Were you for or against the sale of Telecom or any of the other state assets which were turning a profit?

Another socialist who wants to live in la la land that the Telephone side of the post office was turning a profit when it was sold… Bet you think Railways was profitable before it was sold as well… muppet !

The health or otherwise of the nation’s accounts was unaffected by the sale of Telecom. The loss of the dividends after the sale (the loss of the social good you so lament) was made up by the additional taxes the government received from a more vibrant and growing private sector (a notion lost on socialists who forget that unprofitable companies pay fewer or no taxes and employ fewer staff who in turn pay less taxes and spend less) that resulted from more efficient, technologically nimble and productive Telecom. Telecom was of more use to the wider society because of the greater productivity that better and newer technology brought to businesses abd consumers and the levelling of price increases brought about by better competition. The arrival of 2 Degrees is a classic example of this.

Cropston House was at the time the Canterbury Labour Party’s sole asset – Telecom was not the NZ Governments sole asset – not even close to it. The impact of the respective sales was vastly different on the respective entities cashflows. You comparison is stretched to make your ideological point – something you never fail to do.

I was working or Telecom at the time. The change over to completely electronic exchanges from the mechanical type was well underway. The expansion of the cell phone network happened in under a monopoly, even though Telecom was a private entity there was no other mobile provider/competition, so I don’t know how the “…expansion of cell phone networks was only possible under private ownership driven by competition and market impertives.” fantasy is relevant.

The more recent explosion of cellphone use is more a consequence of the assembly of electronic products being outsourced to cheap labour markets – a condition Telecom could have exploited regardless of whether it was a private or public entity.

Telecom was an important social asset that returned a healthy profit to the its collective owners, much like Cropston House (which I only know about from your version of events). Although, judging by your response, I suspect you too are well aware of the obvious parallel between selling either valuable asset to satisfy a short term debt ‘crisis’ – a debt crisis being the rationale at the time for selling Telecom at a bargain basement price – and the foolishness of such a sale.

The social need for the Canterbury Regional Council of the Labour Party to retain Cropston House had not expired – indeed it was the sole income generating asset the LRC had at the time. The comparison is factuous and confirms you to be the lefty partisan hack you have always come across when posting here.

Which kinda begs the question: Were you for or against the sale of Telecom or any of the other state assets which were turning a profit?

You have your trans-genders, intergenders, hopelessly confused genders, the “how dare you label me” genders, temporary genders…

No wonder it engenders such confusion…

Well may we scoff, but middle NZ possesses a similar belief advancement on merit so this will make Labour unelectable as anything other than a minor party. Which makes NZ effectively a one party state. That is never a good thing, no matter how much the present leadership manages to confect an everyman image.

I’ll contribute to a hard right wing party to add some balance – you want to lead it or should you and I fight it out to see which of us leads the charge against the rot of socialism.

I’d just like one decent right wing party to vote for!

I’d be happy if the National Party stopped drifting to the left and returned to its founding principles. These principles won it a long term of government when it was first elected, and they apply just as well now as they did then.

If that is what makes me far right then so be it. I’ll wear that label willingly.

There is no good reason for the party to have ever moved away from these principles, and that they have betrayed them so fully is the main reason NZ is in the excrement it is in today.

NZ National Party Founding Principles 1936
“To promote good citizenship and self-reliance; to combat communism and socialism; to maintain freedom of contract; to encourage private enterprise; to safeguard individual rights and the privilege of ownership; to oppose interference by the State in business, and State control of industry”.

Instead we have announcements like this from Key and his bunch of Labour-lite sycophants-

National Party Senior Spokesperson 2011- “Conservatives are viewed as not in touch with middle New Zealand and not in line with John Key’s broader image”

Pathetic spineless Marxist weasels.

What these idiots fail to understand is that the battle for parliament is won with by attracting the swinging voter.

The battle is won by focusing on what the national electorate is concerned about. The list of remits is not that.

Now DPF , everytime you talk about your mate grant Robertson, this shit is what you are actually endorsing.

As someone said above, to para phrase ..this sort of rubbish comes out of a 6th form lesbian support group

What these idiots fail to understand is that the battle for parliament is won with by attracting the swinging voter. The moderate in the centre of the bell curve. Act were never able to work that out, it was a concept that completely eluded Brash both as leader of National and as leader of Act and lurching further to the left is simply not the answer for Labour.

For Labour to defeat National they have to be seen to be electable and these policies are simply idiotic.

We have seen this with the current National government, which has essentially claimed the ground previously occupied by Labour. This has meant the Labour has the option of moving further to the left (as they appear to have done) or aligning themselves with Nationals policies, or moving to the right of National. None of those options are very appealing and it is a clever move by National.

The only way out for Labour is to get back to basics and deal with the issues of relevance to the working class majority. The issues of a few angry minorities should not dictate policy. Most gays, Maoris, etc want the same things as every one else anyway. You can not expect to win a majority of votes by appealing to a minority.

I just don’t understand Labour’s obsession with what one has between one’s legs.

Because supporters of socialism have nothing between their ears.

Many of the small business owners, white heterosexual male small c conservatives were similarly drummed out of the party. I recall having lunch with a solicitor mate in Chch about 10 years after I left the party who was a party member. This man would’ve made an absolutely first rate MP and he tried to get onto the regional list. I told him frankly that he would be rank very low because he was the wrong gender, occupation and sexual orientation and sure enough he was ranked last. I can’t recall how much longer he stayed in the party – may be 2 election cycles – long enough to be passed over for any significant power role in the party. He could run rings around most of Labour’s current front bench!

When you create a party in the image of a small more extreme activist base far out of touch with mainstream New Zealand and drive out the few members who are, you end up with remits of the type you have detailed.

And the best part is – the government has consulted with ‘experts’ to determine what the prescribed behaviors should be.

What could be wrong with that? ………….Oh I know -

“When you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing; when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors; when you see that men get rich more easily by graft than by work, and your laws no longer protect you against them, but protect them against you… you may know that your society is doomed.” -Ayn Rand.

I’d just like one decent right wing party to vote for!