:50 pm

             And there has been no real growth in the West either, just a consumer bubble fuelled by debt.

             Pop!
             From Steve Keen..
             http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EzWV7RSYzE
       • Tiger Mountain 6.2.1.2

         24 November 2011 at 4:00 pm

         You’re arguing rearguard for the motliest crew in history Gosman. Crony capitalism is on the way out, either that or we as a species are.
         • Gosman 6.2.1.2.1

           24 November 2011 at 4:06 pm

           I’m hardly arguing for crony capitalism. However there is no evidence that there is any groundswell for changes to anything remotely left wing.If you look at Europe many, if not most, Governments (including the possibilty of Sweden turning to the center right), are pursuing standard Right wing political prescriptions to deal with bloated Public sectors i.e. cutbacks, liberalisation, and privatisations. Where is the evidence supporting a move to leftist ideas beyond the rather pathetic Occupy movement?
           • Tiger Mountain 6.2.1.2.1.1

             24 November 2011 at 4:44 pm

             No time for an ideological discussion like an election. Chile seems to rev your engine Gosman. What a long narrow checkpoint of a sad excuse for a country to this day. Another place dealing with a post colonial and authoritarian past. Not to mention the Chicago school experiment too, which Keys ‘Pineda’ labour relations are based on. Pinochet divided it into economic zones, ie zone 1, zone 14. No Waikato or Northland for them.

             Capital and finance capital it cannot be denied have proved more resilient for far longer than most of the world population and environment can bear for two reasons.
             1. Brute force of standing armies and internal security forces via nation states
             2. Manufactured reluctant and uninformed consent via state superstructures-governmental, legal, education, religious and media.

             The concrete is what counts, ‘devil in the detail’ in modern parlance. Significant change is underway by a multitude of indicators. You are a tail gunner Gosman.
       • Ianupnorth 6.2.1.3

         24 November 2011 at 5:21 pm

         Gossy, did you read past the first few lines? It seems all the ‘freedom of choice’ fr private schools, private health and private everything else has a remarkable coincidence with their decline.
7. queenstfarmer 7

   24 November 2011 at 12:17 pm

   So 2 days out from the election, and it seems you have abandoned all hope of Labour’s policies causing people to vote for them.
   • Treetop 7.1

     24 November 2011 at 12:36 pm

     In the last few days I actually know people who are changing their vote to Labour.
     • I dreamed a dream 7.1.1

       24 November 2011 at 1:03 pm

       Not likely to be enough though.

       Tonight the One News poll will be out. My prediction is that it will still not be good for the left. 🙁
       • ianmac 7.1.1.1

         24 November 2011 at 5:33 pm

         So what Dreamer? The polls have been consistently against Labour and probably will again tonight. So what.
         Consider the Real Poll that may not deliver ACT or UF. Consider the reality of National on say 47%. Now stop smirking and save your soul!
8. One Anonymous Bloke 8

   24 November 2011 at 12:34 pm

   I blame confirmation bias, not chumphood. One thing I do get tired of is the right wing confusion between advocacy (usually some warmed up Randist fare) and evidence.
   • Tangled up in blue 8.1

     24 November 2011 at 1:43 pm

     confirmation bias

     Particularly around welfare spending. ie, the double fallacy that there are a lot of people ripping off the benefit and that the Govt. needs to restrict welfare spending.
9. rain33 9

   24 November 2011 at 1:02 pm

   I don’t really think that is a fair comment. I have been very please with the way the Labour Party and their supporters have conducted themselves during the campaign. Especially Phil Goff who I have always quite liked as a person, but he has really gone up in my estimation as a Leader.

   The name calling (chump)..let’s leave it out, not necessary and not helpful.
10. randal 10

    24 November 2011 at 1:27 pm

    kwewee is a chump.
    dont be afraid of calling a spade a spade.
    first of all he demanded a “TURN”.
    he got that.
    then he said that he knew hat we all aspired to but none of us got that.
    now he is promising a brighter future.
    well we dont need him for that.
    so therefore he is a chump.
    and he shares 99% of his dna with chimps so hows that?
    not much difference bewteen a monkey and john key.
11. Dave 11

    24 November 2011 at 1:55 pm

    Gee that was a negative post. I`m not voting Labour. I thought everyone was entitled to their view.

    [lprent: Perhaps you should read the about. These are authors opinions. They don’t need to match yours. However you should read the policy before you extend your disapproval too far into areas that force me to defend the site. ]
    • Blighty 11.1

      24 November 2011 at 4:01 pm

      You are entitled to your view. So is Zet entitled to the view that if you vote for liars you’re a chum.

      Stop whining for God’s sake. It’s pathetic.
      • Bill Colenso 11.1.1

        24 November 2011 at 6:34 pm

        Yeah, how dare anyone suggest they are allowed to have an opinion. Exactly why Labour are toast again.

        [lprent: Banned for being stupid. Reading either the about or the policy is simple, would have warned that this is not the NZLP, and that I am tired of hearing the same stupid bullshit from idiots who can’t read.

        I correct myself. You do know the rules from previous episodes of idiot trolling. Added you to autospam. ]
        • Jackal 11.1.1.1

          25 November 2011 at 2:05 am

          LOL
12. Inverness 12

    24 November 2011 at 2:06 pm

    Funny how the majority of the population are chumps yet they are in the higher income and qualifications band as well.
    • mac1 12.1

      24 November 2011 at 3:20 pm

      Inverness, can you qualify the “qualifications” part of your assertion with a bit of hard evidence? I won’t quarrel with the higher income since I’n not focussed on measuring my worth in monetary terms.
    • mike 12.2

      24 November 2011 at 3:52 pm

      “If you care about integrity, if you’ve got enough pride not to put up with being lied to, you won’t be voting National.”

      Maybe not only chumps vote Tory. What kind of person doesn’t have integrity? Doesn’t mind the population being lied to as long as their interests are served? Thinks that their higher salary is a good indicator of intelligence or the correctness of their party choice? Believes that helping the rich helps everyone?

      Self-centred. Self-impressed. Selfish.
    • Ianupnorth 12.3

      24 November 2011 at 5:24 pm

      Most of the manual workers at Kinleith Pulp mill are on around $90K, way more than me and I bet few have letters after their name.
13. freedom 13

    24 November 2011 at 2:31 pm

    I would like to share a little story from earlier today that speaks volumes to the character of the National Party Candidate for Otaki. I am aware that Key is making his way up the West coast from Wellington but this is not a Key moment.

    I was in Levin, having just left the Library where I had Voted as I am working away from my electorate on the day. I headed off to the P.O. to check my box and what do I see but the blue t-shirt of ‘I am a Key person’. I walk towards the person and as they were engaged in a dialogue I waited patiently. Once the person’s attention turned to me I asked plainly and in a straight forward manner,
    ” Are you aware that John Key made a large portion of his wealth by betting against the NZ dollar as a currencty trader?”
    “Yes” was the reply, the person then went on to say , unprompted by any response from me, “that he gave all that up to come and work for NZ to make it a better place”

    It was at this juncture in the conversation that Nathan Guy, incumbent MP and candidate for the Otaki Electorate, steps out of a nearby shop, obviously out glad handing, so i take it he is campaigning.
    He was also wearing the “I am a Key person’ T-shirt.
    (Why the candidate lowers himself to being a walking billboard is a whole separate issue)

    Mr Guy approaches the campaign worker, (a person not known to me, could be his wife or manager, irrelevant really) and i ask politely and clearly,
    ” Mr Guy, can i ask you a question about National’s Policies?”
    his reply?
    ” No.”
    he did not say ‘I do not have the time’, or ‘I am urgently required elsewhere’, or even an ‘I am on a lunch break’ he flat out said NO!

    I ask again,
    “Mr Guy as the candidate and standing member of Parliament for Otaki, can i discuss National Party Policy with you? ” again, an emphatic ” No” and he walks away.

    We were standing outside a local cafe and some of those inside were showing keen interest in the exchange by this time. Again, and a bit louder so people in the front of the cafe can hear ,

    “Mr Guy will you please answer some questions on National Party Policy?”

    By this time he is twenty meters down the street and picking up pace. What does he then do, and this is the event that really speaks to the character of the candidate in this situation, he looks back over his shoulder, laughing and says plain as day
    ” don’t forget to vote”

    I already had, but if I had not? I can tell you one thing, I don’t vote for cowards !

    I tried a couple more times to call him back but to no avail. I dislike standing on a footpath shouting like an overly-medicated evangalist and anyway, the focus of my interest had expressed plainly that they do not want to engage. I have been around the block enough times to know not to begin to follow them or attempt to catch up with them as i don’t need charges of harrassment in my life. (I was warned plenty of times whilst living in Wellington that too much attention will only lead to trouble)

    Since there was such a negative response from the candidate to a very simple question, I took the opportunity of his speedy retreat to take a quick straw poll on those present to discover if they had heard the exchange? I got a large number of thumbs up and shaking of heads in disbelief at what they had just witnessed. I got call-outs of Vote Labour, and a few for Mana, but not one of those in the cafe or on the street outside said anything about voting National. There are many stories of National’s lack of disclosure regarding their Policies, this has been one of them.
    • Gosman 13.1

      24 November 2011 at 4:14 pm

      So a hard left supporter decides to harrass a political candidate from the other side of the political spectrum and demand that he answer politically loaded questions and the refusal to engage in this petty and childish behavious somehow reflects badly on the candidate does it? Bizarre.
      • mike 13.1.1

        24 November 2011 at 4:33 pm

        An awful lot of ungrounded assumptions in your interpretation of freedom’s story there Gosman: harrassment, demands, politically loaded questions (“can i ask you a question about National’s Policies?” yeah, real cheap shot there), petty and childish behaviour.

        Now I don’t know how this encounter really went down any more than you do. All we have to go on is the story as freedom tells it. So stripping away your unjustified loaded words it seems that your real objection is that a leftie tried to ask a Nat candidate about policy. Maybe you’re too young to realise but there used to be a time when this sort of thing was welcomed in a democracy. Bizarre.
        • freedom 13.1.1.1

          24 November 2011 at 5:00 pm

          gosman, and anyone else who had similar thoughts after reading what i shared above.

          I can absolutely assure you it ‘went down’ exactly as written. I was polite, courteous, non-confrontational in every sense of the word. I did not in any way shape or form ask a loaded question. The quotes above are as verbatim as memory allows. When his responses consisted of one word, “No” i think i can remember that without misquoting. I emphatically defend the statement above to be an accurate fair and true account of the exchange.

          Yes, because the campaign worker was talking to another person when i saw her, i waited for a sensible pause in their dialogue and when her focus had turned to me, I asked the simple straightforward question about John Key’s history as a trader. I was on a public street and saw an election campaigner out campaigning and i approached them. I took the opportunity to speak to a person wearing the blue t-shirt, oh my god how can i be so manipulative of a poor political campaigner.

          The exchange with Nathan guy himself is exactly as i transcribed it.

          Believe whatever fantasy of verbal assault you have in your little mind gosman. I know I did nor said anything that was impolite accusatorial or disrespectful of the circumstances or the person.

          I learnt many years ago when that rare circumstance occurs when you are face to face with anyone in that position, you behave. Something about bees and vinegar. I would like an apology from you regarding your blatant and baseless accusations of improper or abusive behaviour towards an MP. I was not the one scampering down the street avoiding a constituent who was calmly standing still wondering why the candidate refused to discuss the Policy of their Party.
          • Gosman 13.1.1.1.1

            24 November 2011 at 5:23 pm

            What utter bollocks.

            When you approached the National party supporter/helper and asked such a loaded and nonsense question as ” Are you aware that John Key made a large portion of his wealth by betting against the NZ dollar as a currencty trader?” do you really expect people to take you seriously that you just wanted to have a reasoned and rational debate with the candidate?

            It would be like a heckler at a National party meeting complaining that it wasn’t fair that they were asked to leave as all they wanted to do was ask some questions.
            • freedom 13.1.1.1.1.1

              24 November 2011 at 5:46 pm

              be clear on this gosman, in regards to the currency trader question, Nathan Guy never even heard that part of the exchange as i was not even aware that he was around when i spoke to the campaign worker. there is no pre-meditation or nefarious intent. I genuinely wanted to know if the individual wearing the t-shirt understood who she was supporting? It was a perfectly fair and reasonable question to ask someone who is wearing a t-shirt espousing full and complete support for a person. How is truth nonsense? Did John Key not make large portions of his wealth as a currency trader? He has himself admitted that he made an undisclosed sum of money in trading the NZD.

              Nathan Guy, the MP, came out of a shop nearby after the campaign worker had already answered my simple question and was continuing with a spiel of how Key ‘is a good man’, ‘he gave up his high income’ to come work in New Zealand.

              This was not a public meeting or a speech from a candidate but an interaction with a campaigning politician on a public street. His interaction with me is exactly as stated,

              I asked him three times if he would answer a question about National Party Policy,
              he said no three times as he headed off down the street in some haste.

              i have been as polite with you as i have patience today, so in the interest of not losing my cool with your commited denial of reality, i wish you good day
              and hope you remember to vote
          • Gosman 13.1.1.1.2

            24 November 2011 at 5:37 pm

            In fact let’s dissect your nonsense and politically loaded question to highlight exactly how bollocks your line of questioning actually was.

            “Are you aware that John Key made a large portion of his wealth by betting against the NZ dollar as a currency trader?”

            First up – How much of his wealth are we talking about here? Do you have any figures on what percentage of his wealth is made up due to betting against the NZ dollar? John Key is unlikely to have bet any of his own money on any trade he performed. He probably gor paid quite well for the money he made for other people but then I presume those people were quite happy for him to get paid for making them money.

            Secondly – What do you mean by betting against the NZ dollar? The dollar is not in any race here. It is not as if John Key said I will put 100 million against the NZ dollar placing in the 3rd at Trentham. At the most he took a position, along with many other people at the same time, that the Kiwi dollar was overvalued. Wow! How terrible that is. On top of that the market moved and he was proved right. Funnily enough a lower dollar has advantages as well as disadvantages for an economy.

            Finally – He has made no secret that he was a currency trader. Currency traders deal in currency. It would be like me approaching a Labour party supporter/candidate and demanding from them an answer to the question that did they know that Phil Goff was once a long haired Student activist in his youth. Big Effing Deal.
            • mike 13.1.1.1.2.1

              24 November 2011 at 6:21 pm

              Gosman you’ve embarrassed yourself bigtime on this post. First you tried to change freedom’s story regarding who asked who what. When that was shown to be bollocks, you changed it again regarding who heard what. When that was shown to be bollocks, you switching to analysing the currency trader line, which is an entirely different point to the one freedom is raising in his post. The point about a National MP rudely ran away from someone who asked to talk about policy.

              You’ve exposed yourself as a rank troll. Go log in with a different handle and try again.
              • Gosman …

                25 November 2011 at 8:46 am

                What an incredibly pathetic attempt to defend Freedom.

                I never tried to change anything Freedom stated that he or she did. I pointed out that Freedom wasn’t interested in a serious political discussion with the candidate but just wanted to vent his prejudicical views on the National party and John Key. This is evidenced by the bollocks question about John Key being a currency trader as if the very idea of a currency trader is ‘evil’.

                Politician’s are interested in trying to convince people that they should support them. Freeom has demonstrated that this would be a waste of time in his or her case. All the attempt at engaging the candidatde was for sems to be to allow freedom to spout off the leftist nonsense in his or her head.
            • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.1.2.2

              25 November 2011 at 1:54 am

              Secondly – What do you mean by betting against the NZ dollar? The dollar is not in any race here. It is not as if John Key said I will put 100 million against the NZ dollar placing in the 3rd at Trentham. At the most he took a position, along with many other people at the same time, that the Kiwi dollar was overvalued. Wow! How terrible that is. On top of that the market moved and he was proved right.

              Laughable.

              Currency speculation increases volatility and destroys the currency stability exporters need to budget and run their businesses.

              Large investment banks don’t just ‘place bets’ on market movements they can cause massive market movements for their own advantage. Using manipulative techniques like HFT and naked short selling, for instance.
              • Gosman …

                25 November 2011 at 8:49 am

                If you know anything about market theory you should know that speculation in a market increases liquidity. Increased liquidity in a market tends towards less volatility as big trades don’t tend to move the market as much. But keep up with your leftist economic nonsense. How about you expouse how the value of goods and services should be related to some formula related to inputs like labour next?
                • Colonial Viper …

                  25 November 2011 at 9:49 am

                  What bankster financial terrorist nonsense.

                  The liquidity being provided is imaginary and highly leveraged, and it is being provided solely by a few huge players amongst themselves. When they move the market through HFT or naked short selling techniques they GENERATE massive volatility as they control the direction of the market, which is worsened by the massive leverage they apply to their positions.

                  The big players then use their massive influence over (and visibility into) the market to *steal* from small players as they can front run trades, trigger stops, and generally thieve from the niave investing public.

                  You’re a financial moron.
                  • Gosman …

                    25 November 2011 at 12:32 pm

                    And yet I make good money out of the financial industry, and have done so for the past 14 years. But obviously I know nothing about finance whereas someone like you knows how it all really works don’t you C.V.
          • Deadly_NZ 13.1.1.1.3

            25 November 2011 at 12:56 am

            Yeah I was in Levin this arvo as well saw the idiots in blue shirts hanging round Queen st
      • Ianupnorth 13.1.2

        24 November 2011 at 5:26 pm

        I didn’t see the words ‘HARD LEFT’ anywhere in that post – weren’t you recently banned for trolling?
      • Dv 13.1.3

        24 November 2011 at 10:59 pm

        YeP gos
        Asking a Nat about their policies is harassment.
        Shouldnt happen.
    • Vicky32 13.2

      24 November 2011 at 4:47 pm

      “I already had, but if I had not? I can tell you one thing, I don’t vote for cowards !”

      The man’s an eejit! Unbelievable. What a turkey…
    • ianmac 13.3

      24 November 2011 at 5:38 pm

      Freedom: Good on yer mate. I am brave behind a keyboard but less so in one to one usually because I forget the point that I was going to make so thanks for speaking up.
      I suspect that the word has been out for a while to the Nats. “Don’t engage in discussion. Run if you have to but stay quiet.”
    • fender 13.4

      24 November 2011 at 6:49 pm

      Peter Foster will win Otaki. But Nathan will return via list, just as well as all Ive seen him do for the last 3 years is wipe Keys ass, and without Guy some shit may stick to our “PM” and that would be very bad indeed.
14. Treetop 14

    24 November 2011 at 2:52 pm

    Your persistence is noted to engage in some honesty!
15. Busman007 15

    24 November 2011 at 2:53 pm

    Good one daffy , you should consider a roll as political stratagist
    • Dean 15.1

      24 November 2011 at 4:34 pm

      With a name like Busman and with a hero-delusional ‘007’ attached, I’m going to guess you’re a National party staffer on Key’s campaign bus.
    • Colonial Viper 15.2

      25 November 2011 at 2:05 am

      Good one daffy , you should consider a roll as political stratagist

      What kind of roll, chicken or vegetarian?
16. Lanthanide 16

    24 November 2011 at 2:53 pm

    Article on Scoop that thoroughly thrashes asset sales:
    http://gordoncampbell.scoop.co.nz/2011/11/24/gordon-campbell-financial-analysts-jump-ship-on-asset-sales/
    • freedom 16.1

      24 November 2011 at 3:31 pm

      A disturbingly clear message really. Why do so many NZ voters still not get it. National want to sell our access to electricity. This is not about moving freight or flying the friendly skies, this is about who you pay to turn on a lightswitch in your home.
17. Karl Sinclair 17

    24 November 2011 at 2:59 pm

    Help, can anyone answer these questions for me.

    1. Using previous Asset Sales data, is it possible to show the proption of shares bought by Mums & Dads in the past?

    2. Then is it possilbe to determine the proportions owned by mums and dads in terms of income distribution….

    3. Then is it possible to see how these shares have been sold of to off shore companies?

    4. Also, it appears that a high proportion of ‘NZ’ companies are subideries anyway… how do you reconcile profits going overseas there.

    5. The NATs said, The partial privatization would earn 5 billion to 7 billion NZ dollars over three to five years to “buy new assets like schools, hospitals and ultra-fast broadband… Does anyone have a break down of this budget?

    6. What the hell is a 21st Century School anyway? Is it a bit like Space 1999 where the kids rip around in spaced cadet suits with jet packs attached. I would expect with the technology we have to do we could be delivering better value right now for less???

    7. Keys mentioned the Majority of shares stay in Kiwis hands, but who are they and from income bracket do they come……

    Cheers
    • freedom 17.1

      24 November 2011 at 3:14 pm

      the NZX also counts as a Kiwi business/stockholder any business with an address that is registered in NZ. Remember that office in Auckland that had something like 2300 different businesses lodged to the same corporate address and every one of them was an overseas entity using the legitimacy of our flawed laws to be seen as a NZ company. Key once again telling the part of the truth that most succintly hides the lie.
    • Carol 17.2

      24 November 2011 at 3:47 pm

      I don’t know, but I’m heartily sick of the term “mums and dads”. As someone who is neither a mum nor a dad, it always comes across as meaning someone other than me. But how do you define “mum and dad investors”? Surely Key would count as a “dad investor”?

      Of course, I know they mean ordinary Kiwis, whatever that means. But how would anyone ascertain who exactly are “ordinary Kiwis” with little bits of money to invest, and who aren’t wealthy investors and corporate operators?
      • Herodotus 17.2.1

        24 November 2011 at 4:18 pm

        Key is not allowed to be an involved investor – Remember that “Blind” Trust.
        So anything he knowingly gets out of it is “that he has done his best, and leave NZ in a better position than he found it” !!!!! 😎
        • ianmac 17.2.1.1

          24 November 2011 at 5:40 pm

          Limit to no more than 10%. So Mum buys 9%. Dad buys 9%. Uncle John buys 9%. Milly buys….
          • Herodotus 17.2.1.1.1

            24 November 2011 at 6:12 pm

            Would love to see a poll post election on the lines of “Did the Asset policy stop you from voting for National?”. IMO this has hurt the Nats more than the polls currently point to. Would not be surprised if in that moment of making a commitment the Greens loss 3-4% towards Lab. And Lab keep their base support of 32-35%. Still it leaves Nats hold govt based on if NZ1 votes are wasted or count, as if they count that to me means that Nat has bleed votes to NZ1. Hate to be 50-60 o the list, as yuo had better keep contacts with your day job.
            Also from some reading today on this site have to agree with who it was that commented that Lab should have used the 08 Nat sound bite of “do you feel better off today than in 08”
    • KJT 17.3

      25 November 2011 at 9:13 am

      Can’t answer those points but I do know that National has information that shows the last lot of asset sales are costing North of 14 billion a year.

      Knowing this they are still pushing asset sales. Which makes them either thieves, criminally negligent or deluded.
18. Spratwax 18

    24 November 2011 at 3:03 pm

    Yes, we are in for another manufactured global financial shock, but now that the US and the banksters have their men in place – http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/21/goldman-sachs-new-master-of-the-eurozone/ – and even in NZ (another Key government), the New World Order is gathering pace faster than you think. Throw in the US foreign policy to ringfence China (current TPPA negotiations, APEC) with Obamas recent visits to Australia (new bases in Darwin) and Indonesia, and an ever-present possibility of an attack on Iran, the US’s race to secure resources by any means is hotting up. Not a good time to sell power generators by the way, unless you’re in the pocket of the banksters!
19. infused 19

    24 November 2011 at 3:14 pm

    Cry me a river. Enjoy the next 3 years.
    • Karl Sinclair 19.1

      24 November 2011 at 3:39 pm

      So no idea on the above questions then?
      • Willie Maley 19.1.1

        24 November 2011 at 4:09 pm

        Karl, you will find that the Right are good at name calling etc. But when it comes down to actually debating a point, more often than not they are posted missing.
        • Draco T Bastard 19.1.1.1

          24 November 2011 at 4:44 pm

          When it comes down to debating a point the RWNJs will invent a load of hogwash to support their “argument” and then declare that they won the argument even though the facts contradict everything they said.
        • insider 19.1.1.2

          24 November 2011 at 5:10 pm

          The right are good at name calling? Who called who chumps?
20. Majella 20

    24 November 2011 at 3:20 pm

    ..possibly! But unless he stands to do well out of it personally, somehow, wouldn’t he just cut & run?
    • Karl Sinclair 20.1

      24 November 2011 at 7:48 pm

      Would’nt he just Cut and Run? Good question.

      I would recommend watching the Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig lecture on Institutional Corruption.

      It examines the prevalence of institutional corruption in American politics, medicine, and journalism, and describes his plan to study and contain the problem. From my take on this, there are many, many, many ways of being paid off both before and after an event…..

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-lEDiUFXUk&feature=related

      Go well
      • mike 20.1.1

        24 November 2011 at 9:33 pm

        Sounds interesting Karl, could you summarize a could of points? I’m having some internet issues…
21. chris73 21

    24 November 2011 at 4:48 pm

    So you’re a chump if you vote Tory. So vote for Goff because if you don’t like his views don’t worry he’ll change them no worries. Asset sales used to be good but now they’re bad. No need to raise the superannuation age earlier this year but now theres a pressing need. No need for CGT earlier but now there is. Axe the tax (gee thats gone quiet) Once an asset is sold its gone for good (apart from air nz and kiwirail)

    Or just vote for who you think will do the best job of running this country and don’t call other people chumps for thinking differently.
    • Jan 21.1

      24 November 2011 at 9:46 pm

      But it is hard not to feel sorry for people who have swallowed the sound bite spin and allowed themselves to be come deluded working-class Tories.

      http://grayee.blogspot.com/2009/01/day-in-life-of-trevor-working-class.html

      A NZ version would be fun.
    • KJT 21.2

      25 November 2011 at 9:18 am

      Key is not here to run the country. He is here to rape it.

      When they failed with Brash, the right wing corporates picked a figurehead which was charismatic and convincing enough to get elected, when supported by enough propaganda in the media.

      I still have not decided if Key is knowingly going along with the theft, or he is religiously deluded like Brash. I suspect he is like other executive types I have met who are lacking in the ability to read anything except management guru fluff.
22. randal 22

    24 November 2011 at 5:43 pm

    kweeweee will be cutting and running on Nov 27.
    He wont get a brown bag full of cash but preferment down the track.
    and a brown paper bag full of cash as well.
    merry christmas.
23. randal 23

    24 November 2011 at 5:45 pm

    to use a good verb lately in vogue from our erudite pals at radiospud.
    he will slink off.
    nice guys.
    thanks.
    • Jackal 23.1

      25 November 2011 at 2:10 am

      +1
24. higherstandard 24

    24 November 2011 at 5:47 pm

    Only chumps trust horizon research.

    ‘The nationwide Definite Voter snapshot indicates New Zealand First will hold the balance of power with up to about 13 seats, but subject to a 1.8% margin of error.’

    http://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/187/more-intend-to-vote-labour-gains
25. mansfield 25

    24 November 2011 at 6:19 pm

    Interesting comparison with Obama’s election ..

    http://ebookee.org/Obama-Does-Globalistan_1172591.html
26. mansfield 26

    24 November 2011 at 6:31 pm

    If Joyce had not been running the campaign, Key might have used something like this ..

    “.. a new kind of politics—a politics that builds upon those shared understandings that pull us together as Americans. Lucid in his vision of America’s place in the world, refreshingly candid about his family life and his time in the Senate, Obama here sets out his political convictions and inspires us to trust in the dogged optimism that has long defined us and that is our best hope going forward.”

    http://ebookee.org/Obama-s-the-audacity-of-hope_1333658.html
27. Afewknowthetruth 27

    24 November 2011 at 7:37 pm

    Gosman.

    I have suspected for some time that you are a lunatic or a mindless ideologue and today you confrmed my suspicion with your ludicrous statements:

    You said: ‘I suspect your position is based on the view that the planet is running out of resources. This is simply untrue. There is essentially the same amount of physical resources on the planet as there was when Man first started developing modern societies. They are just in a different form and the demand has changed for them.’

    Well yes, there is still roughly the same amount of carbon on the Earth as in 1780. The only problem is that 230 years ago much of it was in the form of high grade coal and oil but it is now in the form of CO2 in the atmopshere and bicabronate/carbonate ion in the oceans.

    According to the best available evidence put forward by oil geologists we have used up approximately half the oil that was available at the start of the industrial revolution and are now dependent on sources which have rapidly declining EROEI, Energy Return On Energy Invested, which is the main reason the global economy is now imploding.

    Yes, the amount of water on Earth is about the same as at the start of the Industrial Revolution. The only problem is, humans have been pumping it out of ancient aquifers much faster than they replenish:

    ‘Withdrawals from the Ogallala Aquifer for irrigation amounted to 26 km3 (21,000,000 acre·ft) in 2000. As of 2005, the total depletion since pre-development amounted to 253,000,000 acre feet (312 km3).[5] Some estimates say it will dry up in as little as 25 years’

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

    And increased melting ice via increased temperatures associated with excessive CO2 emissions, so more of the water in is the oceans and in the atmosphere (already well covered on TS).

    Yes, there is just as much soil on the Earth as in 1780. Unfortuantely a huge amunt of it is no longer where it can be used to grow stuff, since it is on the sea floor, having been washed away as a consequence of dreadful agricultural practices carried out via industrial farming, especialy in the US..

    ‘Around the world, soil is being swept and washed away 10 to 40 times faster than it is being replenished, destroying cropland the size of Indiana every year, reports a new Cornell University study. ;

    http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/march06/soil.erosion.threat.ssl.html

    And let’s not even think about the availability of lumps of gold or silver these days.

    http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1318263505.php

    (an outstanding article you presumably won’t bother to read)

    You said: ‘I reject your view on growth. Growth is based on increase in productivity’

    I know you are scientifically illiterate and cannot compehend simple scientific statements but nevertherless is has to be said: without energy nothing happens; growth is dependent on energy; if an econoimic system is starved of energy it shrinks; if an organism is starved of energy it dies. It really could not be simpler.

    It must be so easy for you to comment on blogs, knowing nothing and churning out mindless drivel that takes no intelligence and little thought.

    Therefore, I’m sure you’ll be back shortly churning out more irrational drivel.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 27.1

      24 November 2011 at 9:24 pm

      Everything you say has factual merit, but your delivery renders you impotent.
      • Gosman 27.1.1

        25 November 2011 at 8:54 am

        Yeah I stopped reading the drivel after the first sentence. There might have been something worthwhile in there.
        • Campbell Larsen 27.1.1.1

          25 November 2011 at 9:21 am

          Complaints about quality of comment are a bit rich coming from you Gos.
          • Gosman 27.1.1.1.1

            25 November 2011 at 12:27 pm

            From the same guy who stated on this very blog that he wanted The Mad Butcher to hurry up and die. Was that a quality comment then Mr Larsen? Do you regard wishing people would die already because they express political preferences at odds to yours is something you should be proud of?
            • Campbell Larsen 27.1.1.1.1.1

              25 November 2011 at 3:16 pm

              Still flogging that dead horse. So unoriginal.
28. gnomic 28

    24 November 2011 at 9:38 pm

    Is your National Party voter a chump? Well I suppose you can call them that if you wish. Perhaps however they are merely making a rational choice from their point of view. After all the National Party exists to serve the interests of certain sectors of society, and some profit from it being in power. They employ clever propagandists to persuade even those who are not on the gravy train that National will carry out their wishes, be it bashing the beneficiaries or building roads, more roads, creating jobs and growth, and just generally bringing on that brighter future.

    Let’s all look forward to 3 more years of drowning the state in the bath tub, and delusional thinking about rising living standards based on growth. Or, somewhat more likely, harsh austerity because there is no alternative, as the global financial system continues to collapse, and the limits to growth become yet more apparent. Just as well we have that extremely competent Mr Key at the helm. If we get really lucky we could have that rather odd fellow Don Brash at his elbow giving him advice.

    Hmmm, perhaps time to go to bed and hide under the blankets.
29. Knoxy 29

    24 November 2011 at 10:17 pm

    Well there you go. Im a chump. Aw well shit happens.
30. Afewknowthetruth 30

    24 November 2011 at 10:47 pm

    OAB

    ‘your delivery renders you impotent’

    Just think what as disaster it would be if EVERYONE understood what is actually happening and tried to take appropriate action.

    As it is, only those with perception and wisdom can recognise the truth and are taking the steps necessary to avoid losses in the coming mayhem (stampede?). Most people will incur horrendous losses as a consequence of their ignorance and/or their refusal to accept reality.

    There is a strange confluence between all this and Biblical ‘end times’ prophecy, in which the majority remain oblivious or deceived right to the bitter end, and then pay the price.

    Another interesting confluence is the so-called Mayan Calendar prophecy which supposedly identifes the year 2012 as the year of upheaval and turning away from the age of empire and control towards the age of consciousness. Having a scientific mind that requires proof, I find it difficult to accept that the Maya had the power to predict, so to me it’s just a peculiar coincidence at this point of time. It is, nevertheless, intriguing.
    • Campbell Larsen 30.1

      24 November 2011 at 11:31 pm

      afktt – dude, biblical end times and 2012 all in one comment!
      Disaster troll.
      There I said it.
      Prove me wrong.
      • One Anonymous Bloke 30.1.1

        25 November 2011 at 6:14 am

        +1
31. Afewknowthetruth 31

    24 November 2011 at 11:05 pm

    Sprat.

    Several good points.

    We need to distinguish betweeen talking about an attack on Iran and actually doing it.

    Talking about an attack on Iran is to geared to keeping the proles (especially Americam proles) fearful and supporting high levels of military spending.

    Actually attacking Iran would indiate TPTB have decided the game is up and they want to bring present arrangements to a very rapid end.
32. Jackal 32

    25 November 2011 at 12:18 am

    I prefer RWNJ as Tory seems to give some semblance of credibility… when there is none.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS