The Standard Week: 3-10 October

16 comments on “The Standard Week: 3-10 October ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Tony Norriss 1

   10 October 2008 at 4:35 pm

   I think that National has been very cunning coming out with their plan first. It is very conservative and does not require additional borrowing that would have drawn immediate criticism from Labour.

   National can now wait for Labour’s plan. They will either have to go further into deficit to fund additional spending, or try and fund new promises from existing money, as National has done. If they go further into deficit, then National can slam-dunk them by offering similar additional money in the form of tax-cuts, but always be slightly behind in spending so they appear more responsible. If Labour intends to fund spending promises from existing money, then National can argue that not enough cash is being left in people’s hands at a time when it is desperately needed.

   This is a very difficult time, and liquidity is key. The more money that people have in their hands to spend is a priority for them to get through and for the economy to keep functioning. Notice, that the NZX has even suggested that provisional taxes for business be suspended for a while. So, we shouldn’t underestimate how difficult things could get. People are going to be very concerned about how they will survive day to day. So, the reduction in Kiwi saver will actually put more money into peoples hands which helps the current crisis.

   So, increased income in the form of tax cuts will become increasingly appealing as the crisis unfolds. I think National is well aware of this.
2. Matthew Pilott 2

   10 October 2008 at 4:40 pm

   Labour’s plan was announced some months ago, Tony. It was called “Budget 2008”. It involved some decent funding for Kiwisaver, which National plans to severly curtail, and a big R & D plan (rebates and a $700m fund) both of which National want to get rid of.

   cap ‘to drinking’… how apropos
3. Tony Norriss 3

   10 October 2008 at 4:45 pm

   Matthew said: “Labour’s plan was announced some months ago, Tony. It was called “Budget 2008″. It involved some decent funding for Kiwisaver, which National plans to severly curtail, and a big R & D plan (rebates and a $700m fund) both of which National want to get rid of.”

   Thats the problem. It was announced months ago. Things have changed significantly since then. As I said, liquidity will be key. I don’t think Labour’s old plan addresses the problems ahead at all.

   If they are going to stick with this, then they will be toast.
4. Matthew Pilott 4

   10 October 2008 at 4:49 pm

   Heh, Tony, See other thread on Roy Morgan poll!

   How much state intervention in the markets are you keen for anyway? I’d have thought virtually none, given your contrary nature towards Labour.

   What are you after, a few nationalisations perhaps? More bureaucracy and regulation?

   Maybe Labour could get rid of some of their policies most likely to drive growth – oh wait, they can’t or they’ll be accused of stealing National policy.
5. tony norriss 5

   10 October 2008 at 5:30 pm

   Matthew, I think the problem is actually far bigger than party politics now. Probably a co-ordinated approach from the two major parties is required.

   But I see that Labour is coming up with something this Sunday to address the problem. Will be interesting.
6. Tony Norriss 6

   10 October 2008 at 7:25 pm

   I’m quite surprised I’m not seeing an article here about Shane Jones being investigated by the police under the Electoral Finance Act. Talk about hoisted by your own petard.

   [lprent: Read this You Must. The short version is that if you want a news service then go and find one.]
7. Tane 7

   10 October 2008 at 7:41 pm

   There hasn’t been a post on Winston Peters being cleared by the SFO, Labour introducing minimum redundancy or National’s new ads either. We’re an opinion site, not a news service.

   If you want to complain about selective reporting, go ask Farrar to write about his mate Bill’s new tape, Winston’s clearing and the two polls out today. See how far you get.
8. randal 8

   10 October 2008 at 7:43 pm

   tony norris…help the police…give yourself up immediately.
9. randal 9

   10 October 2008 at 7:46 pm

   for being a poormouth mealymouth tory twit!
10. Tony Norriss 10

    10 October 2008 at 8:30 pm

    Come on you guys. How about some consistency. If this had been a national MP you would have been writing about it for weeks, judging by other matters of far less significance that have been attracting numerous articles over the last couple of days.

    Personally, I think it is ridiculous he was charged. He should be able to say “vote for labour” as much as he likes. It just demonstrates how stupid the law is.

    Randal says: “for being a poormouth mealymouth tory twit!”

    You can call me anything you like (although that is pretty childish I must admit). However, if I had said something like that, you would have pinged me for being a troll.

    I have no problems with divergent opinion and lively debate. I just think there should be consistency.

    [lprent: It isn’t a news site. It makes no pretence at being ‘balanced’, it is partisan in its posts. Posters are given almost complete freedom to post about what they wish to, because each comes recommended by a trust chain (in the finest tradition of the net). I don’t have to know who they are, I just have to know that people I trust trust them.

    We do leave a lot of room for intelligent comment and divergent opinions in the comments section. You can decide how far to trust each poster’s posts and can comment on them, and ditto for other commentators. The moderators will largely keep the wreckers under control. But don’t presume to tell us what to do. It wastes our time.]
11. randal 11

    10 October 2008 at 8:49 pm

    tony norriss…I have read your posts very carefully and yes you are right…you are a troll. you have not addressed one argument but merely put words into other people mouths and then convicted them for what you said they said. and. you are mealy mouthed because until your posts contain some substance then they are no more than swingeing bleats. is that mealy mouthed or not?
12. Weather Eye Of The North 12

    10 October 2008 at 10:01 pm

    John Key and his tax cuts policy: damp, damp squib I reckon, damper even than the “hockey mom”, perched on her kitchen stool “watching” “Russia” through her night goggles across the Baring Straits.

    I jest too much. The cow could run the world in a faltering heartbeat. Oh My God !

    How could 25% of Americans do this to us ? And the ShonKey goons reckon we’ve got problems with Helen Clark. Who’d you feel safer with ? Seriously…..
13. Pascal's bookie 13

    10 October 2008 at 11:33 pm

    I jest too much.

    Nah. Sarah Paleo-lin cannot be mocked enough. She is like a black hole for reason. No political discourse that takes itself seriously, and believes that ideas matter, can escape her suck.

    The way the polls have turned so sharply over there, and the all around coolness that Obama is responding to the crazy with, makes me think that there has been a wise-ing up to the GOP stupid. When things have gotten to be as generally shite as they appear to be, the stuff the GOP is selling is seen as a luxury people can’t afford. What people want is grown ups.

    GOP mockin’ is the black I tells yah.
14. Pascal's bookie 14

    10 October 2008 at 11:37 pm

    GOP mockin’ is the new black I tells yah.

    Note to self, take more care when drinked.

    I miss pre-view. (but no pressure Lynn. Love your work)
15. tony norriss 15

    11 October 2008 at 12:04 pm

    Randal, whatever you think of my posts, one thing I have not done is resort to personal insults as a form of argument. It seems to me that you just can’t engage with someone who has a different opinion to yours.

    All I have done in this instance is to ask a perfectly reasonable question about why you are not putting anything up about the Dale Jones police investigation. I think this is perfectly reasonable and thought you might actually do some comparisons and contrasts with Steve’s situation. I notice you have not at all disputed my accusation that you would be all over National like a rash in the same circumstances. Therefore, I take it that you agree with me on that point.

    Therefore, I think the evidence in this respect suggests that the name of this blog is one word short. Instead of “The Standard” you should be calling yourself “The Double Standard”.

    [lprent: Don’t be an idiot – read the About, especially the section “You must”.

    The synopsis is that if you WANT something to happen – set up a blog and do it yourself. Do the hard yards involved in setting up and maintaining a blog. Don’t sit around and whine here about what we should do on our own blog site.

    But if you want to put comments here, then read the rules in the About and the Policy, and don’t waste my time having to explain what has already been written down.

    Besides, I think that Randal has a point]
16. Felix 16

    11 October 2008 at 1:17 pm

    Therefore, I think the evidence in this respect suggests that the name of this blog is one word short. Instead of “The Standard’ you should be calling yourself “The Double Standard’.

    Come on Tony, that’s like the oldest joke dude and usually it’s just the knuckle-draggers who drop it. You’re not in good company there, it makes you look like a Kiwiblog troll.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS