Again Labour wants equality of outcome, not opportunity

July 7th, 2014 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Labour’ deputy leader and finance spokesman David Parker has stressed the party’s egalitarian roots in a scene-setting speech at its election-year congress.

“I am an egalitarian politician,” he said.

Parker stressed Labour’s commitment to a balanced economy and greater equality of outcomes.

Equality of outcome is basically a socialist and communist policy.  You can justify pretty much any intervention by the Government on the basis of wanting equality of outcomes.

Fighting for equality of opportunity is very different. I’m all for equality of opportunity. But equality of outcome is very different. Equality of outcomes means reducing the outcomes for people, rather than increasing the opportunities.

Tags:

65 Responses to “Again Labour wants equality of outcome, not opportunity”

  1. Manolo (13,588 comments) says:

    No surprise. The despised Labour Party is full of Fabian academics and social engineers.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. MT_Tinman (3,136 comments) says:

    Parker stressed Labour’s commitment to a balanced economy and greater equality of outcomes.

    “Balanced economy”? “Greater equality of outcomes”?

    This means nothing, political speech at it’s best.

    I agree DPF, equality of outcomes is achievable rather easily, you simply reduce everyone to the lowest point.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Scott (1,780 comments) says:

    David Parker is also an atheist, that mindset also has something to do with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. CHFR (227 comments) says:

    Christ Almighty my 8 year old understands the difference between the 2 concepts and thinks equality of outcome is stupid.

    For the benefit of Labour here is how I explained it.

    Equality of opportunity;

    You sit is a classroom with your peers and your teacher stands at the front and teaches you maths. You all have the same opportunity to learn and when it comes time for tests your marks will reflect how well you have learnt what was taught.

    Equality of outcome;

    The 2 boys that talk, muck around and make a nuisance of themselves and get low marks now get the same marks as you, who studies and does well, will get.

    Her answer “But that is dumb Mum why should I work when they will get the same mark for doing nothing. How does anyone benefit from that…”

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. burt (8,239 comments) says:

    Equality of outcome… Everyone (except party leaders & special union friends) queue for toilet paper and bread.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. RightNow (6,987 comments) says:

    In the end everyone dies. Equality of outcome is a certainty.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. dime (9,866 comments) says:

    “Equality of outcome… Everyone (except party leaders & special union friends) queue for toilet paper and bread.”

    lol nailed it.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. beautox (420 comments) says:

    OMG they will be wanting equality for numbers next. Why can’t 1=2? (Or in their case, why can’t 23% = 43%)

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. kowtow (8,324 comments) says:

    It used to be equality before the law.
    Then equality of opportunity.
    It’s moved onto equality of outcome.

    In Europe (and to some extent here with the parody of marriage law)the concept is now absolute equality,and of course there is no such thing.

    Some people call it progress, I call it madness.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Komata (1,180 comments) says:

    ‘Equality of Outcomes’

    As has already been noted, this term is ‘Socialist Speak’ for ‘We will do all we can to destroy the hated ‘Rich Pricks’ and reduce them down to the level where absolutely everyone is equal ‘By Order’.

    There is however a very interesting subtext which is being carefully ignored and which, IMHO, really indicates the ‘them and us’ mentality of the NZLP (and its disconnect from reality).

    Aa far as I can deduce, the subtext would seem to be as follows: ‘Despite what has been said, the ‘caucus’ of the NZLP will not, of course be doing anything about a certain ‘Do-up’ in Herne Bay, cos the ‘Leader’ of our great and glorious party, must have ‘some’ privileges’.

    And, in respect of the ‘Rich Pricks’? Never us say the NZLP leaders!! So why not live in Otara or Canon’s Creek? Never Us (we would never stoop so low; our university education is simply TOOO valuable). and as for ‘real’ work (as in ‘labouring’)? US? Come sir, you jest!!

    Once the easily-spouted rhetoric is analysed, the disconnect is really rather obvious.

    A certain poem by Kipling comes to mind…

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Redbaiter (8,554 comments) says:

    “Equality of outcome is basically a socialist and communist policy.”

    John Key in opposition once described “Working For Families” as communism by stealth.

    Now he’s in power he likes it, and continues it, and rejects the claim it is communism by referring to his tinkering with the tax system.

    “Progressive” is a code word for communism and its popularity as a political concept is only the manifestation of neo-communism.

    A couple of weeks ago Key stated his pride in the fact that now, National was a “progressive” party.

    People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Zapper (1,019 comments) says:

    Come on guys, it’s completely understandable they want this when they’re struggling to get 25% in the polls. It’s always the losers who want equality of outcome.

    I heard on the radio news yesterday, some Labour idiot saying “The difference between Labour and National is that Labour cares about people and National cares about money.” Then I heard the vile Helen Kelly saying how the majority of New Zealanders want to see the back of John Key. I guess opinion polls do not count. Great tactic though, tell New Zealanders that they want the most popular PM in my lifetime gone. I’m sure all of those who see he is the best option to keep leading the country will think “oh, that unionist says I want him gone…okay then, 2 ticks for the lunatic coalition”.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Other_Andy (2,617 comments) says:

    “Labour’ deputy leader and finance spokesman David Parker has stressed the party’s egalitarian roots in a scene-setting speech at its election-year congress.“I am an egalitarian politician,” he said.”

    Of course David.
    Everybody takes home more than $147,000 a year plus expenses for doing absolutely nothing constructive.
    And you are Labours’ finance spokesman?
    That figures.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Tarquin North (263 comments) says:

    David Parker must read Animal Farm before he goes to bed. That would explain how he dreams up such stupid things. As time goes by Labours vision is looking more like a communist Party manifesto, I suppose you get what you pay for and the unions are paying plenty.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    Umm, the straw man of “Equality of outcome” that DPF has knocked over as “basically a socialist and communist policy” is not the same as “greater equality of outcomes” as per David Parker. The former is saying all outcomes will be equal, the latter that they will be closer together. Just saying.

    Also, @ CHFR

    “You sit is a classroom with your peers and your teacher stands at the front and teaches you maths. You all have the same opportunity to learn and when it comes time for tests your marks will reflect how well you have learnt what was taught.”

    But what if a kid has glue ear, foetal alcohol syndrome, dyslexia, ADD, crap parents…?

    I’ll be voting National this year, and I do agree striving for as close as possible to equality of opportunity is the mark of a good and just society. But It can never be achieved perfectly, so it too is a Utopian fantasy, like equality of outcomes.

    Better is the pragmatic sufficient opportunity for everyone…including the kids with glue ear, foetal alcohol syndrome, dyslexia…

    Posted in the interests of clarifying the debate so both sides of the divide don’t continually talk past one another.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (876 comments) says:

    I always call the Labour party Socialist Party of Aotearoa and the toxic Greens as Communist Party of Aotearoa….I feel vindicated now…

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. georgebolwing (796 comments) says:

    I hope Labour continues to run the “equality of outcomes” line, since it will surely be the road to crushing defeat.

    To strive for equality of outcomes is to reject:

    – every parent who says “I want my kids to have a better life than mine”

    – every student who says “I want to work hard and be top of the class”

    – every business person who says “I want to be better than my competition”

    – every sports team that say “We want to win”.

    That’s it Labour, tell parents, students, business and sportspeople that success is bad.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    What else would one expect from a loser such as Parker. His only credentials being that of failing in a small business venture, ruining his business partner’s life and bank balance, falsifying the details of the failure to Parliament, hence being demoted (he was a prospective Labour leader) to the back of the class by Clark. Running off with a stroke-ridden friend’s wife . . . what a recommendation of man, no wonder “Tojo” apologised for being a man, once again Labour has produced someone unworthy of the title.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Komata (1,180 comments) says:

    igm

    Yet the strange thing is that Parker appears to be totally unrepentant!! He got ‘caught-out’, that was all, and if he hadn’t been, then he would continue as before.

    He seems to be possessed of a very strange set of values, demanding that everyone else conform, except himself (Oh, wait, no, that is Cunnliffe D.’s ‘strength’ isn’t it? I’d temporarily forgotten…)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. mikemikemikemike (324 comments) says:

    We should never have an equal outcome society, the human race was built on consistently trying to be better than the next guy. On the same note though, anyone who thinks we have ever had an equal opportunity society (or that we are aiming for one) is playing with themselves. We have always had an ‘us and them’ society – we don’t necessarily mind ‘others’ coming up on their own and joining the upper classes but we don’t exactly go out of our way to allow that to happen.

    As an example, when I was a teenager I went to MOTAT for a science trip, my wealthy private-schooled cousin went to MIT. Which kid do you think got to make contacts that would afford them a much easier ride into Teritary education? I’m not begrudging this, she was given a great opportunity and has worked exceedingly hard to make it work for her. However the contacts and lifestyle that she was born into gave her a massive (the left would argue unfair) advantage and kick start for her future life.

    I don’t think we should be aiming for equality of outcomes, but equally think we should stop kidding ourselves if we think we should or are trying to achieve equality of opportunity.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Other_Andy (2,617 comments) says:

    “Parker stressed Labour’s commitment to a balanced economy and greater equality of outcomes.”

    Let’s apply this to the All Blacks selection.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Komata (1,180 comments) says:

    gb

    Well-said that man!!

    (Keep on telling the truth, sir, and you will probably find that there is a wall reserved for you ‘Come the Revolution’)

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    @ mikemikemikemike

    We should never have an equal outcome society, the human race was built on consistently trying to be better than the next guy…We have always had an ‘us and them’ society

    Umm, the first statement is correct, but the second and the subsequent elaboration is not the whole truth.

    All cultures also have to co-operate and care for one another, not just compete. It is a false dichotomy to think competition and cooperation are mutually exclusive. Your access to public education when you were a teenager confirms that. Different cultures and societies may choose a different place with different emphases on the cooperation-competition continuum. Nevertheless both are always present.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    At least it is a clear message. Could someone please tell me what National’s message is?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RRM (9,838 comments) says:

    Well RRM just recently broke into the “rich prick” top income tax band…. I don’t feel very friggen rich! Surrounded by yoof and unemployed people who have better cars, bigger TVs etc etc than us.

    I can’t express how HAPPY I am for the opportunity to be supporting their kids instead of my own! If only I could give away even more to make society “more equal”…!

    …As in, all animals are equal, but layabout animals need to be made MORE EQUAL courtesy of everyone else!

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. mikemikemikemike (324 comments) says:

    @Kimbo – how is it not the whole truth? It was as true an example as I can think of.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. duggledog (1,528 comments) says:

    National’s message is grow the pie, but continue to have about 25% of it eaten up and shat out by the unproductive. Better pie than Europe’s pie, or the American’s, or the Australian’s pies though.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    @ mikemikemikemike

    “how is it not the whole truth? It was as true an example as I can think of.”

    Umm, not sure I can elaborate any further on my explanation – which you seem to have ignored or at least failed to engage with.

    Your statements as they stand focus exclusively on competition. Which is why, yes, your example is valid in so far as it focuses on just one thing.

    But you made no mention of coopertion, which shows, in contrast to what you wrote, it is not just a case of “the human race was built on consistently trying to be better than the next guy”. The word “consistently” is the overstatement (and your anecdote does not support a universal application), as follows: –

    Instead, the human race is also built on cooperation which sometimes for reasons of disinterested altruism, or the sheer satisfaction and joy of seeing others prosper hauls the other guy up for no other reason than…he needs it.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    So you don’t support action to be taken to help reduce actual (growing) inequality in New Zealand?

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Zapper (1,019 comments) says:

    Penny, can you demonstrate some evidence in the form of data to support your claim?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    Please let it not be Penny Bright who gave my last two posts an up tick!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    Ah, that’s better! Presumably it was Penny who gave my last post a down tick!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. RRM (9,838 comments) says:

    So you don’t support action to be taken to help reduce actual (growing) inequality in New Zealand?

    Penny Bright

    No!

    WHY in the world would I want to reduce inequality? :-P
    Those who can’t / won’t stand on their own two feet already get looked after adequately in this country thank you very much.

    I see no reason why social welfare should be anything more than “adequate.”

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    And another!

    Whew. That makes it 2-2. One more to put me on the right side of the ledger, please, Penny?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    Two more! Now well in credit! I can live with myself once more.

    Thanks Penny.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Fletch (6,296 comments) says:

    “The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal” – Aristotle

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. mikemikemikemike (324 comments) says:

    @kimbo – perhaps, but the thing is, the example of hauling others up to make us feel good is tokenism, and are restricted to a very, very small minority of ‘lucky’ individuals (who were smart enough to see the opportunity and take it), however one person getting a lucky break is not representative of a group, and certainly not an example of equality of opportunity.

    If you can give me a real world example of how (say) the kids of Otahuhu College, and the kids from Kings College have been given the same opportunity to succeed then I might take your point. And don’t say ‘they both get to sit in class and have someone teach them stuff’ because that is BS.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Odakyu-sen (600 comments) says:

    “Her answer “But that is dumb Mum why should I work when they will get the same mark for doing nothing. How does anyone benefit from that…”

    That girl will go far.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    (I didn’t actually downtick you Kimbo :)

    Ok Zapper – here’s a bit of light reading for you to support my claim of growing inequality in New Zealand:

    (I suggest you throw away your Women’s Weekly – meant of course in a caring way :)

    August 2012

    The report on household incomes, inequality and hardship prepared each year by the Ministry of Social Development was released this month.

    It showed that income inequality rose again in the year to June 2011, and is now at its highest level ever in New Zealand.

    It also showed that the median (middle) household income fell by 3.0 percent over the year.

    This is the first time the median household income has fallen since the early 1990s.

    The changes in income were not evenly spread: the top third of households by income saw increasing incomes.

    The bottom two-thirds had falling incomes – some falling steeply.

    Download a complete version of the CTU Economic Bulletin for August 2012 (PDF 350k)

    http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/monitoring/household-incomes/index.html

    There’s LOTS more – but I know how a lot of you Kiwibloggers can’t handle the jandal when it comes to heavy duty FACTS and FIGURES?

    Kind regards

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    duggledog – even a 6 year old knows that you can’t grow a pie. It’s not a living thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Zapper (1,019 comments) says:

    Penny, do you often wonder why people treat you like a joke? Have you ever considered the way you engage with people? You’re not as smart as you think you are, and sadly, facts and figures are generally a stranger to you.

    CTU economic bulletin? Well the CTU don’t have a vested interest at all do they?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9664017/Gap-between-rich-and-poor-a-muddy-margin

    This is a good analysis, with the money quote:

    “The best interpretation is that the income distribution has remained at roughly the same level of inequality over the last two decades.”

    So it’s not getting worse at all, it is rather stable. Your heroes were in power for one of those decades. While I think inequality of outcome isn’t a bad thing, if I didn’t think that, I’d be asking the Labour Party why they couldn’t improve the situation, and why they are stinking hypocrites.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    Penny – please, don’t be afraid to be cruel to be kind! Down tick – you know you want to!

    @ mikemikemikemike

    I suspect we are still continuing to talk past one another. Nevertheless,…

    “…the example of hauling others up to make us feel good is tokenism, and are restricted to a very, very small minority of ‘lucky’ individuals…however one person getting a lucky break is not representative of a group, and certainly not an example of equality of opportunity”

    Um, I would suggest that is not the case.

    Most subsistence cultures cooperate in the first instance rather than compete. They have to! Even within indigenous groups that have been fast-tracked into the modern world within the last 100 or so years, the same cooperative values are to the fore. I’m not trying to peddle the myth of the “noble savage”, but nonetheless the rugged individualism we take for granted is actually a relatively late cultural development built on historical-cultural events such as the Reformation, Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution and mass-production consumer society.

    Also, charity is extensive, not just within our own country, but also across international boundaries. So too is free trade, which IMHO is the best way for the 3rd world to lift itself out of poverty, even if it means penalising our 1st world domestic communities in the short-term, e.g., we no longer have a textile or car assembly industry as we did 30 years ago. The increased efficiency and lower prices of free trade mean all ultimately benefit in the long run. Nevertheless the motive for free trade can be both self-interest, and the desire to see others lifted out of subsistence and poverty.

    Our modern welfare state is the next step beyond charity and the primary means of giving others a place at the table. Which is why I’m bemused by your statement, “we don’t necessarily mind ‘others’ coming up on their own and joining the upper classes but we don’t exactly go out of our way to allow that to happen”. Our collective vote for governments that tax us substantial amounts to fund the welfare state would indicate otherwise.

    “If you can give me a real world example of how (say) the kids of Otahuhu College, and the kids from Kings College have been given the same opportunity to succeed then I might take your point”.

    Umm, as per my earlier post, I think equality of opportunity is a fallacy. Instead, as per the way we vote and cooperate in paying our taxes, we are in agreement that others should be given sufficient opportunity depending on their various, often adverse circumstances. What they do with it is up to them.

    Which is why John Key’s message of the aspirational economy has resonance, and he is so popular. We don’t like carrying people, but we do buy-in (via votes and taxes) to assisting those who need it, and enjoying their subsequent success if it occurs.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. mikemikemikemike (324 comments) says:

    @Kimbo – Yep I agree on your last point. I also concur that equality of opportunity is a fallacy my objection is more to those who subscribe to the idea that we are or should be providing a level playing field for everyone.

    It’s a noble theory, but the reality is the more you try and force it the more people will resent it and the opportunities given will actually dry up as people try and protect their patch. If you create an atmosphere where people can feel secure in their wealth they will be far more likely to share it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    errr… Zapper aka Dopey Goat – did you not see from where the CTU got their data?

    http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/monitoring/household-incomes/index.html

    From that hive of left-wing fanatics – THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT???
    __________________________________________________________________________________

    Here you go Kiwibloggers – more FACTS and EVIDENCE of growing inequality in New Zealand:

    This may be easier for you to digest – it’s a video clip with pictures?

    (Meant of course in a caring way :)

    Only 12 minutes long.

    ” Inequality: A New Zealand Crisis – Max Rashbrooke

    Economic inequality is real, personal, expensive and it was created. Journalist Max Rashbrooke lays out the facts about income and wealth inequality in New Zealand, and its effects on our society. ”

    http://vimeo.com/97996373

    Go on!

    Have a look – I DARE you! :)

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    So Kimbo – you’re opposed to tax evasion and tax havens?

    Yes / no?

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    @ publicwatchdog

    “So Kimbo – you’re opposed to tax evasion and tax havens?

    Tax evasion – yes, it is a crime. On a par with failing to pay your rates. Although whether the particular tax laws in question are just is a matter of debate, and potential change via the ballot box.

    Tax havens – as it is a form of tax avoidance, then it depends. As long the administrative cost is not prohibitive and the law of unintended consequences does not kick in and closing loop holes does more harm than good…

    Now, seeing as I have been so upfront and answered your questions, how about answering one I asked a few years ago, to which I’ve yet to receive an answer:

    As you’ve never won any public representation via the many ballots you’ve placed yourself on at both a local and national level, thus confirming you have no popular mandate, when can I expect a refund of my portion of my rates that covers the damage you and the rest of the 99% (sic) mob did to the grass in Aotea Square a few years ago?

    Kind Regards,

    Kimbo

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Komata (1,180 comments) says:

    PENELOPE

    On inequality; a thought to entertain and amuse you….

    So far, as you repeatedly tell us, (and with very evident pride), you have NOT paid your rates.

    You now regale us with figures that show that the poor are getting poorer.

    Now, poor or not, ‘the Poor’ still have to pay for certain things, and they are still charged for certain things.

    Amongst these things (at least in Auckland) are items like transport, rubbish removal, and the general infrastructural-type that we have come to expect from Councils; it’s a perk that we have because we live in a Western-style democracy.

    Of course such things are not free and, perhaps surprisingly are paid-for by a charge that local bodies make on those citizens who are ‘wealthy enough’ to own property. Such charges are known as ‘RATES”.

    Now, by your own admission, you are a property owner. Therefore, the Auckland City Council is legally able to charge you for the use of its services. BUT, you absolutely REFUSE to pay yours, this despite making daily use of such services; even by the mere fact of walking down a footpath. This of course puts the burden for paying these charges (known as ‘Rates’ BTW) back on the council and , ipso facto, on the other inhabitants of the city of Auckland who use Auckland City Council services .

    Therefore, because of YOUR selfishness, Penelope, YOU, are actually OPPRESSING your fellow citizens and contributing to the decline in income amongst the one third of the population who are ‘becoming poorer'; that sector of the population in Auckland who have to ‘fork out’ extra money to pay for the things that they need , but that YOU steadfastly, SELFISHLY, refuse to contribute towards. You are imposing extra, unwanted, UNWARRANTED costs on that sector of the population of New Zealand about which you are apparently oh so very concerned. But, as always, it is no doubt ‘different’ when YOU do it; ‘Principle’ is sooo convenient…

    Ironic is it not?? An ‘Anti-Poverty’ campaigner who is always loudly trumpeting about how she is upholding the case for the poor, is in fact contributing to their state of poverty and the decline in their available income

    There is a word to cover this state m’dear: It’s called ‘Hypocrisy’- possibly you’ve heard of it?

    And yet, despite being an ‘OPPRESSOR OF THE POOR’ by not paying your rates and contributing to society as even the poor have to, you want to be an MP?

    Perhaps we should advise Mr. Cunnliffe of your situation, since, by owning a valuable property and NOT contributing to society, evidently because you are above such things, you would seem to be one of those people he publicly hates; the ‘Rich Pricks’. I’m sure he will be very interested in such a revelation, and might even invite you to his ‘do up’ to discuss the matter…

    (Said in a caring way of course, as we are want to do).

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    Remember this Kiwibloggers?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10336608

    Fran O’Sullivan: Key chases luck o’ the Irish

    4:59 AM Wednesday Jul 20, 2005

    Banking Boards and Governance Company Taxation… Economy Fiscal Policy Foreign Policy Interest Rates New Zealand
    National MP John Key gets a gleam in his eye when he starts talking about New Zealand becoming the “Jersey of the South Pacific”.

    “Why not have an offshore banking industry based here?” he asks.

    “In the right conditions you could attract 200 banks to register here – each with a CEO and staff. You could attract insurance companies. Bring back lots of Kiwi accountants and lawyers. Single out clusters – such as high-class yachts – or other special sectors as the Irish did.”

    Key is clearly on a roll as he lists the options New Zealand could explore if it decided to abandon outdated ideology and take a more pragmatic approach to growing the economy.

    The former investment banker knows what he is talking about.

    As head of global foreign exchange for investment giant Merrill Lynch he shifted a considerable amount of his business to Ireland in the mid-1990s to take advantage of a 10 per cent tax rate for foreign investors.

    The investment was a runaway success. …… ”

    _________________________________________________________________________________________________

    So – our Prime Minister John Key, helped thousands of his clients avoid /minimise tax by shifting business to Ireland.

    How did that work out for Ireland?

    http://ec.europa.eu/ireland/key-eu-policy-areas/economy/irelands-economic-crisis/index_en.htm

    The boom becomes a bubble

    However, from 2002 onwards, the nature of the boom began to change.

    Labour productivity was no longer increasing, inflation was high and growth in GDP increasingly became related to the housing market.

    Across the economy, wage increases threatened competitiveness. By 2006, although the public finances still appeared strong, this was deceptive, because much of the revenue the State took in was related to the property market. The property related revenues included not only stamp duty and capital gains tax, but just as importantly, a large amount of VAT paid by developers, as well as income tax paid by workers in the very large construction sector. The tax base was effectively very narrow, and dependent to a large extent on the housing boom.

    Figure 2 – The collapse in property related tax revenue which caused the fiscal crisis in Ireland
    Graph showing Tax Revenues from Housing

    Despite this risk, Ireland continued to increase its public expenditure, funding expensive capital projects, but also allowing some categories of current spending to rise very rapidly.

    The speculative bubble in property was supported by a surge in bank lending, and the balance sheets of Irish banks grew disproportionately large relative to the size of the economy.

    The banks had traditionally relied on their deposit base to fund their lending activity.

    However, greater financial integration, spurred in part by the birth of the euro, allowed them to turn more and more to short-term borrowing from abroad, from so-called wholesale money markets.

    This period also saw a global increase in risk appetite by financial markets, and Irish banks were caught up in this.
    _________________________________________________

    The crisis erupts

    By 2007, the housing market had reached its peak.

    That year, tax revenues began to decline markedly, new home completions fell for the first time since 1988, and in 2008, Ireland experienced its first significant increase in unemployment in 15 years.

    Irish banks began to report arrears on their loan books, and with confidence evaporating, were faced with the prospect of deposit outflows.

    At the same time, short term inter-bank lending, on which Irish banks had become heavily reliant for their funding, became difficult to access, due to the international financial crisis.

    Responding to these pressures, the government decided to issue a blanket guarantee of the banks’ liabilities and to recapitalise them using public funds.

    The large costs of these measures further exacerbated the structural budget deficit which the housing market collapse had revealed.

    This bank debt was added to an already significant budget deficit, causing international investors to question the sustainability of Irish sovereign debt. In November 2010 yields on Irish government debt reached an unsustainable 9%, which meant that the government was effectively locked out of international bond markets. Unable to borrow to fund the deficit, Ireland would have faced a devastating and abrupt adjustment to public services, as spending would have had to be brought in line with revenue immediately.

    _________________________________________________________________________________________

    The EU/IMF economic adjustment programme for Ireland

    To avoid this prospect, On November 29 2010, the government negotiated a financial assistance package with the EU and the IMF totalling €85 billion (including a contribution of €17.5 billion from Ireland’s own resources).

    The financing provided by the programme partners is helping to cushion the very large shock which Ireland’s economy and public finances have suffered as a result of the bursting of the bubble.

    It is helping to keep vital public services running. In July 2011, EU leaders agreed to reduce the interest rate and to extend the maturity on the EU loans provided to Ireland under the programme.

    This decision brought about a significant saving to Irish taxpayers and has helped to improve the country’s debt sustainability.

    Three main elements

    The programme contains three main elements.

    First, a financial sector strategy is helping Ireland to have a smaller, better capitalised banking sector.

    Second, fiscal consolidation will put the country’s public finances on a sustainable path over the medium term.

    Third, an ambitious structural reform agenda will restore competitiveness and strengthen the economy’s growth potential.

    Although broad policy targets in these three areas are agreed between the programme partners (the Irish authorities, the EU, the IMF and the ECB), implementation is a matter for the Irish government, which has a democratic mandate from the Irish people. …

    _________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Bugger.

    Not such a ‘brighter future’ for Ireland?

    For whom exactly was this ‘investment a runaway success’?

    Doesn’t look like it’s been such a raging success for the poor old Irish 99%?

    So in whose interests is NZ Prime Minister John Key working for again?

    Follow the dollar ……..?

    http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/mpp/mps/fin-interests/00CLOOCMPPFinInterests20141/register-of-pecuniary-and-other-specified-interests-of (Pg 30)

    Rt Hon John Key (National, Helensville)

    2 Other companies and business entities

    Little Nell – property investment, Aspen, Colorado

    Bank of America – banking

    _____________________________________________________________________________________________

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    PROVEN ‘Anti-Corruption Whistle-blower’ ……..

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Kimbo (913 comments) says:

    @ Penny Bright, PROVEN ‘Anti-Corruption Whistle-blower’ ……..

    So that’s still a “no-comment” on the cost of re-sowing the damaged grass in Aotea Square, is it?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Zapper (1,019 comments) says:

    Penny, and I showed you an analysis of that study that pointed out inequality has not in fact changed for 20 years. And you respond with abuse.

    You’re such a hypocrite. A criminal one at that. I hope your crimes are duly punished.

    Kimbo, surely she meant “PROVEN corrupt ‘whistle-blower'”?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    Oh really Crapper? Like to point at a Judgment which confirms that I’m a criminal or ‘corrupt’?

    Is that why you don’t put your name to your silly posts, to try and shield yourself from the NZ Defamation Act?

    Do you support Auckland Council not complying with the Public Records Act 2005 and telling citizens and ratepayers EXACTLY where our public monies are being spent?

    Or are you just a gutless sheep / cash cow – all pay – no say?

    Because I’m not.

    That’s why I’m refusing to pay rates, because Auckland Council is NOT following the law, and not creating and maintaining ‘full and accurate records’.

    Or perhaps you don’t support ‘open, transparent and accountable ‘ local (and central) government, to which citizens and ratepayers (and taxpayers) are lawfully entitled?

    Perhaps you are content with Auckland Council wanting to increase charges / rates in a number of areas, without looking at where they could be cost-effective with spending?

    Like – by opening the books and cutting out the consultants and private contractors?

    More fool you …..

    (Meant of course in a caring, if slightly exasperated way…:)

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    (Who consistently puts her name to her posts …..)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    Dimbo – perhaps you might want to put your mind to the hundreds of thousands of dollars which were wasted on the Occupy Auckland court case (which we eventually won), that should never have gone to Court – because we were still ‘talking to the Council’?

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Albert_Ross (275 comments) says:

    errr… Zapper aka Dopey Goat – did you not see from where the CTU got their data?

    http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/monitoring/household-incomes/index.html

    From that hive of left-wing fanatics – THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT???

    I followed that link, and I had a look at some of the data and graphs which it covered. However, I could not see which particular dataset was meant to support the contention that income inequality is rising. Could you cite specifically which dataset we are meant to look at?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Zapper (1,019 comments) says:

    I see what you did there. Very clever.

    How is it defamation to call you a criminal when you openly admit to a crime? Just because you’ve found a way to justify it to yourself doesn’t change it being a crime.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. ShawnLH (4,605 comments) says:

    “So Kimbo – you’re opposed to tax evasion and tax havens?”

    Not paying your rates is tax evasion. Cripes your a monumental hypocrite Penny.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. OneTrack (3,024 comments) says:

    DPF –

    Equality of outcome is basically a communist policy.

    FIFY

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. chris (644 comments) says:

    Err… it’s funny how Penny always resorts to name calling.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    Gee – are some of you Kiwibloggers overdosing on your ‘thick’ pills, or are your eyes just painted on?

    (Meant of course, in a caring way :)

    I’m not ‘evading’ paying my rates Shorn Sheepish – I’m REFUSING to pay my rates because I’m not being told EXACTLY where Auckland Council rates monies are being spent, for which I take full personal responsibility.

    It’s my own personal ‘rates revolt’ – in order to defend citizens and ratepayers lawful rights to ‘open, transparent and accountable’ local government.

    Here’s a wild idea – try googling the Local Government Act 2002, and the Public Records Act 2005, and read up on YOUR lawful rights, and Auckland Council’s statutory duties.

    Then, give a bit of credit to citizens like myself, who are making a stand to defend YOUR lawful rights.

    (And tell everyone you know to electorate vote Penny Bright for Helensville ;)

    Kind regards,

    Her Warship

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. ShawnLH (4,605 comments) says:

    Penny you can wrap it up in a claim to be a protest as much as you like, you are still being a hypocrite. “Tax evasion” or “rates revolt” in practice it’s the same thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. ShawnLH (4,605 comments) says:

    You do realize you have not got a hope in hell of beating JK right? He’s the most popular PM in recent memory. Most people have no clue who you are, and most will only know you as the screeching nut being dragged into a van (quite rightly) by the police while ranting insanely about corporate control of the police.

    Your ability for self-delusion is impressive.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    I did rather well out of small wagers with prominent journalists over whether or not John Banks would be found guilty of electoral fraud.

    I’ll bet $1.00 that I’ll beat John Key for the Helensville electorate seat.

    Of course – my small technical problem is that I don’t know who the hell you are Sheepish Shorn.

    Pity .

    I reckon my $1.00 is looking good ……

    Kind regards,

    Penny Bright

    (Future MP for Helensville? ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. All_on_Red (1,581 comments) says:

    Penny
    I’m looking forward to when you have to speak publically. Should be fun.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. publicwatchdog (2,516 comments) says:

    You reckon John Key will front a public candidates meeting for Helensville?

    I DO hope so.

    ipredict I’ll kick his ass – (politically, and in a probably not-quite-so caring way, of course ;)

    The ‘Tradie’ vs the ‘Trader’?

    WOOHOO!

    It’s going to be fun all right ….

    Kind regards

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. All_on_Red (1,581 comments) says:

    You are going to get humiliated. I’d wager that many will see this as a very public opportunity to express their view of what they think of you. The left seem to forget that many of us used to protest also and haven’t forgotten how to show dissatisfaction with someone.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. ShawnLH (4,605 comments) says:

    “I’ll bet $1.00 that I’ll beat John Key for the Helensville electorate seat.”

    Delusions are free Penny.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.