“You should quit while you’re a head.” Robespierre to Marie Antoinette

Sounds like the Republican Party in the US.

What a bizarre statement! Even in Texas you can’t throw a rock without hitting someone who voted for Obama. Which is handy, because they need to have lots of rocks thrown at them.

How do top-earning tax-evaders cost the country far more? Not giving enough of their own money to the government is somehow costing more? They are still net tax payers unlike beneficiaries or even lower to middle income earners. Not giving something that you own to someone else is not “costing” that other person anything

Because the rest of us end up paying to make up the shortfall, you muppet. If they don’t like NZs tax laws, then they can petition for change or they can piss off somewhere else.

By all means, petition for he tax laws to be changed. But don’t excuse the scofflaws who think the rules don’t apply to them. Think of how much lower the honest tax payers rate would be if they didn’t have to cover for self righteous scum who think that. Law only applies to other people.

Yes, but it’s damn close and that is reflect in a 1 seat majority.

Over time it erodes, when you govern you own things that break; oppositions don’t.

The anti-Shearer mob want him gone, yet openly proclaim that Labour will sleepwalk to victory (tui). If that’s the case, why are they wanting him gone?

Easy… if they don’t roll him now, and they do sleepwalk to victory, they won’t be able to easily roll a “winner” for at least another 3 years after that. If they do it’ll turn them into a 1 term gov’t… imagine how frustrating that’ll be for the Silent T and Robertson brigades.

It’s almost a now or never moment for some of them.

Surely the voiceless walls of that room must be endeavoring to scream, “YEAH, RIGHT.”

With all the flak from Labour commentators and media people flying around, who would ever believe that, in the presence of Clark, the subject never arose. It is far more likely that Labour’s “leadership” issues were the sole reason for Clark’s presence there – and that the fatuous accounts of what did and didn’t happen were more targeted at the diminished ranks of Labour’s remaining supporters. However, unlike those who blindly expect straightforwardness from Labour politicians, I don’t accept utterances that, by any rational analysis, must be patently untrue.

but there is presently enough of a pie that children should not be hungry, cold, or sick with preventable diseases, regardless of their parents irresponsibilities

The only sustainable solution to that problem is fixing the “parents irresponsibilities”.

Their behaviour – receiving welfare assistance for their family and yet neglecting their children’s welfare – shows that extra money is not any guarantee of solving the problem of the children’s welfare. It doesn’t even promote any level of confidence that it would address the problem.

It is not a solution, merely a conscience salver. Salved consciences will not fix the problem. Only addressing parental responsibility will do that. National’s welfare changes do that far more effectively than providing parents who ignore the welfare of their children with even more money to ignore their welfare with.

Seeking to label the whole concept of science and the climate as a political tool of the left is silly. Science is not the lefts propaganda toy. There is no massive conspiracy by scientists
Acknowledgement of the science is the only sane choice. The evidence is compelling that we have a developing problem with the climate. You do not have to agree with the proposed fixes from the left. The tendency to confuse climate science and politics is allowing the left to dominate the high ground on the environment.

There are many things that are green that can enhance your life or save you money
Next time get a diesel car BMW Audi and Merc all make some stunning executive cars that burn less co2 and go like the proverbial raped ape. Accountant and user both happy
Replace all your light bulbs modern LED technology last multiple times longer and uses far less co2
Install heat pump if building new or renovation. Up grade to green technology when it is cost effective.

Why do you have to be a Luddite if you find the evidence for AGW overwhelming?

i will beleive there is a crisis when those who say there is a crisis, start acting like there is a crisis.

PB, as your 1st sentence stated you hate national, you are the one who came here with spit and venom.

you are parroting obama etc, becuase it fits the envy view point of the left, that seem to think that those people who earn a high income dont ‘deserve’ it. its clear becuase you use waffly language like “And how good is the market at distributing wealth justly?” without defining such a subjective term in anything like an objective way.

why should i reward someone i dont know for popping out a kid? its none of my business, same way as you should not be paying for any of my kids. thats another envy laden attempt to try and get more money taken from people you dont like and given to those you do. the reward is the mother gets to live in a country with a very high likelihood that the child will survive to adulthood, beucase in the main, of the effort of those who sought profit, to make the country better than a 3rd world shithole.

there is no reason for any child to go hungry etc in this country other than the fecklessness of their parents and family.

more tax money wont help that, it will just fill the coffers of govt for more pork.

btw, we have heard all this before, it was crap when Ure spouted it, it was crap when hamnida spouted it, its crap now.

come up with an argument that works why dont you?

And I’m not sure what unions have to do with excessive pay for employees of some companies. Do you think unions should control the distribution of remuneration in companies?

This is the market that rewards a mother for raising a child NOT AT ALL, and the tobacco executive very handsomely indeed.

Actually you ignore that in the free market economy, and certainly in NZ, the mother raising the child can be the very handsomely rewarded executive.

Why are they paid so much more?

Not surprisingly, you expose your views as “explore myriad ways to carve up the pie” (which benefits some) instead of making a larger pie (which benefits all.)

Even if the tax rate were flat, if the top earners are paid enough more than those at the bottom they would be paying a majority of the total tax take.

That is absolutely true. (Mind you, only ACT campaign on a flat rate.)

so its november so i guess PBJ etc just finished their degree in leftwing bullshit (or pol sci they probably call it).

are you saying that CEOs dont do any work?

i appreciate that uni has told you that the labour value of work is the only true way, but it was discredited a long time ago and has never had any reason to not stay that way.

how would the market ‘reward’ a mother for raising a child? i dont get rewarded by the market for reading a book. the market does not give or take, it is simply the mechanism for the willing exchange of goods and services.

the market allows the mother to buy her groceries on line so she does not have to travel, to watch TV or use decent technology to clean the house when the child is asleep. without the profit incentive of the market, she would still be beating her clothes clean on a rock.