Were you unhappy with the level of Labour’s spending in 2005?

But hey, if you’ve been living under a rock aka Reid you wouldn’t have a clue.

http://johnquiggin.com/index.php/archives/2009/12/04/zombie-economics/#more-8102

If we were a state of a combined US, Canada, Australia and NZ, look where we’d come for average annual wages.

(2008 GDP per capita in $NZ, purchasing power parity).

1. District of Columbia – $254,985
2. Northwest Territories – $147,343
3. Delaware – $109,903
4. Alaska – $108,349
5. Wyoming – $102,883
6. Alberta – $102,201
7. Connecticut – $95,823
8. New York – $91,134
9. Massachusetts – $87,175
10. New Jersey – $84,893
11. Virginia – $79,313
12. Saskatchewan – $79,060
13. Nevada – $78,332
14. Louisiana – $78,190
15. Minnesota – $78,143
16. Colorado – $78,111
17. Texas – $78,056
18. California – $77,977
19. Newfoundland and Labrador – $77,932
20. Western Australia – $77,109
21. Hawaii – $76,920
22. Washington – $76,491
23. Illinois – $76,230
24. Northern Territory – $75,687
25. North Dakota – $75,503
26. Maryland – $75,301
27. Nebraska – $72,467
28. Yukon – $72,325
UNITED STATES – $72,308
29. ACT – $72,253
30. South Dakota – $71,327
31. New Hampshire – $70,777
32. Iowa – $70,143
33. Rhode Island – $69,956
34. Pennsylvania – $68,983
35. Kansas – $67,977
36. North Carolina – $67,346
37. Wisconsin – $66,302
38. Oregon – $66,162
39. Nunavut – $63,968
40. Georgia – $63,734
41. Ohio – $63,711
42. Vermont – $63,558
43. Florida – $63,010
44. Tennessee – $62,963
45. New Mexico – $62,493
46. Missouri – $62,430
47. Oklahoma – $62,401
48. Utah – $62,261
49. Indiana – $62,029
CANADA – $60,580
50. Arizona – $59,425
51. Michigan – $59,350
52. Maine – $58,603
53. Montana – $57,577
54. Ontario – $57,336
55. British Columbia – $56,971
56. Kentucky – $56,869
57. Alabama – $56,599
AUSTRALIA – $56,012
58. New South Wales – $54,292
59. South Carolina – $54,178
60. Idaho – $53,722
61. Victoria – $53,586
62. Arkansas – $53,447
63. Manitoba – $53,181
64. Queensland – $53,086
65. West Virginia – $52,734
66. Quebec – $49,183
67. Mississippi – $48,472
68. South Australia – $48,318
69. New Brunswick – $46,229
70. Nova Scotia – $46,058
71. Tasmania – $44,993
72. NEW ZEALAND – $42,019
73. Prince Edward Island – $41,825

Dear Nats: what is your ambitious strategy for keeping New Zealand ahead of Prince Edward Island?

(In fact, the 2009 figures may show they’ve already overtaken us.)

and give more to the rich..

eh reid..?

and c’mon..!..

brash..at the behest of his advisors(mccully/w.h.y..or whatever..?

played the race card for all it’s worth..

it is what defines him/his time as national party leader..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

he does advocate the tearing away of social support from the poorest/weakest

no, he advocates removing support from those who are capable of supporting themselves, and why not?

and ‘iwi-kiwi’/orewa-speech..?..anyone..? and that conforms the ‘racist’.. (or..if not racist..deeply cynical/manipulative in the playing of the race card.. which is preferable to you..?

phil, phil, phil, phil, phil.

How could you buy into the MSM/MP/Liarbore lefty spin that Brash was saying something other than all people are equal? I mean it’s like agreeing with the village yokel in the national idiot of the year competition.

Seriously.

I bet you haven’t even read the speech.

yes..i read that as old school thrift..

“..hard-hearted racist arsehole..”

well..yes..he does advocate the tearing away of social support from the poorest/weakest..

so that’s the ‘hardhearted’ confirmed..

and ‘iwi-kiwi’/orewa-speech..?..anyone..?

and that conforms the ‘racist’..

(or..if not racist..deeply cynical/manipulative in the playing of the race card..

which is preferable to you..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

The thing that lefties don’t seem or admit to seeing phil, is that Don is an ‘old-school’ man of integrity.

Young lefties laugh at him for being geeky and old lefties give every impression they think he’s one of the people they’ve seen in the history books of the 20′s where the fat top-hatted banker greedily gathered wads of money.

Every single impression I’ve ever had of Don Brash has been of someone of faith, of integrity, of honour.

The media laughed at him for washing his socks in the hotel sink when he was RB governor. No-one in the media acknowledged the only possible truth behind that act which was he was simply saving we taxpayers money by avoiding expensive hotel cleaning bills.

No-one.

That to me speaks volumes of the misunderstanding of the public perception of this fine man.

It also speaks volumes of the man himself, for in that simple act which no doubt was repeated many unspoken unheard times, he made unseen contributions to the wealth of this country.

Now how phil can people like you who constantly deride him as a selfish hard-hearted racist arsehole, reconcile that. For what a man does in secret, so he truly is.

Fact is, to me, despite his marital issues and that’s private and says nothing about his political integrity, he would have been a great PM. To me, he has more integrity in one skin cell than the entire 5th Liarbore Cabinet did throughout its execrable reign of lies, deceipt and cynical manipulation of the useful idiots that infest this country.

“and btw..farrar did no stories on it..despite receiving those warnings since aug 2006..”

Yes, I know phil, that’s why I never posted on it. Out of courtesy.

whio was/is brash ‘working for’..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

mm!!…ever heard of marxism..?

similar problems there..

and i am not claiming any ‘i said it first’ dibs..

i just saw/listened to others saying it..reasonably early on..

and btw..farrar did no stories on it..despite receiving those warnings since aug 2006..

he just followed the official national party pre-election line in bullshit/spin..

..’the recession will be over after xmas; (08)..

the point is..the freemarket/survival/prosperity of the fittest…

is so so ‘wrong’..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

I saw this coming before you and was telling my work colleagues about it. I blogged here on it on the extremely rare occasion there were any threads on it. I don’t care if you believe me or not, but it’s true. I’ve never wanted to claim first dibs, I realise that’s important to you, but believe me phil, I saw it coming a long time before 2006.

You seem to imagine because I’m a Hayek fan that I’m therefore a fan of the way his theories are implemented. Please use your obvious intelligence to discern the difference.

Just because the theory is correct, doesn’t mean it will work in practice when poorly implemented. How long has it taken to improve the internal combustion engine? Does that mean that Benz was wrong when he invented it?

Re: Greenspans “instructions,” I can’t believe you’re so disingenuous. He was the Fed Governor. Who, phil, was he working for if not the private shareholders of the Fed? You know this. Don’t you? Don’t disappoint me by pleading ignorance of the Fed, FFS.

I’ll also grant you he’s a bloody good impersonator.

where is the lie.?

for three + decades we have had this freemarket-experiment..

started by douglas-labour..continued/expanded under national..

and brash has..both in and out of power-roles..

been one of the main architects/executors of those ‘wrong’ policies..

as i said..

where is the ‘lie’..?

(n.b..oz did not do that experiment..

they got rich..

we got poor..

duh..!..eh..?

‘more of the same..!’..eh..?

just to see if that hot element still burns..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

If you repeat a lie enough times someone might believe you.

You could argue that Brash’s ideas were tried for maybe four years under Labour (’84 – ’88) and maybe three years under National (’90 – ’93).

The other 23 of the last 30 years were big government as usual.

do tell more..!

i’m on the edge of my seat..!

who exactly was ‘instructing’ him..?

and are you attempting a new benchmark in hindsight..?..with this:..

‘.for it was very forseeable to anyone let alone those with access to date not available on the web) drove the US economy into the ground..”

really..?

so you agree/d with the economic doom/gloom stories i have been linking to since early august 2006..?..then..?

but reid..who is/was ‘the architect’..?..if not greenspan..?

and what is brash..?

if not a mini-me of alan ‘i was wrong’ greenspan..?

and this one..?

“..The fact he was able to do that, does not mean the vehicle wasn’t operating correctly at the time…”

i mean..w.t.f..!

please explain..!

phil(whoar.co.nz)

He (IMO deliberately under instruction, for it was very forseeable to anyone let alone those with access to date not available on the web) drove the US economy into the ground. The fact he was able to do that, does not mean the vehicle wasn’t operating correctly at the time.

it is obvious you have not yet seen/digested the recant/mea/culpa from alan greenspan..eh..?

where he admits he was/is/got it all ‘wrong’..?

with his admission the economic crash being the irrefutable confirmation of that ‘wrong’..

you really should seek it out..eh..?

‘cos..y’know..!..if the architect is saying it’s a leaky building..

it’s looks a bit dodgy to be still trying to flog it/hawk it around..

..saying it is watertight..eh..?

(it cd effect yr ‘credibility’..eh..?..)

phil(whoar.co.nz)

(oh..!..and far be it for me to be a linguistic-pedant..eh..?

but how many ‘roads’ have you seen ‘hoe’d..?..

and why would you..?

i think ‘row’ is the word you were grasping for..)