The sock puppets, the media and the UBI

117 comments on “The sock puppets, the media and the UBI ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Jenny Kirk 1

   31 March 2016 at 8:33 am

   I felt the same exasperation that you did MS on reading all the tripe that has been thrown at the idea of a UBI. Goodness, its just an idea … it needs discussion … and it needs expanding, and querying re the pitfalls or otherwise.
   Obviously Labour cannot put up any ideas for discussion without being shot down.
   Meanwhile our very freaky PM doesn’t put up any ideas at all but just talks about pandas or golf and doesn’t raise a boo. Exasperating !
   • Redbaiter 1.1

     31 March 2016 at 10:02 pm

     Jenny, you or Mickey or any Labour supporter should not worry too much about John Key’s initial reaction to any suggested Labour party policy.

     Give him a couple of years to think about it, while he talks with Mark Textor and or Lynton Crosby, and gets old Davey Farrar to do a few polls, and he’ll end up making it National Party policy.

     Its the basic reason Labour is finding it difficult to get any traction. Key has stolen your policies, tweaked them a bit, and passed them off as his own.

     That is the pattern he has followed over the last eight years of his govt. So you can take heart that although you’re not in government, most of your policies are being enacted or continued or expanded upon by National.

     They’re too gutless and bereft of principle to do it any other way.
     • Hanswurst 1.1.1

       1 April 2016 at 5:33 am

       Yeah, because tax cuts for the rich, raising GST, selling state assets, 90-day firing at will, charter schools and three strikes were clearly Labour-inspired policy.
2. ianmac 2

   31 March 2016 at 8:34 am

   It is disturbing that those idiot Wright brothers have come up with an idiotic idea that they could construct a machine that could fly like a bird. “They are barking mad,” said our PM today. And he is quite right. “The Wright brothers are so ignorant and lacking in vision.” The Taxpayers Union which is made up of some very clever guardians of fair and reasonable investigations have also condemned the terrible Wright brothers efforts saying that “they are an affront to Christian people and that as such the idiot Wright brothers should be burnt at the stake for heresy.” The Herald Editorial agreed and supported the careful analysis of the PM and the TU.
   • Jenny Kirk 2.1

     31 March 2016 at 8:40 am

     You’re on good form this morning, ianmac ! lol.
   • Pasupial 2.2

     31 March 2016 at 10:28 am

     An apt satire ianmac, but I would have gone with Richard Pearse myself.
3. AmaKiwi 3

   31 March 2016 at 8:39 am

   Left wing “sock puppets” is the answer.

   If the discussion about universal basic income had been discussed at an “open conference” of the (hypothetical) Organization for a Fairer NZ, the Labour Party would not have gotten its head handed to it.

   Most people do NOT vote FOR an opposition party because they think its policies are better. They vote to throw out the incumbent party. Trump reminds us campaigning is about destroying your opposition, not about enunciating clear, positive policies.

   Winston knows. When the Nats make a blunder Winston’s sharp tongue provides the sound bite the public can identify with.
   • shorts 3.1

     31 March 2016 at 10:00 am

     pretty much this

     If Labour does one thing that will benefit them greatly it is to have on hand to senior MPs (at the least) a set of three soundbites on any given significant policy or discussion release – repeat these like the parrots in national and start to see those lines repeated in media, overly explaining or being caught with not much constructive to say isn’t working… plenty of time for well thought out discussions later, just seize the day and own it
   • Wainwright 3.2

     31 March 2016 at 10:50 am

     Great idea. It was never going to work holding a Labour Party conference and then trying to distance themselves from the things discussed at said conference.
   • b waghorn 3.3

     31 March 2016 at 11:18 am

     Can I point out that Winston has never been more than a minor party .
     And for over a year labour have been getting thumped for being the no ideas no policy party.
     You’re posibble falling for the latest attack meme on labour by saying they shouldn’t have floated the ubi idea.
     • shorts 3.3.1

       31 March 2016 at 11:39 am

       Labour consistently serves up great policy coupled with terrible communications

       They need to focus more on one area as that gets votes, unfortunately thats comms, soundbites and the stuff Winston is great at (National too)… once in power they can then enact their great policies and make NZ a better place for all
   • Brutus Iscariot 3.4

     1 April 2016 at 11:48 am

     I disagree. You lose political traction by becoming “the party of no”.
4. saveNZ 4

   31 March 2016 at 8:41 am

   “Why the media even tolerate these clowns is beyond me.”

   Because under neoliberalism the news isn’t about news anymore, it is about making money. And people with money want a means to populate their views and influence opinion to make them more profit.

   In addition if so many PR, politicians and others are prepared to fill their columns with their views, MSM do not need to pay journalists anymore.
   • Draco T Bastard 4.1

     31 March 2016 at 10:50 am

     +1
   • Gangnam Style 4.2

     31 March 2016 at 10:56 am

     “In addition if so many PR, politicians and others are prepared to fill their columns with their views, MSM do not need to pay journalists anymore.” Yep!
   • Mosa 4.3

     3 April 2016 at 1:45 pm

     NZ media is foreign owned
     When we sold we sold out
     Journalist’s won’t rock the boat their job and reputation are at stake
5. One Anonymous Bloke 5

   31 March 2016 at 8:42 am

   A trashtalking mouthpiece who lies for money says what? His name’s Jordan? So?
6. Ad 6

   31 March 2016 at 8:53 am

   The only option for Labour MPs since they are incapable of predicting the entirelt predictable is to double down and pump out whole bouquets of fresh ideas every few months, and shift their brand in the media by doing so.

   Otherwise they will continue to be pecked to death by ducks.
   • BM 6.1

     31 March 2016 at 9:10 am

     I don’t think that’s the best option.
     This is much better

     http://thestandard.org.nz/the-media-treatment-of-labours-ubi-discussion-paper/#comment-1151254
     • Ad 6.1.1

       31 March 2016 at 10:43 am

       Yes I noted something similar as soon as the idea was released.
   • Colonial Viper 6.2

     31 March 2016 at 9:51 am

     They’ve pretty much already expended their years supply of new ideas. Which weren’t theirs btw, but mostly nicked from other people who had expressed them years or decades ago.
     • Ad 6.2.1

       31 March 2016 at 10:41 am

       They don’t need to have new ideas, they just need to have presented ideas. Shows they have a pulse.
7. pat 7

   31 March 2016 at 8:59 am

   “Why is it that the right is more interested in slowing down the uptake of progressive ideas instead of supporting change that is actually really important?”

   No mystery here…its to allow them time to position themselves to exploit it.
8. alwyn 8

   31 March 2016 at 9:25 am

   Vernon Small suggests, as you say
   “He suggests that in terms of costing the starting point should be to use the number of adults currently not in work instead of all adults. Good point. The mathematical geniuses who did not do this are neither mathematical nor geniuses.”

   Can you please tell what there is about the word “Universal” that you and Vernon don’t understand?
   As the Merriam-Webster dictionary says, the definition is
   “1 : including or covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception; especially : available equitably to all members of a society

   How can anyone start talking about a “Universal Basic Income” and then say it only applies to people currently not in the work force?
   • Draco T Bastard 8.1

     31 March 2016 at 10:53 am

     Can you please tell what there is about the word “Universal” that you and Vernon don’t understand?

     Can you please explain why you don’t understand what he said?

     It’s really quite obvious.
     • alwyn 8.1.1

       31 March 2016 at 11:05 am

       If you are talking about a “UBI” then a critical factor is that it be Universal.
       If it isn’t going to be “Universal” then simply talk about a review of the benefit system or whatever you are going to talk about. UBI is much sexier though for politicians to pontificate about, and Robertson pontificates almost as well as Geoffrey Palmer. Do you think it would have been of such interest if that hadn’t been the topic?

       There is another alternative I suppose.
       “When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master-that’s all.”

       I imagine you can just use your own version of “Universal” as simply meaning only people currently out of work. Most people, however, call that an Unemployment benefit.
       • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1.1

         31 March 2016 at 12:29 pm

         It will be universal but the extra cost is only that which will be going to those who are presently getting nothing. Specifically it will be:

         Total cost – present cost = extra cost

         Really, you’re off with the fairies if you’re missing that point.
         • Andrew 8.1.1.1.1

           31 March 2016 at 4:10 pm

           It’s actually the opposite of what you say:

           He said:
           “use the number of adults currently not in work”

           You said:
           “the extra cost is only that which will be going to those who are presently getting nothing”

           Those “presently getting nothing” as far as benefits are concerned, are those that are IN work.

           Unless i missed something …
           • Draco T Bastard 8.1.1.1.1.1

             31 March 2016 at 5:59 pm

             Those “presently getting nothing” as far as benefits are concerned, are those that are IN work.

             Lot of people in work that are presently getting benefits (WFF, accommodation supplements, etc) and there’s plenty of adults that don’t get anything who aren’t in work.
             • alwyn …

               1 April 2016 at 10:08 am

               What you are talking about is fine.
               However it is, as Andrew has pointed out nothing like the claim that Vernon Small was saying.
               He said, in his article
               “And surely, at the very least, the place to start calculating extra costs would be to multiply any assumed annual UBI by the the number of adults NOT in the workforce .”
               That is his claim. It is rubbish isn’t it?
               • Draco T Bastard …

                 1 April 2016 at 1:14 pm

                 No, because as he states quite clearly, it’s a starting place. Not the be all, end of the cost consideration.

                 After that you need to take into account all those already receiving benefits and how that will change. After that how those not receiving benefits will cost after tax.

                 It’s the place to start, after that it gets complex and so far I haven’t actually seen anybody with credible figures on it. All they’re saying is that it’ll cost $xx amount multiplied by the number of people and that is just outright wrong.
         • alwyn 8.1.1.1.2

           1 April 2016 at 6:00 pm

           “Really, you’re off with the fairies if you’re missing that point”
           That is not, in fact something you can accuse me of.
           I commented on the cost of a UBI scheme a couple of weeks ago. If you look at this comment you will see that I took the cost of a UBI (at $94 billion) and deducted the current cost of all the current benefits and student allowances (about $24 billion).
           So no. I am not away with the fairies.
           http://thestandard.org.nz/labour-considering-unconditional-basic-income/#comment-1146223
           On the other hand Vernon Small’s story is still rubbish when he is only going to count the number of people not in work.
9. ianmac 9

   31 March 2016 at 9:28 am

   Rob Salmond writes a good critique on TU:
   “The Taxpayers’ Union rides again!
   Jordan Williams and his cronies have waded into the debate over the UBI. They have a new “study” on the topic, and it’s a doozy.

   My personal favourite was the part where author Jim Rose argues a fiscally-neutral UBI will lead people to work less, leading to a massive recession.

   Oh noes – massive recession!”
   http://publicaddress.net/polity/the-taxpayers-union-rides-again/
10. Huginn 10

    31 March 2016 at 9:58 am

    Because they’re out of touch.

    Here’s how the grown-ups at the Financial Times are talking about UBI:

    Why we should pay everyone a basic income
    Mar 30, 2016 : Anthony Painter of think-tank the RSA and Lex writer Giles Wilkes debate the idea that governments should pay a universal basic income as they seek to tackle income inequality and technological disruption. FT employment correspondent Sarah O’Connor chairs.

    http://video.ft.com/4815640345001/Why-we-should-pay-everyone-a-basic-income/World

    A universal basic income is an old idea with modern appeal – http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a9758f1a-e9c0-11e5-888e-2eadd5fbc4a4.html
    • weka 10.1

      31 March 2016 at 10:39 am

      that ft link requires a subscription. Can you please cut and paste some relevant bits?
      • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 11:07 am

        Not a subscription. Just free registration.
        • weka 10.1.1.1

          31 March 2016 at 11:53 am

          The popup that blocks that article only offers paid subscriptions.
          • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1.1.1

            31 March 2016 at 12:52 pm

            Are you sure? There’s usually a link that allows registration but no subscription. It’s how I signed on.
            • weka 10.1.1.1.1.1

              31 March 2016 at 1:10 pm

              Can’t see anything but the paid ones. Same on my phone. If you already have a registration maybe they’re still allowing access?
      • Huginn 10.1.2

        31 March 2016 at 4:18 pm

        Sorry about the pay wall, which is also making it hard for me to select/copy&paste.

        First link is to a video – 3 talking heads discussing the UBI concept. Argument is that in contemporary industrial economy we need UBI to transition smoothly in and out of paid and unpaid work.
        Argument against is that we pay welfare for that. Rebuttal is that current welfare doesn’t allow us to take time out to acquire new skills, look after kids etc.

        Second link is to a description of UBI that starts with a reference to a book by Andy Stern
        Raising the Floor: How a Universal Basic Income Can Renew Our Economy and Rebuild the American Dream
        Here’s the Amazon link
        http://www.amazon.co.uk/Raising-Floor-Universal-Economy-American/dp/1610396251
    • Draco T Bastard 10.2

      31 March 2016 at 12:23 pm

      Mr Stern believes the US economy is reaching a “Vietnam moment”. It was only when middle class children were drafted that public opinion swung decisively against the Vietnam war.

      Globalisation has destroyed many blue-collar jobs but technological change is now threatening the professions. “The middle class is no longer immune,” he says.

      That bit.

      Neo liberalism has destroyed much but now it’s starting to eat away at the middle classes.
      • Huginn 10.2.1

        31 March 2016 at 4:31 pm

        The Amazon description of Stern’s book:

        Advances in technology are creating the next economy and enabling us to make things/do things/connect with others in smarter, cheaper, faster, more effective ways. But the price of this progress has been a decoupling of the engine of prosperity from jobs that have been the means by which people have ascended to (and stayed in) the middle class. Andy Stern, the former president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) spent four years traveling the country and asking economists, futurists, labor leaders, CEOs, investment bankers, entrepreneurs, and political leaders to help picture the U.S. economy 25 to 30 years from now. He vividly reports on people who are analyzing and creating this new economy–such as investment banker Steve Berkenfeld; David Cote, the CEO of Honeywell International; Andy Grove of Intel; Carl Camden, the CEO of Kelly Services; and Geoffrey Canada of the Harlem Children’s Zone. Through these stories, we come to a stark and deeper understanding of the toll technological progress will continue to take on jobs and income and its inevitable effect on tens of millions of people. But there is hope for our economy and future. The foundation of economic prosperity for all Americans, Stern believes, is a universal basic income. The idea of a universal basic income for all Americans is controversial but American attitudes are shifting. Stern has been a game changer throughout his career, and his next goal is to create a movement that will force the political establishment to take action against something that many on both the right and the left believe is inevitable. Stern’s plan is bold, idealistic, and challenging–and its time has come
      • Craig H 10.2.2

        31 March 2016 at 11:08 pm

        Agreed, and not in small numbers any more either.
      • Colonial Viper 10.2.3

        1 April 2016 at 12:54 am

        Neo liberalism has destroyed much but now it’s starting to eat away at the middle classes.

        The US working class was fucked by the early 90’s. The US middle class has been increasingly screwed over the last 25 years. (Remember the Michael Douglas movie Falling Down? About a defence industry engineer who was made redundant in a corporate restructuring? That was a 1993 movie.)

        Now it’s the turn of the top 5% to 10% to feel the ice cracking underneath their feet.
11. DH 11

    31 March 2016 at 10:13 am

    I’m a bit puzzled why the political left still don’t appear to accept that the mainstream media have turned into active political players. This Herald editorial for one makes that very clear and yet Labour MPs in particular still seem to cling to the fruitless notion they can win the press over;

    “Editorial: Income for all entails more bad than good”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11612852

    Note how often ‘the left’ is referred to in a snide context, with the implicit message that Herald senior management are actively opposed to the left.

    I’d like to see the left use the right’s own game against them. Get together and form an ‘independent’ media watch that constantly attacks the bias of the MSM and keeps them on notice. Start some rolling strikes against the media; boycott them whenever they get out of line. The left aren’t toothless but they need to form a united front to combat the MSM.
    • Chch_chiquita 11.1

      31 March 2016 at 11:04 am

      Reading the comments you get the feeling there are more reasonable people reading and commenting on the article than those who agree with the article, which makes me think National is off the mark guesstimating the public opinion (hopefully a trend that begun with the flag referendum). Labour needs to ignore MSM and keep on going.
      • DH 11.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 12:07 pm

        “Labour needs to ignore MSM and keep on going.”

        I don’t believe they can. We can only form our views & opinions from the information we absorb. No matter how smart any of us are we can’t operate in a vacuum, we all need the facts & information. For the great majority of the voting population the information they receive on politics is sourced from the mainstream media – TV, newspapers, radio.

        In the IT industry we have the old adage bibo… bullshit in, bullshit out. It’s relevant here. If the voting public are fed a regular diet of contrived media narrative then we’ll get that bullshit at each election.
        • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.1

          31 March 2016 at 2:03 pm

          If the voting public are fed a regular diet of contrived media narrative then we’ll get that bullshit at each election.

          Thing is, that’s all they’re fed unless they get off of the MSM and look elsewhere.
    • Colonial Viper 11.2

      31 March 2016 at 11:21 am

      I’m a bit puzzled why the political left still don’t appear to accept that the mainstream media have turned into active political players

      uhhhh…can you name a decade in NZ where the MSM were not “active political players”?
    • Adrian 11.3

      31 March 2016 at 1:19 pm

      God knows how many years ago while working the phones in the old St Heliers electorate, Mike Moore came in after a meeting with Michael Horton the Herald owner. Mike was asked how it went and his reply was ” He’s a man of principile but unfortunatley they’re not our bloody principils”. So nothing has changed.
12. saveNZ 12

    31 March 2016 at 11:30 am

    A handy tax calculator from the Green party…

    How much more income tax are you paying than Goldman Sachs, Methanex, Pepsico NZ or Apple? Do your calculation now, and get your friends to do it too.

    http://action.greens.org.nz/corporate-tax-avoidance?utm_campaign=alldb300316bbb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzgreens
13. saveNZ 13

    31 March 2016 at 11:34 am

    BTW a UBI has already been trialled.

    http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-mincome-experiment-dauphin
    • ianmac 13.1

      31 March 2016 at 1:21 pm

      Brilliant link on UBI saveNZ. Thanks. Covers a lot of those negatives put out by those opposing the idea. All those who are “for”, and those like BM who cry “against”, might benefit from a read.
      • ianmac 13.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 1:33 pm

        From Dauphin/Forget:
        “Between 1974 and 1979, the Canadian government tested the idea of a basic income guarantee (BIG) across an entire town, giving people enough money to survive…”
        “Forget(Forget is the researcher) documented a decline in doctor visits, an 8.5 percent reduction in the hospitalization rate, and more adolescents continuing into grade 12…”
        “Provider organizations for the entire welfare program are going to resist it because you are essentially describing eliminating all their jobs,…”
        ” …evidence shows that full withdrawal from the labor force was a relative rarity. Instead, workers spent longer periods of time searching for better jobs. Others may have spent more time in school.”
        “Midway through, though, the project ran into financial problems. The economy across North America drastically changed, and a recession, stagf​lation and higher-than-anticipated unemployment made the project more expensive than its budget could accommodate. “
14. saveNZ 14

    31 March 2016 at 11:43 am

    Swiss to vote on incomes for all – working or not

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25415501

    (Does anyone know the outcome of this vote, the article was 2013?)
    • ianmac 14.1

      31 March 2016 at 1:09 pm

      Swiss Referendum will be in June this year. Some opinion polls suggest maybe half think it a good idea.
      In Swiss style the idea has been discussed/examined for a few years in a non-partisan way. Pros and Cons. In contrast in NZ, an idea is floated and promptly rubbished in a partisan manner. Kill off the discussion quickly.
      • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 2:28 pm

        In contrast in NZ, an idea is floated and promptly rubbished in a partisan manner. Kill off the discussion quickly.

        QFT
15. NZJester 15

    31 March 2016 at 11:53 am

    That is a typical soundbite uttered by John Key when Labour looks at an idea and Key has no idea what it is about so attacks it anyway.
    If you where to ask John Key at an interview about a National Party policy and say it was a Labour policy he would shoot it down as a bad idea immediately without stopping to think just as he has been trained to do by Crosby Textor.
16. Magisterium 16

    31 March 2016 at 12:36 pm

    The UBI debate is over as far as the public is concerned, Labour fucked it up.
    • vto 16.1

      31 March 2016 at 1:12 pm

      in your dreams…

      the people are steadily cottoning onto it
      • Magisterium 16.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 1:31 pm

        Labour should have spent time and effort and brains actually coming up with a specific sort of UBI that’s realistically feasible for NZ. But they didn’t and just did their usual “hey we just want to put this out there, this isn’t a policy yet, we just want to have a discussion” bullshit, which allows National to paint Labour as supporting a totally unrealistic unfeasible UBI. Now National is in control of what the public thinks Labour’s policy is, and surprise surprise National will tell the public that what Labour is proposing is batshit crazy.

        Labour: shitty at communicating since ages ago.
        • vto 16.1.1.1

          31 March 2016 at 1:39 pm

          I think the important bits have flown way over your head…

          People like you are entirely expected in a village. Good for you. I expect most of the rest of the village will carry on regardless, particularly those concerned with their fellow villagers wellbeing ….

          This is just the start of the start for our UBI …. lol, you’re going to crack
        • One Anonymous Bloke 16.1.1.2

          31 March 2016 at 5:20 pm

          Yes, you must be right: the National Party exists for the sole purpose of telling lies and it’s all Labour’s fault.
          • Magisterium 16.1.1.2.1

            31 March 2016 at 5:56 pm

            One would think that after so many years of leaving gaps and having National step in and fill them with whatever it wanted to score points, Labour would stop leaving gaps.

            How many “show me the money” moments will it take for Labour to learn the lesson?
            • RedLogix 16.1.1.2.1.1

              31 March 2016 at 8:17 pm

              Tell me again … exactly how many highly paid PR types does John Key have working for his office again?
              • Magisterium …

                31 March 2016 at 8:58 pm

                I don’t see how that’s relevant. The problem is that Labour either has

                a) nobody managing communications, or

                b) someone who isn’t cutting it managing communications, or

                c) MPs who refuse to have their communications managed

                None of those things are a National problem.
    • Draco T Bastard 16.2

      31 March 2016 at 2:30 pm

      Wrong. The debate is heating up quite nicely.

      And I actually think that it was John Key that fucked it up.
17. vto 17

    31 March 2016 at 1:18 pm

    Labour simply need to keep pushing this and ignore the ignorant conservatives on the right. Such conservatives never lead anything – it is entirely against their nature. They haven’t a clue.

    Labour just needs to keep at it and not give up.

    Like with nuclear-free, like with the (now corporate) welfare state, like with free education, health, etc., like with ALL advances our nation has made..

    Labour leads.

    National follows.

    Like the sun rising tomorrow

    Ignore them.
    • Draco T Bastard 17.1

      31 March 2016 at 2:34 pm

      Labour simply need to keep pushing this and ignore the ignorant conservatives on the right.

      QFT

      Just need to keep at it. When National calls BS tell them to prove it and then shoot holes in their BS.
    • gsays 17.2

      1 April 2016 at 6:56 am

      hi vto,
      “Like with nuclear-free, like with the (now corporate) welfare state, like with free education, health, etc., like with ALL advances our nation has made..

      Labour leads.

      National follows.”

      i would add that since the green party has come on the scene they seem to be a generation or so ahead of both of these parties.
      perhaps too far ahead of the wave but still out front.
18. Clean_power 18

    31 March 2016 at 2:14 pm

    I also think the UBI is a winner and should be at the heart of Labour’s platform for the next election.
    • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1

      31 March 2016 at 4:01 pm

      Prepare to be disappointed, since at the very most they plan to run a limited trial.
      • weka 18.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 4:43 pm

        Here’s an idea, the GP, who’ve had investigation of a UBI as a core part of their income policy for ages, could to the mahi on it.
        • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1.1.1

          31 March 2016 at 4:55 pm

          From my perspective, a limited trial has pros and cons. On the one hand it will provide useful information on logistics and viability. On the other it’s a way to delay the process in favour of BAU, and in the meantime, Jordan and the other low-life trash can white-ant it to death.

          The progressive left didn’t ask permission to establish democracy or universal suffrage. This needs a big push to succeed, not the “wizened little shove”.
          • weka 18.1.1.1.1

            31 March 2016 at 5:05 pm

            I agree, which is why it suprises me to see so many people thinking that Labour should save us. Besides, we’re not even close to being able to set up a trial. We’ve only just started having the conversation. Lots of people don’t understand what it is, or what our options are, or even what the point is.

            There is a NZ group that’s been doing some work on a UBI too, can’t remember what they are called though.
            • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1.1.1.1.1

              31 March 2016 at 5:13 pm

              Gareth Morgan? 😉
              • weka …

                31 March 2016 at 5:15 pm

                ha ha, no, it looked more like a group of interested citizens, something one could join.

                Here ’tis. Pity about the name, and as noted, it’s a bit lacking in diversity.

                http://thestandard.org.nz/quantitative-easing-for-the-masses/#comment-1145698
19. Steve Withers 19

    31 March 2016 at 3:34 pm

    Vern Small highlighted the issue very well. If labour says it, then it’s wrong and if John Key says it, it must be right.

    Vern Small isn’t going to contest that reality. Instead, he wants to impose it on the Labour Party.
20. weka 20

    31 March 2016 at 4:23 pm

    People, Labour don’t own the UBI concept. It belongs to the commons.
    • joe90 20.1

      31 March 2016 at 4:33 pm

      Yup, ain’t nothing new under the sun.

      https://medium.com/basic-income/basic-income-basic-solutions-for-basic-problems-df8d629cf8b9#.3da02vj0o

      http://www.remappingdebate.org/article/guaranteed-income%E2%80%99s-moment-sun

      http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/01/the-failure-of-a-past-basic-income-guarantee-the-speenhamland-system.html
      • Steve Withers 20.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 5:09 pm

        Social credit have been talking about a UBI for almost a century.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit
    • Chris 20.2

      31 March 2016 at 5:22 pm

      But you can near guarantee Labour will attempt to destroy the concept as viable once and for all. Grant Robertson hates the UBI because he thinks his chances of being PM will be dashed if it becomes Labour policy. That’s how Labour rolls.
      • One Anonymous Bloke 20.2.1

        31 March 2016 at 5:30 pm

        The marriage of principle and pragmatism.

        As such, the Labour Party is a tool.
      • weka 20.2.2

        31 March 2016 at 5:43 pm

        I feel sorry for you if you think that Robertson rules the Labour Party or if you think that Labour should be the standard bearers of change in NZ.
        • Chris 20.2.2.1

          31 March 2016 at 8:32 pm

          I didn’t say Robertson rules the Labour party. I said Labour will scupper the UBI idea because it doesn’t see it vote-catching. This is my prediction. As far as Robertson goes I just don’t trust his support for a UBI. Sure he’s fronting it but again he doesn’t seem too passionate about it and again my guess is that he personally sees it as unpopular therefore a hindrance to his goal to be prime minister.
          • weka 20.2.2.1.1

            31 March 2016 at 9:00 pm

            You said that it’s almost guaranteed that Labour will destroy the UBI. I’m sick of people giving their power away. Labour don’t own the UBI concept. If there is sufficient will from the people Labour will follow, even you seem to be implying that.
            • Chris 20.2.2.1.1.1

              1 April 2016 at 8:26 pm

              Sure, I may have been a bit loose with my words (binning the idea as a policy would be more accurate rather than “destroy”) but it’s a two way street. I don’t think Labour has the guts to adopt a UBI and the standard old hackneyed bullshit reasons it’ll rely on will unfortunately impact on public opinion.
        • Magisterium 20.2.2.2

          1 April 2016 at 4:03 pm

          I feel sorry for you if you think that Robertson rules the Labour Party

          It’s more that obstacles to Grant Robertson’s rise within the party often seem to accidentally brutally stab themselves to death while shaving.
      • Anne 20.2.3

        31 March 2016 at 6:00 pm

        That’s poppycock Chris. He’s fronting it in the House and on the streets. Some of you have multi-coloured glass marbles for brains.
        • Chris 20.2.3.1

          31 March 2016 at 8:23 pm

          I hope you’re right but when was the last time Labour came up with a good idea and stuck to it? And about the multi-coloured glass marbles – well you’re probably right about that.
          • Anne 20.2.3.1.1

            31 March 2016 at 8:31 pm

            …about the multi-coloured glass marbles – well you’re probably right about that.

            It presented a good picture in my mind. As a kid I had an obsession with ‘multi coloured glass marbles’. Owned bags of em.
            • Sacha 20.2.3.1.1.1

              31 March 2016 at 9:24 pm

              Are those things still around – or banned as a choking hazard? Remember trading them in schoolyard.
              • Anne …

                31 March 2016 at 10:00 pm

                Suspect they’re not. The PC brigade would have made sure of that. We were not allowed to play with them when babies and toddlers were around. Feel sorry for kids these days. They’re not allowed to make their own fun – develop their imaginations and learn to be creative in the process. The odd broken bone, blood nose and a lot of dirt never did us any harm.
                • One Anonymous Bloke …

                  1 April 2016 at 6:42 am

                  🙄
21. greywarshark 21

    31 March 2016 at 4:36 pm

    Oscar Wilde tip:
    Enemies
    Always forgive your enemies; nothing annoys them so much.
    • Macro 21.1

      31 March 2016 at 4:56 pm

      “Love thine Enemy”
      “Drink is the Enemy”
      🙂
      • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1.1

        31 March 2016 at 5:32 pm

        Alcohol: the cause of, and solution to, all life’s problems.

        Homer Simpson.
        • Stuart Munro 21.1.1.1

          1 April 2016 at 1:07 pm

          It’s terrible stuff alcohol – I’ll be glad when I’ve had enough of it.
22. Huginn 22

    31 March 2016 at 4:48 pm

    Gareth Morgan’s pithy rebuttal of Taxpayers’ Union:

    Taxpayers Union Critique of the UBI just bonkers – again

    Today the Taxpayers Union – a lobby group that advocates minimal tax and State-provided education, health and social services – has released a report suggesting that the Unconditional Basic Income (UBI) will result in sky high tax rates and leave the most vulnerable worse off. The report is lightweight, and little more than zero tax advocacy dressed up as research. The TU has taken the same approach to this topic as it did to sugar taxes a few weeks ago and with which we pointed out the flaws.
    http://morganfoundation.org.nz/taxpayers-union-critique-ubi-just-bonkers/
23. Observer (Tokoroa) 23

    31 March 2016 at 7:16 pm

    . Pity about The Standard

    . If you go through and look at the Comments on here you will see that The Standard is a refuge for John Key Followers.

    And Main Stream media hacks.

    I imagine that the numerous little National commentors on here,- live in old peoples homes, togged up in diapers, little blue bibs around their necks, dribbling out dated claptrap.

    Not a single new idea from any of them. Especially not from the former political traitor.

    This is a Blog of hatred against the Labour Party.

    Will it always remain this way ?
    • lprent 23.1

      1 April 2016 at 12:22 am

      While there are a lot of right wingers who comment here and a lot of NZLP supporters an members, there are also a large number of ex-NZLP members and supporters of the left. I suspect that you have a problem distinguishing between right wingers and left wingers who are critical of the NZLP. The ‘Labour Ulterior’ of ex NZLP members dwarfs the number of current members in the NZLP.

      Perhaps you should spend some time distinguishing which is which. Ex members are a hell of lot easier to get support from compared to right wingers.
      • Draco T Bastard 23.1.1

        1 April 2016 at 7:06 am

        +1
      • Observer (Tokoroa) 23.1.2

        1 April 2016 at 1:19 pm

        Hi Lprent

        .
        You are correct. It is impossible for me to tell who was a former Labour voter,

        Is there some distinguishing feature of a past Labour voter?

        But I understand what you are saying. You are here to promote the former disgruntled Labourites. The past often gives people a purpose in life.

        Your words: “Labour Ulterior’ of ex NZLP members dwarfs the number of current members in the NZLP”.

        Thankyou for defining your blog and and its likely clients (coupled with National trolls)

        I will recommend to genuine Labour Voters that they develop another blog for people who like to discuss political and commercial Policy – OPEN MINDEDLY.

        Just for the record, are you confident that Greens and NZ First can form a viable Opposition come election time?
24. Michael 24

    31 March 2016 at 9:54 pm

    I believe the Labour caucus does not really want to adopt UBI as policy so it is quite happy for the Nats and their lackeys to destroy its credibility. After all, the MPs will still have their jobs (with regular, backdated payrises) and lavish, taxpayer-funded, pensions, even if globalisation results in the loss of one in four paid employment positions within the next decade or two. So why would they agree to a policy that benefits the precariat? It’s not as though Labour represents workers any longer, is it? That explains the lack of robust support for UBI coming from Grant Robertson, for instance, when he spoke on Waatea last week.
    • maui 24.1

      31 March 2016 at 10:14 pm

      It’s not Labour policy yet, it’s an idea they’re floating. Why would Robertson show gushing support for it, if it’s not part of policy. I thought he did a decent job on the Waatea 5th Estate show of explaining it and why it was needed, and he left the more in depth analysis of it for the other experts to comment on.

      And why would Labour draw so much attention to themselves and the UBI if they weren’t seriously considering of using it in some form?
      • Michael 24.1.1

        1 April 2016 at 1:16 am

        Because UBI was forced on the caucus by the few remaining sentient members of the party’s grassroots.
25. Nic the NZer 25

    1 April 2016 at 7:48 am

    What is so astounding about this is yet another significant Labour party communications failure is being passed off as unexpected media attacks on the left. Given the long history of this the medias reaction could clearly have been anticipated.

    Just to challenge another myth here is a discussion of an Australian based attack on the left, with the media in full assist. It happens just the same in Australia, though given some opinions here many on the left may not have realised this was an attack.
    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=33255
    • Magisterium 25.1

      1 April 2016 at 4:04 pm

      another significant Labour party communications failure

      Spot the rightwing concern troll. How much is Crosby Textor paying you?
      • Nic the NZer 25.1.1

        1 April 2016 at 6:45 pm

        Why, whats your rate? Want to unionise together for a better one?
        • alwyn 25.1.1.1

          1 April 2016 at 7:56 pm

          Why on earth do you need to ask?
          His pay rate was published in one of today’s postings.
          http://thestandard.org.nz/revealed-standard-bloggers-paid-by-labour/
          As the song goes “Nice work if you can get it”
          On the other hand I gather that the Labour Party is so broke that they even had to have the tax-payer pay for their leadership candidates to travel around the country in their leadership election.
          Shame isn’t it?
          • dv 25.1.1.1.1

            1 April 2016 at 8:16 pm

            How much did the taxpayer pay for Jason Ede?
          • Gangnam Style 25.1.1.1.2

            2 April 2016 at 12:34 pm

            Whoops http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11544788 “Housing officials tried to hide a National MP’s attempt to use a Government housing roadshow to raise her own public profile, documents show.”
26. doug stuart 26

    1 April 2016 at 10:25 am

    Can Labour tell us the extra cost and who will pay, tax rate of 50% may be????????
27. Cemetery Jones 27

    1 April 2016 at 12:12 pm

    Speaking of sock puppets, Jordan Williams always kinda reminded me of Zippy from Rainbow.
    • Gangnam Style 27.1

      2 April 2016 at 12:37 pm

      At least you could shut Zippy up!
28. Jenny 28

    16 April 2016 at 4:02 am

    The criticisms of the UBI dredged up by the Right are the same tired old criticisms used by the Right in opposing President Obama’s initiative on providing universal healthcare to Americans; So I thought the cartoon contained in this link might be appropriate.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/introducing-invisible-hand-free-market-man/

    Just change the words Obamacare to UBI and American to New Zealand and you have it.

Links to post

1. Sock puppetry, shilling and lying | Your NZ: posted on 1 April 2016 at 7:44 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS