General Debate 11 October 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment184

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (184)

Login to comment or vote

Lee01

But some people are suggesting they pay a little more

No, some people are suggesting that the state force them to do so.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:45pm
Chuck Bird

Debate tonight
Tuesday, October 11 · 6:00pm – 8:30pm
Location
Stone Lecture Theatre, Law School, 9 Eden Crescent. Auckland Central
Created By
Marcus Playle, Corinne Marti, George MintonShow all (5)
For University of Auckland Debating Society
More Info
Should we have reserved places in universities and reserved seats in Parliament for Maori? Do you support targeted Maori policies? See Maori Party Co-Leader Dr. Pita Sharples, Labour MP Shane Jones, ACT Candidate David Seymour, Law Professor Jane Kelsey, and the Debating Society’s finest debaters Gretta Schumacher and Joshua Baxter battle it out on the topic “This house supports one law for all”. Judging them will be retired Supreme Court Justice, Sir Ted Thomas.

A panel discussion (with the chance for you to ask any burning questions) and refreshments will follow.

Free of charge; all welcome.

Note ACT Candidate David Seymour is but one of ACT’s young future leaders in the top 12 on the list which is supported unanimously by the board.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:46pm
Lee01

Thanks Lee. But I’m more interested in what you have to say.

I’m new to free market economics, I’m still reading through a stack of books myself.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:47pm
Ryan Sproull

Look at the West prior to the advent of statism in the 18th century. Not perfect by any means, but generally when you look at the West prior to the 18th century, including the pre-Christian classical period, you generally see monarchy, heirarchy, and family centred society based on the ties of kith and kin.

And when you see something like women being excluded from political roles, or the persecution of homosexuals?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:48pm
Lee01

And when you see something like women being excluded from political roles, or the persecution of homosexuals?

So?

For a start women were sometimes Monarchs, and even leaders in war, particularly in Anglo-Saxon and Germanic society. And excluding homosexual practice is simply what normal, natural societies do.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:50pm
tom hunter

I didn’t see a quote from Krugman where he described corporations as evil.

How diversionary. You’re confusing my paragraph where I wrote that the hypocrisy of people who use products made by corporations that same those people describe as evil – is the same as the hypocrisy of a man who rants about financial manipulation by corporates and the richest 1% when he used to work for one of the icons of that group.

Moroever I wrote that precisely because I did not see where Malkin made that accusation either. Did you somehow confuse the two different groups, even though my paragraph makes it quite clear that they’re two different sources of hypocrisy for two different reasons – or are you deliberately conflating the two in order to build a strawman counter-argument?

What I did see Malkin do was point out that Krugman snuggles up to those who do say that corporates are evil, with comments like this:

Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.

Which Malkin goes on to demonstrate is a remarkably hypocritical thing to say for a guy who got paid to be an Enron advisor back in the day. But then Krugman has been a hypocrite about a lot of things so it’s not a surprise to me.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:51pm
Ryan Sproull

So?

Is homosexuality or women wanting equal political power to men part of the Natural Order?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:52pm
Lee01

Is homosexuality or women wanting equal political power to men part of the Natural Order?

No.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:54pm
leftyliberal

Lee01: No problem with witchcraft, bigamy, sodomy, cannibalism etc in your natural order?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:57pm
KiwiGreg

Ah well Lee you’ll fit in well with the fundamentalist muslims. See you were worried you were alone in the world 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:59pm
Lee01

lefty,

those are just cultural practices. Such things differe from one society to the next.

The term “Natural Order” refers specifically to the general structure of society, not the details of its culture.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 2:59pm
Scott Chris

Lee says:- “In terms of the first the historical context does not determine what is written in Scripture”

So you are suggesting that regardless of the fact that the Romans were in occupation of Judea, and constantly dealt brutally with uprisings, that this wouldn’t have affected Jesus’ or Paul’s behaviour?

And that a conservative religious institutions run by Pharisees and Saducees wouldn’t feel threatened by some guy who claimed to supersede their institutions?

Or that the people Jesus and Paul were preaching to were mainly an illiterate and oppressed primitive Jewish society, many of whom prayed for revolution and looked to Jesus as their deliverer, or Messiah?

I put it to you that the New Testament can only be understood within its historical context, because what Jesus taught was only relevant to Jewish society 2000 years ago. The underlying moral code is *culturally encrypted*

Seems so obvious.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:03pm
MyNameIsJack

Lee01 (1,357) Says:

October 11th, 2011 at 1:37 pm
@ Weihana

Many of those on welfare are religious

Prove it. With NZ statistics. I dare ya!

Every church that does not pay rates is on welfare.

Every church owned business that does not pay tax is on welfare.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:05pm
plebe

Do i smell the scent of a stitch up between Westpac,the bank of choice for the Nats, and their good friends, the National party, this could keep the govt contract with the bank going for a few more years
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/5767710/Simon-Power-to-head-Westpac-Private-Bank
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:10pm
Lee01

@ Scott

So you are suggesting that regardless of the fact that the Romans were in occupation of Judea, and constantly dealt brutally with uprisings, that this wouldn’t have affected Jesus’ or Paul’s behaviour?

it would not have determined the content of their preaching, no. For example, your claiming that Paul wrote Romans 13 to suit the Roman authorities. I think there is good evidence he wrote it because he believed it.

And that a conservative religious institutions run by Pharisees and Saducees wouldn’t feel threatened by some guy who claimed to supersede their institutions?

Of course they would. But Jesus did not change what he preached to mollify them.

Or that the people Jesus and Paul were preaching to were mainly an illiterate and oppressed primitive Jewish society

Primitive? No. We are the primitives.

I put it to you that the New Testament can only be understood within its historical context

i put it to you that the historical context is useful to understand, but does not in itself determine the content of Scripture the way your claiming.

because what Jesus taught was only relevant to Jewish society 2000 years ago

Jesus was and is the incarnation of God and the world’s saviour. What he said is eternally relevant.

Seems so obvious.

Because your still trapped in the Matrix.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:10pm
Lee01

Every church that does not pay rates is on welfare.

Rubbish.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:11pm
Johnboy

A suitable theme song for GD since it’s become the Brother Lee Christian Crusade. 🙂

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nPvqZG8mLM&feature=related
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:13pm
tom hunter

But few are suggesting the richest 1% pay 100% of their annual income or 100% of their wealth. That is just being absurd.

Indeed and normally such an argument would simply be a reductio ad absurdum to demonstrate where such thinking could lead.

However, in this case it’s more like a thought experiment to demonstrate how far in the hole the US is, in terms of both its Federal debt and annual deficits. In other words it demonstrates that the debt and deficit are a real-life reductio ad absurdum, which is what should be terrifying people.

But some people are suggesting they pay a little more and ease the burden on those who are less able to contribute and who are suffering the most under the present crisis.

Considering that the bottom 47% of Americans don’t actually pay any nett tax, we’re talking about the middle class who are suffering and who are “burdened”.

But the fact is that if spending is not seriously tackled (and I mean cuts of 5% plus in annual spending for several years running) they will have to be burdened even further in order to make any difference, even if the rich were to pay everything they’ve got, let alone just a little more. And that does not even take into account what would happen to investment in the US economy, which is already screwed as people basically stuff money under their beds while they wait for the next government smash and grab raid.

If those leftists crying crocodile tears actually did give a shit about those who are “burdened” by all this they’d cut Federal spending by significant % amounts rather than the smoke and mirrors bullshit that has been pulled to date. But considering that even a 40% cut in annual spending would only take the US back to what it spent in 2008 I’d say the chances of any real impact via that route are also a mirage.

Like I said – jack the tax rates up on the richest 1%. It will provide warm and fuzzy feelings in the left, but eventually even they will be forced to the same conclusion that Kennedy and his economic advisors reached in 1961: the higher the tax rate the lower the revenue. Counter-intuitive I know but it’s been demonstrated multiple times in many different tax areas, especially in the US.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:13pm
MyNameIsJack

Lee01 (1,360) Says:

October 11th, 2011 at 3:11 pm
Every church that does not pay rates is on welfare.

Rubbish.

that’s right, churches expect their rubbish to be collected, but they do not pay for it. They expect the state to pay, they are on welfare, they are bludgers of the highest order, always with their hands out, never prepared to put in.

Should a church catch fire, they expect the fire brigade to attend, but they do not want to pay for the fire brigade.

Should a pastor be assaulted by the child he buggered, he weill expect the polcie to prosecute, but he does not want to apy for it.

Bludgers. thieves. parasites. The unholy trinity of religion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:15pm
Lee01

A suitable theme song for GD since it’s become the Brother Lee Christian Crusade.

I actually don’t bring the issue of Christianity up that much. Its usually others that do.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:15pm
Lee01

always with their hands out, never prepared to put in.

They put in a vast amount in terms of charity and voluntary work. I would hazard a guess the average Christian gives back more to the community than you do.

Bludgers. thieves. parasites. The unholy trinity of religion.

No, thats the unholy trinity of secular Leftism and the Liberal Welfare state.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:18pm
Johnboy

‘Bludgers. thieves. parasites. The unholy trinity of religion.’

Don’t forget the Lawyers on WWL. Bludgers, thieves, parasites.

Wonder where His Lordship is today? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:24pm
bc

Lee01 @ 2.50pm “And excluding homosexual practice is simply what normal, natural societies do.”

Oh dear.
May I suggest to those people having a ‘discussion’ with Lee01, that based on the above statement from him, he is beyond help. I wonder if he would disown his children if they said they were gay?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:26pm
Lee01

May I suggest to those people having a ‘discussion’ with Lee01, that based on the above statement from him, he is beyond help.

Shock! Horror! He’s not a Liberal!

Quick, call the Thought Police..er I mean the Human Rights Commission! I’m sure that they can force me to attend one of their re-education programs so I can be trained to think like all the rest of the sheeple!

On second thoughts, I need to go do some real work. Bye.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:29pm
MyNameIsJack

Lee01 (1,362) Says:

October 11th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
always with their hands out, never prepared to put in.

They put in a vast amount in terms of charity and voluntary work. I would hazard a guess the average Christian gives back more to the community than you do.

Prove it. With statistics, I dare ya!

A recent US study on charitable work by xtians showed that most of the “charitable work” was done within the church, not outside.

That aside, the amount of charitable work that any given church does is no reason it should get a free ride. Why not accept your founder’s words about rendering unto Caesar?

I and my business both do charitable works and giving and we, rightly, receive a tax deduction for that. But only for that. Not on our entire profit, unlike churches.

It is the secular, sometimes left, but not exclusively, that are behind such hard working charites as Red Cross, Medecin sans Frontieres, Oxfam, UNICEF, Lions, Rotary, and many more.

They do what they do, not for a reward in heaven, but because it is the right thing to do.

that is the Natural Order.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:30pm
bc

Lucia Maria @ 2.00pm “I’m no fan of John Key, however I have to say he’s occasionally touching his nose (once maybe twice) because he’s sniffing. He’s got hayfever or the beginning of a cold.”

Ha, ha – classic. What about the covering of his mouth when talking. Or the worried ‘deer in the headlights’ look. Or the getting angry ‘ok you got me, just drop it’ look at the end.
Not one of his best moments. A pretty bad week for Key. Let’s hope he learns from it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:31pm
Lucia Maria

bc, I didn’t notice him covering his mouth in that clip. He touched his chin – once.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:40pm
Lee01

A recent US study on charitable work by xtians showed that most of the “charitable work” was done within the church

A study commisioned by whom for whom? And what about a global one?

That aside, the amount of charitable work that any given church does is no reason it should get a free ride.

They don’t get a “free ride”, and yes it is. This is a Christian country.

More to the point, all taxation that is not for National defense and Law and Order is illegitimate anyway.

It is the secular, sometimes left, but not exclusively, that are behind such hard working charites as Red Cross, Medecin sans Frontieres, Oxfam, UNICEF, Lions, Rotary, and many more.

Many Christians are part of those organisations and they have founded more, such as Worldvision, Tear Fund, and hundreds of others.

They do what they do, not for a reward in heaven, but because it is the right thing to do.

So do Christians.

But if your an atheist, there is no “right thing to do”. Right and wrong are just subjective personal tastes that have no objective meaning in the atheist worldview.

So a more accurate statement would be they do it because they are made in the image of God and are responding to His grace.

THATS the Natural Order.

Bye now 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:40pm
Ryan Sproull

No.

So…

The state is currently making people liberal, against the Natural Order.

You point back to pre-18th century Western countries where things were better.

Homosexuality and women wanting equal political power to men are not part of the Natural Order.

And yet they both arose in pre-18th century Western countries.

What was it that was perverting the Natural Order back then, that such people would arise?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 3:55pm
bc

Lee @ 3.29pm “Quick, call the Thought Police..er I mean the Human Rights Commission! I’m sure that they can force me to attend one of their re-education programs so I can be trained to think like all the rest of the sheeple!”

Oh please – it’s you who’s thinking like a “sheeple” (whatever that is). The rest of us are more enlightened. I note that you didn’t address the last part of my comment.

Dammit! He’s dragged me in after I suggested we ignore him!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:02pm
Chthoniid

But if your an atheist, there is no “right thing to do”. Right and wrong are just subjective personal tastes that have no objective meaning in the atheist worldview.

There is no such thing as an atheist worldview. Atheism only means the rejection of the theist claim that there is a god. Atheism starts and stops at that point. That’s the problem when you use theism as your reference point.

From there- anyone lacking a belief in gods- can draw upon any work in moral philosophy that likewise lacks a theistic base- turns out over the last few centuries there’s been a few of those. Utilitarianism or contractariansm have a lot of adherents.

So a more accurate statement would be they do it because they are made in the image of God and are responding to His grace.

You belong to a belief-system that promoted the murder of tens-of-thousands for the entirely fictional crime of witchcraft, and you claim you think you have a grasp of morality? Fascinating.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:06pm
Scott Chris

Lee says:- “……made in the image of God and are responding to His grace. THATS the Natural Order.”

Anagram of Natural Order is:

Learnt Ardour

Kinda ironic.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:10pm
nasska

Ryan

The era he keeps harking back to was the Renaissance, circa 14-17th Century. It was about the time the Anglican Church (of which he is an adherent) was formed after the Roman Catholic church had a bit of a stoush over who should be pope & took their eyes off the ball.

It was of course before the Industrial Revolution & before the Agrarian Revolution, a time when people lived wretched lives in feudal villages. A time when peasants slaved from dawn to dusk & more so they could retain about 20% of the fruits of their endeavour. If the crop was good they ate…if it failed they starved. Higher up the food chain the lords, ladies & clergy grew fat. The clergy held a firm grip on the education system which prevented anyone from getting ideas above their station.

Paradise on earth if you had the fortune to be born into the right sector of society…living hell if you weren’t.

This is the great step back the theological one wants society to take.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:15pm
Weihana

# Lee01 (1,353) Says:
October 11th, 2011 at 1:37 pm

“How can one prove what’s going on in the mind of the employer? Not always so easy.”

“Irrelevant. The Human Rights Act exists and is enforced, thereby violating voluntary association.”

Lee keep your eyes on the goal posts. The issue was whether such laws were consequential not whether they violated principle.

“Paul Henry isn’t a racist.”

“Yes, but he did get fired by the state for supposedly being a racist.”

He actually got fired because he upset a large number of wowsers. Again, it is social pressure which drives these decisions. It is not simply a case of the government imposing outrage on people, some people actually were outraged and the pressure they exerted forced his exit. And the fact that a large number of other people support Paul Henry is the reason he is back on air.

“If we accept that welfare is a liberal policy that does not imply that those who are more likely to need it do so because they are liberal.”

“It means they behave in ways liberals approve of, such as having sex and children out of wedlock.”

Tolerance does not imply endorsement. Whatever happened to the notion of personal responsibility Lee? Suddenly when social conservatives do stupid things it’s because the liberals encouraged them to do it.

“Many of those on welfare are religious”

“Prove it. With NZ statistics. I dare ya! 🙂 Rubbish.”

It is merely my own experience that those on welfare are often religious, presumably reflecting the fact that people in general are often religious. I don’t believe it is something that I can prove with statistics. The notion that religious affiliation has something to do with whether or not one receives welfare is probably offensive to many and so I doubt any such statistics exist. But given the large population of people who receive welfare and given that approximately 2/3rds of the general population identify as religious (2006 Census) then it would seem unlikely that any deviation in the demographics of welfare recipients as compared to that of the general population would be so great such that the statement “many welfare recipients are religious” would be unjustifiable.

“So conservative Maori are not conservative and liberal whites are not liberal.”

“Not in terms of their behaviour, no.”

But that doesn’t change their ideals. I would say their behaviour reflects neither conservative OR liberal ideals.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:17pm
Ryan Sproull

But if your an atheist, there is no “right thing to do”. Right and wrong are just subjective personal tastes that have no objective meaning in the atheist worldview.

Saying that right and wrong are “just” subjective implies that they are somehow inferior to what they would be if they were “objective”. Given that “objective right and wrong” not only don’t exist, but cannot exist, the attempt at belittling them is pointless. You might as well say that position in space is “just relative to other points in space”, as if it lacked something by not being an “objective” point in space – when actually such a thing is meaningless.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:23pm
Weihana

Lee01,

“But if your an atheist, there is no “right thing to do”. Right and wrong are just subjective personal tastes that have no objective meaning in the atheist worldview.”

Not true. Atheism does not imply anything at all about one’s morality.

I have an objective moral code based on the values I believe in. But just because the values I believe in are subjective does not make the moral code subjective because the moral code is derived from my values *as they apply to reality*. So while valuing life over death is subjective, the means to uphold life over death is not subjective. For instance I cannot expect to kill others and expect security of my own life. To me that is what it means to have an objective moral code. It means to observe how reality functions in order to decide how best to conduct yourself to achieve that which you desire. What you desire is subjective but the means to achieve it are not.

Religion on the other hand does not promote an objective moral code, it promotes an absolutist moral code which says things are right and wrong in an absolute sense regardless of personal values or consequences.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:26pm
wreck1080

The SFO investigating Alan Hubbard that may ruin a persons life and making jokes about it by handing out Hubbard books as booby prizes at staff functions.

Horrible bunch of people if this is true. They take great joy in destroying people.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:31pm
Other_Andy

Green jobs

The Manhattan Institute is proud to present the first in a series of animated videos created by Andrew Klavan, City Journal contributing editor and creator of “Klavan on the Culture.”
“The Green Jobs Answer Man” is a very animated discussion with an expert who can tell you everything you need to know about the Obama administration’s green jobs initiatives.

http://tinyurl.com/3mbzr42
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:45pm
Weihana

tom hunter,

“Considering that the bottom 47% of Americans don’t actually pay any nett tax, we’re talking about the middle class who are suffering and who are “burdened”.”

Paying tax is the only form of suffering that exists? What about being unemployed and paying no tax?

For me it’s not a matter of saying that the über-wealthy aren’t paying their fair share. Of course they are. But they could pay more and they could handle it a lot better than the other 99%. Contrary to Bill O’reilly’s warning, he will not quit what he does if his tax rate goes up a bit.

“the higher the tax rate the lower the revenue.”

Depends on where the maximum revenue generating tax rate lies. If current rates are to the right of that value then raising the tax rate will lower revenue. If on the left of that value then raising tax rates will increase revenue.

Given that the US has experienced some of its most productive times with rates much higher than the current ones it would seem unlikely that current rates are to the right of what’s ideal.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:45pm
Scott Chris

Weihana:- “He actually got fired because he upset a large number of wowsers”

Call me a wowser int that case. His comments implying Anand Satyanand did not conform to what a real Kiwi looks like were about as blatantly racist as you can get.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 4:48pm
Weihana

tom hunter,

“You’re confusing my paragraph where I wrote that the hypocrisy of people who use products made by corporations that same those people describe as evil”

These protests contain people with a variety of views and beliefs. Their messages will inevitably be overly simplistic such as “down with evil corporations”. I doubt many of them actually believe that corporations shouldn’t exist, rather they believe that the system should be structured in a different way to serve the 99% and not just the richest few.

Moreover, how is one supposed to exist in society without using products made by corporations? I’m sure it’s possible, but is it practical? To criticize these people for using corporate products, isn’t that kinda like criticizing an advocate of First Past the Post for using MMP to effect such change? How else is it supposed to happen? People have to work within the current system. For practical purposes it would seem a person can no more opt out of the economy any more than they can opt out of the electoral system.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 5:00pm
Weihana

tom hunter,

What I did see Malkin do was point out that Krugman snuggles up to those who do say that corporates are evil, with comments like this:

“Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.”

Which Malkin goes on to demonstrate is a remarkably hypocritical thing to say for a guy who got paid to be an Enron advisor back in the day. But then Krugman has been a hypocrite about a lot of things so it’s not a surprise to me.

—————————————————————

I don’t quite see how a reference to those who “serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent” amounts to an assertion that “corporates are evil”. Moreover, I do not see what is wrong about being an Enron advisor who had nothing to do with the fraudulent accounting practices the company engaged in, and which does not appear to be inconsistent with Krugman’s overall stance on economics. From what I know, Krugman does not appear to be opposed to market capitalism or corporations, he just seems to favour appropriate regulation.

Maybe I’m missing something but it just seems like you and Malkin are relying on an association with Enron in the hopes that Enron’s fraud somehow rubs off on Krugman who seems to have had nothing at all to do with that. Krugman did write rather positively about the company in 99 and some embarrassment would be expected. But hypocrisy?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 5:09pm
KiwiGreg

@ weihana you can, like the handfuls of protestors, maintain that they somehow represent “the 99%”. But it wont make it true.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 5:13pm
Weihana

# Scott Chris (2,002) Says:
October 11th, 2011 at 4:48 pm

Weihana:- “He actually got fired because he upset a large number of wowsers”

Call me a wowser int that case. His comments implying Anand Satyanand did not conform to what a real Kiwi looks like were about as blatantly racist as you can get.

———————————

Hmmmm, I had actually forgot that comment and I agree that is a racist thing to say. Though having said that I can’t say it would upset me even if he wasn’t saying it kinda jokingly. Was it a joke? I can’t remember. Never really watched the show.

However, I will say that I do not like the way people are often silenced when they say something unpopular, even when they say something wrong. For instance the Hank Williams controversy in the US about comparing Obama to Hitler. I think it has a chilling effect on free speech when people are so quick to impose punishment on those who express ideas which are offensive. That’s not to say that companies shouldn’t have the freedom to distance themselves from unpopular opinion but it does say something about our society that we do not look down upon companies which do that.

I don’t see why having employment or a business relationship should mean one’s views have to be conformed to the wishes of these other people and I do not see why we, as a society, tolerate those who impose punishment on people simply because they expressed an unpopular opinion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 5:22pm
Weihana

# KiwiGreg (2,032) Says:
October 11th, 2011 at 5:13 pm

@ weihana you can, like the handfuls of protestors, maintain that they somehow represent “the 99%”. But it wont make it true.

———————

They certainly don’t represent the *views* of the 99% but it is arguable that they represent the *best interests* of the 99%.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 5:27pm
plebe

More porkies Key

from another blog, copy and paste
Key so loved, cannot do wrong ,BUT TALKS CRAP, didnt see that comming
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 5:50pm
Scott Chris

Weihana says:- “For instance the Hank Williams controversy in the US about comparing Obama to Hitler”

Yes, I see what you mean. Good example of how a society weights such matters. There was a bit more to that story though. Apparently what he Hank Williams said was:

“Obama’s decision to go golfing with Republican House Speaker John Boehner is like Adolph Hitler playing a round with Benjamin Netanyahu.”

Big no no in the States with the ultra sensitive Jewish lobby very quick to bring financial pressure on anyone seen to be dissing the Jewish race. Harmless remark really, but foolish all the same, so perhaps he deserved to get fired for being stupid.

But I agree that the cultural climate is a little over-sanitized at present. The Alasdair Thomson affair was borderline, but once again, he still deserved to be sacked for being stupid and for how he handled himself in the midst of the furore.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 6:05pm
tom hunter

Paying tax is the only form of suffering that exists? What about being unemployed and paying no tax?

Indeed, in the last few days NY Mayor Bloomberg (R, “moderate”, multi-billionaire) and NY Senator Schumer (D, “moderate”, multi-millionaire) both pointed out that many high-paying jobs will be lost if the OWS protestors demands are met and the knives are sunk into the likes of Goldman Sachs.

From my point of view as a right-winger I don’t think there could be anything funnier than one of the great Democrat strongholds stabbing itself in it’s tax revenue-producing arm.

The point I’m making – that many critics of the OWS protests are making – is that while there anger can be justified in some cases and their protests against corporate bailouts would find agreement with none other than the Tea Party movement (who’ve been making exactly that complaint for the last two years), their “solutions” are just more of the same Big Government crap that fed this insanity in the first place – and they want more of it except next time it will be better and smarter, as always.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 6:22pm
Weihana

tom hunter,

“The point I’m making – that many critics of the OWS protests are making – is that while there anger can be justified in some cases and their protests against corporate bailouts would find agreement with none other than the Tea Party movement (who’ve been making exactly that complaint for the last two years), their “solutions” are just more of the same Big Government crap that fed this insanity in the first place – and they want more of it except next time it will be better and smarter, as always.”

As I understand it there is no official list of “solutions” advocated by this protest movement. It encompasses a variety of people with varying degrees of sanity. I don’t really expect any solutions from this movement. All it represents to me is public anger and, whether or not they understand the economy, it’s indicative that things aren’t working as they should.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 6:40pm
tom hunter

For me it’s not a matter of saying that the über-wealthy aren’t paying their fair share. Of course they are. But they could pay more and they could handle it a lot better than the other 99%.

Okay – so we’re past the fairness argument and obviously they could handle it better. But the question then turns on why they (or any other citizen) should pay more. For the US Federal government? For the US Post Office, Homeland Security and myriad programs that should never have been created in the first place or have been twisted from their original intent (SCHIP being the classic example). Pay more for government that has shown no actual inclination to spend less or even hold the line on cost increases?

To be more precise: why give ever more money to an outfit that shows it will simply be back in a few years with a demand for more.

I don’t think so. I (and it would seem a lot of others) are no longer willing to compromise on paying “a little bit more” when the result is simply to feed the black hole.

Contrary to Bill O’reilly’s warning, he will not quit what he does if his tax rate goes up a bit.

This seems of a piece with a rather sweet, naive attitude to all this. Of course Bill won’t quit, any more than Matt Damon and George Clooney will stop making movies because their income tax rates have gone up. No, they’ll just visit their accountants and – ahem – “arrange” things so they don’t pay the amount – just like Bono and co did with Ireland’s tax regime.

Actually along the same lines as the Wall Street joke, as a right-winger I would absolutely love to see more taxation on Hollywood: huge incomes, tons of loopholes, a target rich environment.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 6:47pm
bereal

i’m getting a little nervous.

The Frogs know their team for the quarter finals.
The Aussies know theirs.
The Welsh know theirs.
We are still rotating.
i almost expect them to name Sonny Bill at No. 8
Jeez. i hope Ted and his mates have some idea what they are doing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:00pm
mikenmild

bereal
Have faith. I think the most recent changes have largely been forced. Our lineup is actually pretty settled.
These are nervous days though, and so they should be with the World Cup on the line.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:06pm
reid

he [Alasdair Thompson] still deserved to be sacked for being stupid and for how he handled himself in the midst of the furore.

No he didn’t. If you watched that whole interview Mihi Forbes was the unprofessional at-fault individual and as usual the MSM got the wrong end either deliberately or carelessly and took an isolated segment from a long interview and portrayed it as something that wasn’t what he’d been saying. As usual as soon as someone mentions what appears to be a popular stereotype of a rich white man being stereotypical almost the entire country leaps into hand-wringing, cover mouth, gasping then frowning mode. Hysteria, plain and simple. Unjustified? You bet. Watch the whole interview and look what Forbes was doing, if you don’t believe what I just said. Deliberately or naively, she, like many journos, such as Mary Wilson also, would not drop this bone she thought was actually real and like a dog to its own vomit, kept returning again and again and again no matter how extensive or reasonable were Thompson’s patient responses until, eventually, he just got fucked off.

And of course, it’s Mihi who then takes the greatest of offence for what did she ever ever do to generate that? I mean, really.

That’s what happened. Pity the entire country didn’t bother to acquaint themselves with the facts. If they had, it would have already changed the face of how news media operates in NZ, and wouldn’t that be a good thing.

For the US Post Office,

Tom the USPS would be in the black right now, if the govt hadn’t required it to forward-fund health benefits for employees it won’t be hiring till 2026. That’s right. The US govt require it to pay $5Billion p.a. to do that. Why is the govt doing that?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:11pm
bereal

OK thanks for that mm
But a leopard rarely changes his spots and i think that these bullshit injuries to Kahui and Dagg
are really just rotation all over again.
Could you pick the team to play Aussie ?
i mean, give it a go . Name the team Ted will pick.
How often have they practiced their combinations.
F’kin Never.
Its looking like deja vu all over again
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:22pm
plebe

bereal,a thought, THINK 4 more years,we might win it one decade in the far future
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:28pm
tom hunter

“the higher the tax rate the lower the revenue.”

Depends on where the maximum revenue generating tax rate lies. If current rates are to the right of that value then raising the tax rate will lower revenue. If on the left of that value then raising tax rates will increase revenue.

Given that the US has experienced some of its most productive times with rates much higher than the current ones it would seem unlikely that current rates are to the right of what’s ideal.

There are many different types of taxes so you may need to pinpoint them. For the moment I’m assuming you’re talking about income taxes, which reached as high as 90% in the 1950’s, when the US economy was certainly very productive. However, whether you’re looking at it from the POV of increasing government revenue or increasing investments, the biggest improvements have come from dropping tax rates, whilst the improvements from increasing them now appear marginal at best or even negative.

Of course that does not matter to the likes of Obama and many other leftists: they’ve already explicitly talked about “fairness” as the objective, even if it reduces tax revenue.

In any case – as I’ve pointed out – the overall tax revenue of the US has been around 18-19% over many decades and many different types of tax regimes, which suggests a ceiling on what the government can be expected to get now. It’s currently at 14%, but that appears to be directly related to the crap economy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:29pm
mikenmild

OK Bereal, here we go:
Israel Dagg, Cory Jane, Conrad Smith, Ma’a Nonu, Richard Kahui, Aaron Cruden, Piri Weepu, Kieran Read, Richie McCaw (capt), Jerome Kaino, Brad Thorn, Sam Whitelock, Owen Franks, Keven Mealamu, Tony Woodcock. Reserves: Andrew Hore, Ben Franks, Ali Williams, Adam Thomson, Jimmy Cowan, Sonny Bill Williams, Isaia Toeava
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:31pm
publicwatchdog

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10758292

As the new head of Westpac private bank – is National Government Minister of Commerce and Justice, Simon Power, going to be involved in lobbying, advocating or having business meetings with members of the future government, parliament, public service or the defence force on any matters on which he has had official dealings as Minister in his last eighteen months in office?

If so, and if National Government Minister of Commerce and Justice, Simon Power was an Australian Federal Government Minister – this would be seen as a form of ‘corrupt practice’ and a breach of their Standards of Ministerial Ethics, as a breach of ‘Post-Ministerial Employment’ requirements:

http://www.dpmc.gov.au/guidelines/docs/ministerial_ethics.pdf

“Post-ministerial employment

2.19. Ministers are required to undertake that, for an eighteen month period after ceasing to be a Minister, they will not lobby, advocate or have business meetings with members of the government, parliament, public service or defence force on any matters on which they have had official dealings as Minister in their last eighteen months in office.

Ministers are also required to undertake that, on leaving office, they will not take personal advantage of information to which they have had access as a Minister, where that information is not generally available to the public.”

Who in NZ has even HEARD of ‘post-separation employment’?

In my considered opinion, the ‘revolving door’ between public office and the private sector is on permanent rotation at both central and local government level in NZ.

What did Simon Power do to help ensure, as Minister of Justice, that our domestic legislative framework was sufficiently in place to enable NZ, ‘perceived’ to be ‘the least corrupt country in the world’ (along with Denmark and Singapore – according to Transparency International’s 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index’) to ratify the UN Convention Against Corruption?

Or would such an anti-corruption domestic legislative framework effectively be a ‘conflict of interest’ for those vested interests who work in the commerce, finance and banking fields?

As Simon Power is going to be – once he takes up his appointment as the Head of Westpac Private Bank?

Penny Bright

Independent ‘Public Watchdog’
Candidate for Epsom
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:31pm
reid

Speaking of mis-maligned NZers, Lockwood goes to Washington:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10758164

At the invitation of Mike Moore the US Ambassador, to push the TPP.

He’s staying with Moore to cut down accomm costs, he’s paying for his wife’s expenses, he’s doing lots of meetings while there, Goff thinks it’s a good idea, but Wussell says:

Greens co-leader Russel Norman said he had no objections to Dr Smith travelling to do business. “We want New Zealand to be part of the world.” However, it was inappropriate for the Speaker to be promoting the TPP.

“Surely the role of the Speaker isn’t to get involved in partisan politics and not everyone in Parliament agrees with what National and Labour are doing,” Dr Norman said.

The last line, the least important one in terms of the journo’s reverse pyramid model, mentions as an aside:

Dr Smith said he had cut the costs of running his office by about 50 per cent since becoming Speaker in 2008.

…

You know, I’ve just about had a guts full of these hard left lefties whining and complaining about stuff that actually, in the real world, all things considered, isn’t being done too badly. Did Wilson or Hunt ever behave in anyway like Lockwood has all through this last Parliament? Answer: No, never. They behaved like wrathful feral self-entitled partisan gluttonous slobs, both in the House and out of it. The way for example, Wilson used to motor monotonously through the House Prayer, overtly making it clear publicly she was only paying lip service to it since she couldn’t get rid of it. I bet she really hated that. Stuff like House Traditions and fairness and honour and above all, sacrifice in the name of service to others, have no meaning to hard lefties for all is sacrificed, their entire humanity, to the sacredness of the cause.

Well, by their works ye shall know them. Personally, it seems rather self-evident their “cause” is obviously the most massive stinking pile of putrid dogshit one could possibly imagine, given that it results in them behaving as they do.

Apparently when it comes to their “cause” vs other people and their wants and needs, everyone else can get fucked, cause they’re just not interested.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:34pm
Scott Chris

reid says:- “until, eventually, he just got fucked off.”

But that’s my point. I did watch the whole interview. He should know all about interview journalism 101 tactic of baiting with repeated and inane questions, and instead of stonewalling or digressing or behaving contritely, he was manipulated into behaving like an overbearing, patriarchal bully, which is exactly what Mihi Forbes wanted him to do. That’s what got him sacked. He was made to look like an idiot by a youngish woman.

That’s why I have no sympathy for the guy. He should have known better than to firstly make a comment about menstruation in connection to women’s pay, and secondly not to have the sense to go into “no comment, issue apology” mode.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:34pm
Johnboy

“As the new head of Westpac private bank – is National Government Minister of Commerce and Justice, Simon Power, going to be involved in lobbying, advocating or”

Whats more important what position will Simon adopt regarding the banks commitment to installing water meters! 🙂

That’s the sort of questions you should be posing Penny!

ps: where the fuck is my barbed wire?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:45pm
tom hunter

I doubt many of them actually believe that corporations shouldn’t exist…

Judging from the photos I’ve seen, which would seem fairly representative of such small crowds, I would not bet on that. The overwhelming messages on the signs are not just left but far left so…

… rather they believe that the system should be structured in a different way to serve the 99% and not just the richest few.

Apple, Epson, Sony are serving me very well while also making their shareholders, including undoubtedly a few of the richest few even wealthier, along with all the pension funds and 401(K)’s invested in them.

See, this is the incoherence coming through again. I don’t know about the OWS protestors but I’m sure that you’d deny absolutely that you’re even a socialist, let alone a communist. You might claim you’re a social democrat but whatever your claimed economic philosophy is, when you clearly imply that corporations are not serving the 99% your actually buying into the oldest of the Marxist myths and completely not understanding capitalism.

People who jump up and down about the Wall Street bailouts are not understanding capitalism either, but what’s worse is they think they do, which means they’ll fall right into the maw of the corporatists end enable the screwing of real capitalists, just like they did when they voted for Obambi, Nancy and Harry. But a later comment of yours is probably an accurate description:

I don’t really expect any solutions from this movement. All it represents to me is public anger and, whether or not they understand the economy, it’s indicative that things aren’t working as they should.

Great. Just fucking great. Inchoate rage from a low-information mob. Spectacular. I’m not expecting any solutions from them either. They’ll be useful to the Democrats though.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 7:49pm
nasska

What men really mean:

Haven’t I seen you before? = Nice arse

I’m a Romantic = I’m poor

I need you = My hand is tired

I am different from all the other guys = I am not circumcised

I want a commitment = I’m sick of masturbation

You’re the only girl I’ve ever cared about = You are the only girl who hasn’t rejected me
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:00pm
reid

But that’s my point. I did watch the whole interview. He should know all about interview journalism 101 tactic of baiting with repeated and inane questions, and instead of stonewalling or digressing or behaving contritely, he was manipulated into behaving like an overbearing, patriarchal bully, which is exactly what Mihi Forbes wanted him to do. That’s what got him sacked. He was made to look like an idiot by a youngish woman.

That’s why I have no sympathy for the guy.

OK Scott. I understand that perspective and I think it’s reasonable. I don’t agree with it but OK.

It’s just my point is: the MSM destroyed a good man’s reputation and livelihood without cause and they got away with it and I just think that really fucking stinks since he has no redress, no comeback, no appeal is possible, no reversal imminent. Sure. It’s only one man.

Barry Gustafsen who I had the pleasure of at Auckland Uni once said the USSR was prepared to prosecute (i.e. execute) 1,000 people in order to make sure they had caught the guilty one, whereas the Westminster tradition is to do the opposite and that to me, in the eighties, seemed true. As I’ve grown up however I’ve realised that we do it too and that what makes it possible is the herd mentality.

I just wish Chris that like you and I, everyone but everyone had watched that video given that a man’s life was at stake for what, precisely, does one imagine is happening to Alisdair now? I imagine if they had, many would have been with you and I do understand and might be persuaded to your perspective. I hope one or two may be in my corner as well but who knows.

Apparently, no-one else did.

(I’m kidding, I know most if not all of anyone who reads this has.)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:02pm
Johnboy

Should I try those lines on Penny nasska? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:02pm
tom hunter

Moreover, how is one supposed to exist in society without using products made by corporations? I’m sure it’s possible, but is it practical?

You’re not and No. But really you need to be telling the OWS people that as they bitch about Korporate Amerikkka as the left have done for the last 40 years – all while videoing themselves on their iPhones and iPads and networking the protests via Facebook and Twitter.

You get it. They don’t.

To criticize these people for using corporate products, isn’t that kinda like criticizing an advocate of First Past the Post for using MMP to effect such change? How else is it supposed to happen? People have to work within the current system. For practical purposes it would seem a person can no more opt out of the economy any more than they can opt out of the electoral system.

I’m criticising them for aiming at the wrong targets, which is a natural result of not actually understanding the system they’re attacking, not least because it’s the system that delivered all those goods to them. To make you’re analogy more accurate, it’s like an advocate of totalitarianism using democracy to get to that point. But what else can be expected of people like this woman holding a sign that says:

I am DETERMINED to break the racial mold and the American racist cycle, so I EARNED a Master’s degree in Minority Women’s Studies. I owe $150,000 for EXCELLENT education, but the corporate facists refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of my scholarly efforts when considering me for a job.

My high speed Internet and new car loan are likewise CRUSHING me – especially when added to the two different child support payments I am FORCED to pay by our CORRUPT legal system.

I don’t know if I can keep this up. I am at the end of my rope.

I AM THE 99%

You think she understands capitalism – in even it’s most basic cost vs. reward, have-a-budget, delayed-gratification form, let alone the difference between a derivatives trader and the sort of venture capitalists who enabled Apple, Facebook and a hundred other corporations to get started?

You think a person who rants, with no apparent sense of self-deprecating humour, about corporate facists would not like to destroy all corporations, not to mention the Eurocentric, patriarchal, capitalist system that produced them?

You think she’s unrepresentative of the rest of that mob? You think she’s not a left winger or did not vote for Obama in 2008?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:14pm
nasska

Interviewer: Congratulations on winning the lottery.
Farmer: Thank you.
Interviewer: Do you have any special plans for spending
the money?
Farmer: Not really. I’m just gonna keep farming ’til it’s gone.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:16pm
reid

As the new head of Westpac private bank – is National Government Minister of Commerce and Justice, Simon Power, going to be involved in lobbying, advocating or…

Westpac used to be the govt bank, I’m not sure if it still is.

The Westpac guy on Check Point tonight sounded very pleased with the prospects for his new hire. My prediction is that Simon may take somewhat more time than said Westpac guy thinks to adjust his thinking toward the exigencies of the high-level corporate private banking world.

While he does have cache this doesn’t automatically translate into overnight business success particularly when your background is: uni, provincial law firm, politics (his name IS Power – duh).

Still, Prebble said he did politics because it was hard to do. It is a hard job.

I’m not saying I think Power will fail, my jury hasn’t even started sitting, I’m saying there are several factors at play:

The translation of all-powerful Minister with minions at beck and call without regard to numbers, time and cost, does not equal the commercial world. That adjustment isn’t difficult but Power has only ever in his whole professional life only ever had one side of this equation.

Political skills from a 41 year old middle ranked Minister don’t necessarily translate into schmoozing skills with the comfortable client base serviced at the Westpac Private Bank.

The contacts he does have may not necessarily result in a rich harvest as seemingly implied by the Westpac guy on Checkpoint.

Since this seems a step sideways if not down for Power given what he had already and what his prospects were, in that previous arena which by any standard presents more opportunity. What pray tell presents more opportunity to a career-driven individual than becoming PM of a whole country? He is only 41, I imagine he has a lot of reasons.

Good luck Simon, the best of British in your new role. Thanks, you have done much good in your short time. I wish you had stayed around for Act II, in 2017. You would have been great. I think.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:33pm
Weihana

tom hunter,

“To be more precise: why give ever more money to an outfit that shows it will simply be back in a few years with a demand for more.”

But who is demanding more? It’s the people that are demanding more through their representatives. They want tax cuts and they want more spending (for things they like but not for things other people like). You have idiots going to town hall meetings and rambling about how the government needs to keep its hands off their medicare and how they don’t want socialized medicine. Crazy.

For all the cries of socialized medicine and for all its faults, I haven’t noticed that it’s that bad in New Zealand. IIRC the US spends something like three times NZ per capita on health care. I don’t believe it is three times as good. The government can do some things well.

It costs money to run government and to provide the things people want and someone has to pay for it. Who? How about the rich first then everyone else.

Spending cuts can certainly be made but snipping at the edges is hardly going to reduce the budget. Who wants to talk about cutting medicare? Or how about cutting social security? Or what about defense? Few people want to talk about that.

“No, they’ll just visit their accountants and – ahem – “arrange” things so they don’t pay the amount – just like Bono and co did with Ireland’s tax regime.”

If they can do it, they’re already doing it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:34pm
tom hunter

I don’t quite see how a reference to those who “serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent” amounts to an assertion that “corporates are evil”.

I did not claim he was making an assertion but that he was “snuggling” up to those who were. In short he is either too smart or too aware of his own involvement with corporates to make the same blatant call. He does appeal to the mob’s claims by enlisting the same language about Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent. – and he is fooling nobody.

Well, almost nobody.

Maybe I’m missing something but it just seems like you and Malkin are relying on an association with Enron in the hopes that Enron’s fraud somehow rubs off on Krugman who seems to have had nothing at all to do with that. Krugman did write rather positively about the company in 99 and some embarrassment would be expected. But hypocrisy?

The hypocrisy does not arise from the association or what he did there. It arises from the writings Krugman has undertaken in the years since he worked with Enron, which the article covered with a link and an excerpt:

In 1999 Paul Krugman was paid $50,000 by Enron as a consultant on its “advisory board,” and that same year he wrote a glowing article about Enron for Fortune magazine. But he would change his tune.

After Enron collapsed in 2001, Krugman wrote several columns excoriating the company. (One featured what may be the most absurd howler in the history of op-ed journalism: “I predict that in the years ahead Enron, not Sept. 11, will come to be seen as the greater turning point in U.S. society.”)

In most of these columns Krugman worked hard to link Enron to the Bush administration, and in one he actually blamed Enron’s consultants for the company’s collapse — while neglecting to mention that he, too, had been an Enron consultant.

That’s why he’s a hypocrite, and these latest pathetic attempts to co-opt the OWS are simply more of the same pretence that he’s part of the solution when what he has advocated has been part of the problem – and there’s a lot more like that on other issues too.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:37pm
Scott Chris

A man is driving down a country road, when he spots a farmer standing in the middle of a huge field of grass. He pulls the car over to the side of the road and notices that the farmer is just standing there, doing nothing, looking at nothing.

The man gets out of the car, walks all the way out to the farmer and asks him, “Gidday mate. What are you up to?”

The farmer replies, “I’m trying to win a Nobel Prize.”

“How?” asks the man, puzzled.

“Well, I heard they give the Nobel Prize . . . to people who are out standing in their field.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:45pm
nasska

After celebrating their golden wedding anniversary, an old couple goes to bed. Many of the guests at the party are spending the night in the house.

“Can you remember our wedding night 50 years ago?” asks the husband. “How I cut my finger so that everyone would believe you were still a virgin?”

“I remember,” says the wife. “What do you want me to do now? Blow my nose on the sheet so everyone thinks you can still get it up?”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 8:58pm
Weihana

tom hunter,

“You think she understands capitalism”

She studied minority women’s studies. That says it all really.

“You think she’s unrepresentative of the rest of that mob? You think she’s not a left winger or did not vote for Obama in 2008?”

Whether or not this woman voted for Obama I don’t think her views represent Obama’s. I don’t believe Obama is “anti-capitalist” and if “socialism” is the provision of government services to those in need then the political right is just as socialist as the political left.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 9:01pm
Weihana

“I don’t know about the OWS protestors but I’m sure that you’d deny absolutely that you’re even a socialist, let alone a communist. You might claim you’re a social democrat but whatever your claimed economic philosophy is, when you clearly imply that corporations are not serving the 99% your actually buying into the oldest of the Marxist myths and completely not understanding capitalism.”

I understand that corporations are serving the 99% by providing products the consumer desires in order to make their profits. They wouldn’t be profiting if they weren’t providing things people needed and/or desired. But I do not believe that the market is necessarily best suited for all endeavours. I believe the government has a role in providing for law and order obviously, but it also has a role to provide public infrastructure, education, health and a social safety net.

So I’m not saying the corporations are not serving the 99% in that sense, but I think it’s arguable that government isn’t serving the 99% by not raising taxes on the richest 1% within bounds that are historically tolerable and which have not prevented economic growth. Moreover I don’t think government is serving the 99% when they bail out those who caused the financial crisis but provide relatively little assistance to those currently suffering under that crisis.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 9:14pm
tom hunter

But who is demanding more? It’s the people that are demanding more through their representatives.

It would be more precise to link this with a later statement you make:

Spending cuts can certainly be made but snipping at the edges is hardly going to reduce the budget. Who wants to talk about cutting medicare? Or how about cutting social security? Or what about defense? Few people want to talk about that.

In other words, “the people” don’t want their Medicare or Social Security cut, and it’s their growth that’s really going to bite the US hard over the next 20-30 years.

But that’s not what’s caused the current problems. I’m not aware of many Americans, even Democrat voters I know, who demanded that their representatives increase annual spending by 40% since 2008. Even with a recession and the resulting increases in social welfare (much of which is handled at the State level anyhow) that’s just not justifiable. No Democrat ran specifically on that in 2006. It just happened as a natural result of the government being so large and powerful to start with.

But with regard to things like Medicare and Social Security you’re undoubtedly correct. The Keep Government Hands Off Medicare is an oldie and a goodie – but I’d note that the “Restore Sanity” rally contained many people who, when asked if they thought Obama was a Keynesian, responded that they were sure he was born in America and that such claims were made by “loonies”. That was the smart, informed section of America that pats itself on the back every time they laugh along with Jon Stewart.

However, the whole problem of running out of other people’s money is beginning to change attitudes towards those government entitlements. It’s becoming harder and harder to argue that nasty right-wing conservatives want to take away your Medicare and Social Security – the so-called “Mediscare” approach employed by the Democrats – when with each passing year it becomes more obvious that those programs are not going to be there in effective form for today’s 20 year olds (or even 40 year olds).

Hell, if US right-wingers were actually as extremist as their opponents claim the best thing they could do to destroy government entitlements would be to cast a straight-ticket vote for the Democrats. Why get the blame for being mean to granny when the left will burn the entitlements to the ground.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 9:22pm
reid

So I’m not saying the corporations are not serving the 99% in that sense, but I think it’s arguable that government isn’t serving the 99% by not raising taxes on the richest 1% within bounds that are historically tolerable and which have not prevented economic growth.

Weihana come clean and declare the revenue figures.

I mean, we all know when lefties talk about “rich” and tax they mean 60k plus and newsflash Weihana, that isn’t 1% of the population, that’s more like, er… 95%? Isn’t it?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 9:40pm
Scott Chris

The Rena was about to sink off Tauranga:

Crewman: How far are we from land?
Captain: Hmm, not far….
Crewman: Well why are these fools making so much noise. I can swim that far easily. Which direction should I swim?
Captain: Downward.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 9:43pm
tom hunter

But I do not believe that the market is necessarily best suited for all endeavours. I believe the government has a role in providing for law and order obviously, but it also has a role to provide public infrastructure, education, health and a social safety net.

I think that’s a different argument to what the OWS protestors are jumping up and down about, so perhaps should be left to another time.

… but I think it’s arguable that government isn’t serving the 99% by not raising taxes on the richest 1% within bounds that are historically tolerable and which have not prevented economic growth.

And I think that’s buying into a whole argument that the left-wing are desperate to have as a way of not talking about capping or shrinking government spending, stupid government investments in the infrastructure of the future – like Solyndra, and the whole role played by government in setting the scene for a $6 trillion housing bubble.

In short it’s a pathetic old class warfare and envy argument that will solve none of the problems, will not even stave off the day of reckoning – but might save Obama’s ass in 2012, even after he and the Democrats failed to push for such increases in 2009-10.

Moreover I don’t think government is serving the 99% when they bail out those who caused the financial crisis but provide relatively little assistance to those currently suffering under that crisis.

I could not agree more, but I would remind you that the Republicans who voted the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act down when it first came up in Congress were attacked by almost all of the left-wing who were pushing Obama to the presidency ( a few Dems also voted against it but they naturally escaped criticism). Many members of the GOP bluntly said exactly the same thing the OWS protestors are saying now about the bailouts – but were eviscerated at the time as being “economic saboteurs”. As a result enough of them buckled and voted it through the second time it came up.

But I doubt any of those morons in the OWS protests know any of that.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 10:03pm
bereal

OK mm , top team. But.
Appart from No 10. why couldnt these guys have played together for months ?
They could have had muchos experience playing as a team and gaining confidence
of each others play.
Ted knows best
.Shit, i really hope so.
We will be the only team in the quarters thrown together at the last minute.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 10:16pm
Scott Chris

The container ship “The Rena’s” captain liked to entertain his crew with a few magic tricks. Problem was, his smart ass parrot would always give away the trick. “The card’s up his sleeve!” it would squawk, or “The dove’s in his pocket!” or “The ferret’s in his undies!”

One day the captain was so busy downloading porn, that he didn’t realize that the ship had gone of course, and had hit a reef off Tauranga. Luckily, when the ship sank, the captain managed to rescue the parrot, and they scrambled onto a floating door.

Whilst waiting to be rescued, the parrot uncharacteristically said nothing. He just stared at the captain quizzically.
Finally, he broke the silence.

“Okay, I give up.” He squawked, “Where have you hidden the ship?”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 10:19pm
bereal

i’m also worried about Nonu.
am i the only person who doesnt believe the sun shines out of his arse ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 11, 2011 10:21pm
Manolo

It’s only a matter of time: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8819195/German-push-for-Greek-default-risks-EMU-wide-snowball.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 12, 2011 5:28am
Manolo

A principled, honest, democrat (and true bitch): http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/10/pelosis-disclosure-belated-in-husbands-land-deal/
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 12, 2011 5:38am
joana

bc thanks very much for your very reasoned response.
Elaycee..no reversing from me…Key rec’d a hammering this week in the Herald comments section. His performance truly was appalling. His worst to date. I admire yr loyalty in trying to defend the indefensible.
Touching one’s nose has long been known to be sign of lying..Studying body language was big here quite a few decades back..I am sure older cops and lawyers could verify this.
I stand by my comments re Key’s immaturity. His naked ambition drove him to ”buy” a job he is not equipped for.
Interesting parting comments from Simon Power..how he likes to get on and create legislation but how ”some people ” like to go after the media. No prizes there.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
October 12, 2011 8:13am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« We win, you win

Chauvel uses the Chris Carter defence »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Never miss a post

Email Address

Links

Clive Bibby: Deterrent or Paper Tiger
Breaking Views
Who Watered Down The New 3Strikes Legislation
No Minister
#ANZAC: "year after year, the numbers grow fewer, who remember what we're not forgetting"
Not PC
Climate Models Not Scientific
Utopia
Word of the day
Hompaddock
Maori Party (with “disgust”) draws attention to Chhour’s race after the High Court rules on Waitangi Tribunal’s summons
Point of Order
Die In for Palestine Marks ANZAC day – Peace Action Wellington
The Daily Blog
"Comity" versus the rule of law
No Right Turn
New Zealand Needs a Security Alliance Fast
The Standard
Jacinda’s legacy – Increasing number of abortions
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
REEFTON – THE NEW PARIS
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 15
Stats Chat
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d