General Debate 22 November 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment94

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (94)

Login to comment or vote

East Wellington Superhero

Labour and the teacher unions are squealing about National’s new education policy.
It’s probably just about the right then.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:09am
flipper

Amazing isn’t it. The CEO of Roy Morgan warns against taking anything from their reaction worm, yet Stuff, TV One, TV 3 and Herald all banner the worm as giving Goffice points over Key in last night’s debate. Then we have Armstrong bleating yet again in the Herald this morning and headlining EVERY Key coverage with a negative.
Finally, that creep Gower on TV3. The name Gower was once synonymous with elegance and excellence (as practiced by the former England cricketer David Gower), but no longer. Now it is synonymous with something less than mediocrity.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:18am
Murray

Apprently claiming that National went into a coalition with “Hone Hawariwa” was a major political acheivement for Goff.

Lets just ignore that fact that National did no such thing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:39am
flipper

Quite right Murray
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:39am
Murray

Well at least we know which way the media have voted.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:45am
Pete George

Critical points highlighted by the debate:
– Peters says he won’t go into goverment with anyone
– Labour has to have NZF support to have any chance of leading a coalition
– Goff needs Peters to go against his word to have any chance of going into government

Another Peters post election betrayal is Goff’s only chance.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:59am
Manolo

Another Peters post election betrayal is Goff’s only chance.

Correct. That will send NZ down the crapper.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:04am
Elaycee

Murray says: “Well at least we know which way the media have voted.’

Indeed. You have to wonder what the real level of ‘support’ would be for Labour if the numbers weren’t being propped up by a constant regurgitation of left wing lies and propaganda courtesy of a compliant, biased media.

At least the poll on Saturday will shut them up for a while… but in the next few days I have no doubt we’ll be exposed to more breathless opinion pieces extolling the virtues (sic) of the Labour front bench.

Pffttt…
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:08am
KiwiGreg

My election night fantasy is NZ First getting 4.5% of the party vote and then a TV cross over to Peters just in time to film his coronary at this betrayal by the New Zealand voter and the media, followed by Goff’s dignified resignation and retirement speech.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:10am
Put it away

PG – always bet on a Peters betrayal.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:12am
Oskar

This opinion piece from today’s DomPost show how TV3 in particular see collecting political scalps as more important than reporting what happens

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/columnists/karl-du-fresne/6007384/Claiming-political-scalps-for-sport
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:12am
Pete George

Goff’s pitch: ‘Put trust in a Labour Government by not trusting Peters”.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:15am
Murray

Duncan Garner is the single most unprofessional “journalist” in a pool of bad journalists.

The INSTANT that the reporter becomes the story he has failed. He has failed to do his job and he has failed his profession.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:16am
Manolo

Addictions invented every day. The mind boggles: http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2011/11/some_300000_dutch_people_suffe.php
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:37am
Elaycee

Yet more crap surfaces – this time in Dunedin. Bullshit flyers / no authorisation / no names – just a letterbox drop.

More bullshit courtesy of the left. They are clearly desperate.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10767838
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:41am
Lance

@Elaycee

Sadly I suspect they would be pulling this deceptive bullshit no matter how well they were doing in the polls. It is clear the lefties are followers of Machiavelli
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:47am
Murray

Doing it classy as always.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:48am
thedavincimode

“he has failed his profession”

“Profession”?

Has someone spiked your tea Murray?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:49am
polemic

Has anyone in the media got the courage to challenge Granny Herald to get a Jornalist that is as pro right as John Armstrong is pro left??

Does the media not have some ethics or none?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:53am
Lance

So like are jorno’s the new tow truck drivers?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:56am
Pete George

Another idea I’ve been considering – an Internet based project to take ‘journalists’ to task, to hold them to account. They have a large amount of influence in our democracy, their motives and practices should be examined.

Any interest in this?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:58am
Murray

“Sex Worker” davinci, its a profession.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:59am
Murray

We call it the blogs Pete.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 9:59am
alex Masterley

Pete, something like one of the teacher rating sites?
It would be quite entertaining.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:02am
Lance

I saw the movie ‘Contagen’ at the weekend

A quote from the movie “blogging is just graffiti with punctuation”

LOL
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:02am
Pete George

alex – I think it would need to be reasonably well considered and researched rather than just a bitch hunt, with right of reply, but I think journalism would benefit from a rapid response examination of the worst excesses.

Journalists can be at least as powerful as any politician, in fact they have an unfair advantage of power because they know media coverage is paremount in modern politics. So they should be just as accountable as any other participant in our democracy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:08am
Murray

Not good punctuation.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:09am
Manolo

Another stuff-up from the nowadays politically-correct and very slow New Zealand Police: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/6008607/Police-apology-over-theft-debacle
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:20am
labours a joke

The voting public of NZ are not stupid. They can see this election for what it is . They can see through all the bullshit and blunder the left are creating. They can see the sheer desperation from the dark side to regain power. They remember the long dark years of H E Clark . Post election, Goff will be history, Peters will be history , labour will be history. Flushed away like this mornings turd.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:51am
Falafulu Fisi

Gone by lunch-time.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:06am
calendar girl

PG @ 9:58 – yes, I would be interested in participating.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:08am
graham

Driving into work this morning, I heard a comment by DPF stating that, in his opinion, Phil Goff clearly won at least the first half of the debate. This is what I like about DPF – although he is unashamedly a National supporter, he has no problem giving credit where credit is due. Contrast this to supporters of the left, who just cannot seem to admit that National might occasionally get it right.

And carrying on with my disgust at the nastiness that we are seeing from the left – Maggie Barry was spat at in Devonport, and told by customers at a cafe in Belmont that she and her supporters were not welcome because it was “red”. WTF? Is there some law that I’m not aware of that states you must not be civil to someone if their political beliefs happen to be different to yours?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10767785
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:19am
Lazybum

FF – Key will be gone by lunchtime on 27 Nov I am afraid.
Labour will get the numbers of left wing scum to form a government. Peter’s will lie his way into baubles again.
Media will win the election for Labour.
Also, Key losing momentum is not helping.
Also, I pick the judge to say that Teacup conversation was not private and what was said will be splattered over the media by 3pm.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:21am
KevinH

Decision 11 TV3 7.00PM 21/11/2011

TV3’s leaders debate last night with an audience of 65 uncommitted voters proved the theory that the voting public are influenced by empathetic social issues that illicit strong emotional responses.

Phil Goff and his Labour team had clearly done their homework and were aware of the emotional quotient that influences an individuals decision making, a strategy widely adopted and used in a sales and marketing enviroment.
Mr Goff was relaxed and confident and displayed the full extent of his political experience, and was well prepared with statistics to easily rebutt John Key’s interjections.

John Key however struggled with the shows format and illustrated his lack of experience as a businessman turned politician.
He was not well briefed on the shows format, a technical mistake by his advisors, therefore by default was caste in the “bad guy” role.
Mr Key focussed his presentation on outlining a deteriorating global financial crisis and the affordability of Labour’s election promises. That strategy was a negative tactic that may have appealed to the bias and prejudices of National supporters but fell flat on a studio audience looking for an empathetic speech. Consequently the audience responded negatively on the “worm” reactor.

Essentially the shows format caste both men in a “good guy”, “bad guy” roles with a forewarned Goff adopting the high moral ground and thereby by default casting an unaware Key as the antagonist.

On the basis of that analysis Phil Goff was the more successful politician on the night.

None of the above however will have an effect on the election, at this late stage most voters would have already made their selections, as reflected in the polls, and the “Debate” would have yielded entertainment value only.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:43am
thedavincimode

Lazybum

You have become a prime softcock. HTFU man.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:58am
oldpark

With the help of TV DECEIVE and NZ FERALD they will stop at nothing to make up lies and deceit to satisfy their lust for LIE-BOR.I believe the two mentioned are protesting too much.Names in question Bellcamp,Weakarm.What a motely lot of has been or never wases.Throw in Goff who just loves worms ,go figure.what an indictment of the man who sold most of our state assets in the years 1984 to 1990.Then goes into denial like a meglamaniac.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:11pm
Lance

@KevinH

The specter of Winston Peters holding sway over the nation was a killer blow to Goff. Even his hand picked audience puked at that and Goff had no obvious counter thrust.
On that Goff lost the debate and Labour are terminal.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:14pm
Mark

National released their education policy when questioned on whether the press would create league tables for primary schools from the National Standards data Key’s response was reported in the NZH as follows

“He said although it was possible the material could be collected to form a “league table” of schools, it would not be simple because the information was not easily comparable.”

Given these are National Standards there seems to me to be a certain irony in that answer
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:24pm
Viking2

More good news for National.

NZ has first annual net migration loss in year to October since 2001, Stats NZ says; Net loss to Australia just below 2008 record
Posted in News Updated November 22, 2011 – 10:58am, Alex Tarrant
Share5

New Zealand had a net loss of 103 migrants in the year to October 2011, the first annual net loss since the September 2001 year, Statistics New Zealand says.

Migration losses were dominated by permanent or long-term (PLT) departures to Australia, with the net outflow of 34,957 during the 12 months to October 2011, just below the record of 35,400 set in the year to December 2008, Stats NZ said.

http://www.interest.co.nz/news/56832/nz-has-first-annual-net-migration-loss-year-october-2001-stats-nz-says-net-loss-australia
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:32pm
Viking2

And no doubt that the tape was public, IMHO, despite all the hell raising and lies and rubbish from the National Party.

Ambrose’s lawyer Davey Salmon said photos and images from the video show a print journalist in the cafe doorway, visible to Mr Banks, and close enough to touch Mr Key on the shoulder through the doorway.

The journalist was later replaced with a cameraman holding a camera.

Lawyers for cameraman Bradley Ambrose have argued that no one was asked not to listen to the teapot conversation, and no was asked not to record it – despite the request to remove recording devices from the table.

Ambrose’s lawyer Davey Salmon said photos and images from the video show a print journalist in the cafe doorway, visible to Mr Banks, and close enough to touch Mr Key on the shoulder through the doorway.

The journalist was later replaced with a cameraman holding a camera.

Anyone who bothered turning on their directional microphone would have picked [the conversation] up,” Mr Salmon said.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10767873

So if justice is done then Ambrose has no case to answer.

Now that will get you all on your high heels snorting.
Great to watch. 😆
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:36pm
Manolo

The Obama presidency, a colossal failure: http://www.nationaljournal.com//supercommittee/super-committee-fails-to-reach-deficit-agreement-20111121
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:36pm
Lance

@Manolo
Trouble is the Republicans don’t appear to be able to organize a piss up in a brewery
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:38pm
Lance

@Viking2
All the tape issues aside. It fucked Labour over by deigning it oxygen for a good week. Pure gold from dim witted journos.
In the mean time Winston has been stapled to Goffs forehead LOL
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:43pm
Bob

I noticed the worm shot up every time Goff opened his mouth even when he said nothing of any significance. Yet when Key said anything of significance it didn’t respond staying flat or even declining. It was obvious most of the wormers were Labour supporters. If it can’t be neutral what is the use of it?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:51pm
oldpark

When i saw how John Key was ambushed in last nights Labour Party set up.My thoughts went back to the 1970s when the Labour Government carried out dawn raids on Pacific Islanders and deported them,also in 2004 how they cruzified beneficiaries in certain towns in NZ.Last nights ambush by the taxpayer funded TV3 and Labour party activisits proved to me how they will jackboot anyone who stands in their way,by fair means or mostly foul.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 12:57pm
KevinH

@Lance

It will be interesting to see what impact Goff’s open acknowledgement of Winston will have on Labour’s party vote. Goff saying that he trusted Winston may not resonate with Labour voters and could cost him, equally it may also inspire some elderly Labour voters to tactically split their vote ie electorate vote Labour, party vote NZ First.
However current polling indicates that even with NZ First in the mix, Labour will still struggle to get the numbers.
Also notable was Goff saying he couldn’t work with Hone Harawira, this remark may come back to haunt him if he is chasing numbers.
John Key however is still resolute in saying that he couldn’t work with Winston, on probability he won’t have to because in all likelihood he won’t need him,
But in saying the above there is an even chance that NZ First will be back, Roy Morgan poll 18/11 has them at 3%, Colmar Brunton 12-16/11 have them at 2% and a Horizon poll 20/11 have them at 10.5%.
On the basis of those numbers they are in with a chance depending on how these last few days pan out and also on the amount of “oxygen” the media and rival political parties give him. Watch that space.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 1:01pm
southtop

Elections 2011 -For the Public to Ponder and make up their own minds

These are possibly the 5 best sentences you’ll ever read and all applicable to this election experiment:

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Southern Europe?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 1:02pm
KH

We will have to see if John Key sticks to his word about not dealing with Peters.
Peters is so bad that anybody who says ‘no’ to Peters, even at the cost of losing government, is to be admired.
Not that it is likely to be a decision John Key has to make.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 1:16pm
slijmbal

OLD VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.
Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.
The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE OLD STORY:

Be responsible for yourself!

MODERN VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

TV1,2 & 3 News, and Campbell Live
show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.
The country is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Sue Bradford appears on Campbell Live with the grasshopper and everybody cries .

The Green Party stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, We shall overcome.

Green Party Leader Metiriea Turei condemns the ant and blames John Key , Rob Muldoon , Roger Douglas , Capitalism and Global warming for the grasshopper’s plight.
John Minto exclaims in an interview with TV News that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper,
and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally to gain votes to win an election , the Government drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to consider how his hard work and preparation has affected the Grasshoppers Mana and,
having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated under the Government Land Repo Act and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government confiscated house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn’t maintain it.

The ant has disappeared to Australia,
never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a Drugs related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of Homeboy spiders who terrorize the once prosperous and peaceful, neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY:
Be careful how you vote in 2011
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 1:41pm
Pete George

Greens announce a flat tax of 15% for small businesses on turnover of up to 60k. They never did seem to understand the difference between revenue and profit.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 2:02pm
voice of reason

DPF – why expend so much energy on negative postings about labour?
I think most visitors to this blog already know their failings and hardly need to be persuaded NOT to to vote for them.

How about posting some topics outlining positive aspects National’s policies in key areas
thks
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 2:13pm
Other_Andy

@PG

I think it is just bad reporting from the rag called the NZ Herald.

Later on it says….
“Micro” companies – those with turnover of less than $60,000 a year – would be taxed at a flat rate of 15 per cent on their revenue, based on the assumption that 50 per cent of their income or sales goes on on business-related expense and the balance is taxed at 30 per cent.

To become a reporter these days you only need to have passed NCEA level 1 in Maths and English…
Dispensation for those with the ‘correct’ political views or belonging to ‘special interest’ groups.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 2:21pm
Pete George

The more I’ve heard about the Green micro business the worse it sounds. Apparently it’s optional, so you can choose which way you pay less tax. Which is just as well, because profit margins on revenue vary enormously. If you choose to pay 15% monthly:
– what happens if you have a very good last couple of months that puts you over $60k?
– what happens if you make 0.00 profit in the year? A bit tough to have been paying tax on sales all year.
– what happens if you only do it for part of the year and earn wages the rest of the year?
– what happens if Greeen policy makers have no practical business experience?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 2:30pm
Manolo

They (the Greens) never did seem to understand the difference between revenue and profit.

And they never will.

The Luddites are basically a deeply socialist, anti-business, anti-private enterprise organisation. In summary, the party against personal freedom and individual progress.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 2:37pm
Andrei

Pete George’s Family First rating is 20%

John Key’s is 44%

Most National MPs were too arrogant to bother answering. Scared I guess of being seen to actually stand for anything either way or take a position that would cost them votes or mana with the all important List committee.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 2:48pm
pseudonymous

An economics teacher at a local university made a statement that he had never failed an entire class.
Until a class he had insisted that Goff’s socialism worked and that no none would be rich or poor, a great equaliser.
The teacher then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on Goff’s plan. All grades will averaged and everyone will get the same grade so no one will fail and no one will get an A…(substituting dollars for grades-closer to home and more readily understood by all).
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B minus. The students who studied hard were obviously upset and the students who sat on their bums were very happy. As the second test rolled around the students who had studied less had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride also, so they studied less.
The second test average was D minus. After the third test the average was F-and to their total surprise the whole class failed.
Moral of the story is that socialism will also ultimately FAIL, because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when a socialist government takes the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. Our test happens on Nov 26th.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 3:10pm
immigant

pseudonymous +500
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 3:27pm
pseudonymous

immigrant @3.27
How about these little gems!
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving
3.The govt. cannot give to anybody anything that the govt. does not first take from someone else
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
Probably not worth your very generous 500+, but I’ll take a 100!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 3:34pm
bereal

pseudonymous @ 3.10 Wrong.

You forgot to factor in that the vice chancellor was Steve Maharey and he intervened
and as one who has lived a perfect and blameless life, ( he says so himself ) vetoed the teacher and passed the whole class.
With honours.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 3:44pm
pseudonymous

bereal@3.44
Damn, I forgot about Steve (I’m so far up myself there’s no room for applause) Maharey.
The fridge is well stocked for Saturday- 24 Nat supporters and 2 brave others-should be a good night!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 3:56pm
joe90

^^^^^^

Parrot.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 4:02pm
bereal

Small point but;
why, in the great debate on TV3 last nite, in the final sector was there a picture, behind the 3 ‘experts’
of Plughead and one other who looked suspiciously like Silent T.
(At 53.10 on TV3 on demand.)
WTF was that about ?
johny campbell trying to score a sublisimal point ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 4:03pm
bereal

i wonder,
if Winston craps out an Sat nite, will his new female paramour/sponser wake up to herself and
dump the loser ?
chuck him out of his warm nest in Herne Bay ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 4:20pm
Pete George

Andrei (1,115) Says:
November 22nd, 2011 at 2:48 pm

Pete George’s Family First rating is 20%

The reason for that is I couldn’t answer most of the questions with a simple “Support or Oppose”. Some were multiple questions in one, most were far too complex.

So I answered “Undecided” to most and included a comment explaining my position or why the question couldn’t be easily answered.

One example was “Will you support or oppose a law change that states that the unborn child has a right to life”.

I could have said Support to that, but not without qualifications, it depends on a number of factors, including the definition of “unborn child” (under some definitions that’s a contradictory term) and the rights of the mother.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 4:22pm
bereal

Oh shit PG
Why not take a real stand for once and say ,
“That depends on what the definition of “is” is.”
Do you EVER take a stand on anything ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 4:28pm
Lucia Maria

Pete George,

I would have thought the definition of an unborn child would be pretty much a no-brainer.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 5:15pm
nasska

PG

Stay out of that argument. You’ll be here until next June while the religious nutjobs dance on the head of a pin defining an unborn child. Even if you survive that you’ll end up debating if abortion is murder, then blowjobs are cannibalism and masturbation is mass genocide.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 5:30pm
Andrei

No Nasska it’s really simple – an unborn child is a person who hasn’t been born yet
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 5:39pm
Lee01

@ nasska

You’ll be here until next June while the religious nutjobs dance on the head of a pin defining an unborn child.

Not really. Its the liberal and atheist nutjobs who do that, making up absurdly nonsensical arguments about how killing children is just fine.

The definition is simple, and scientific. Conception makes a human being.

So you comments about blowjobs and masturbation are silly and beside the point.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 5:40pm
Lucia Maria

Why is it only men that equate semen with unborn babies? Too much self-importance there, or what? Freud would have a field day, or maybe he already has and I don’t know about it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 6:16pm
meh

what a non-event tvnz’s lead election story was. Claiming national has mis-led the public on asset sales based on a very weak OIA request..
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 6:18pm
Manolo

P.G., Do you EVER take a stand on anything?

What party does he stand for? UnitedFuture. Mmmmmmm, that’s anwers the question emphaticaly: NO!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 6:25pm
Manolo

Trouble ahead for a fellow Democrat, the former governor of New Jersey and good mate of the Messiah: http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/mf-global-trustee-estimates-shortfall-could-be-more-than-1-2-billion/?ref=business
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 6:38pm
ste3e

Even allowing that the government can borrow for less than you and I, the interest payment on the current $17 billion has to be some scary big number. Divide this number by 12 and you get the monthly bill the government must pay to simply cover interest on the debt. Add to that bill the monthly cost government must pay for education, health, welfare, justice, infrastructure, and disasters and you get close to the monthly expenditure government must meet. On the other side of the ledger government has money coming in from tax, dividends from state assets, and dividends from state savings funds such as ACC. Any shortfall between expenses and revenue the government meets by borrowing. At the current time National are borrowing money every day.

National’s plan is fourfold; sell state assets, reduce expenditure, increase foreign investment and increase export revenue, thereby they wish to increase revenue and decrease expenditure so they no longer have to keep borrowing, so let’s look at this.

Proceeds from sale of state assets are to go into a slush fund which will be diverted to pay for infrastructure. This will mean government borrowing to pay for infrastructure will not be needed, thus while the proceeds do not go directly to pay down debt, they do reduce expenditure. The question is, would removal of the need to borrow to fund infrastructure mean existing revenue would pay for existing interest on debt and government expenditure? My understanding is that it would not, and that National require either further reduction in government spending or increase in tax take to make it so.

Reduced expenditure is supposed to come from further efficiencies in the public sector. I doubt this is possible. In the first instance National have been paring back the public sector over the past 3 years and there comes a time when there is no more fat. And indeed, Pike River and the associated cost, it can be inferred, would not have occurred had the Labor department been adequately funded to ensure proper inspection of mines. One must also wonder at the Rena; would a fully functional and well funded public service have allowed the continuation of NZ’s legal position that sees us liable for foreign company’s accidents? Furthermore, and we have seen this in the past, demoralized public sectors seem to have a way of producing fraudsters that steal large amounts of money for long periods of time without getting caught. A further reason for doubting National’s ability to reduce expenditure is the 380 million upfront expenditure National are promising to remove beneficiaries from benefits; definitely not a saving in the short term, and depending on whether we end up like America, not a savings in the long term either.

The reason for increased foreign investment is to provide businesses. These make profits which are taxed, provide employment which reduces benefit expenditure and pays wages which are taxed, and introduce new skill sets that NZ business would not otherwise provide. The downside of foreign investment is that some investors demand tax and labour rates be low else they will not invest. And here rubbish has been spoken to the effect that foreign investors who demand low wage low tax provide skill sets. Any foreign investor that wants to employ educated people and train them in new skill sets is obviously going to expect to pay above minimum wage. Their incentive for being here is that comparatively, wages in their own countries cost more, tax in their own countries costs more (America and England around 50% top tax rate), both of which incentives held prior to National dropping top tax rates. The type of investment National are trying to attract by their dropping taxes and keeping wages low are the Super Cheaps, and the only skill sets they provide are the ability to wonder around after customers, occasionally operate a till, and stack shelves… now there is a brighter future!

But there is more to it than this. Setting the tax rate to attract foreign investors of this ilk has meant the government has had to borrow significantly more because it has not had the income required to cover expenditure. It has meant an exodus to Australia. Finally, while the majority of employees are paid minimum wage, the CEOs get million dollar salaries. Envy aside, the real objection is that a CEO living in NZ spends a certain amount of money in the local economy by way of living costs, the rest is banked/invested. Increasing CEO take home by reducing personal income tax does not mean the CEO suddenly lives bigger, they can already afford to live as big as they feel like, it means more money is invested. Most of which investment is offshore thus there is a further flight of money out of the local economy. The majority of people left to walk through the doors of small businesses are on minimum wage, and they inevitably walk through the doors of Super Cheap. So small business viability reduces, the tax take therefrom also, along with employment opportunity which leads to increase expenditure in welfare. Is not this precisely what we have seen with the adventure of The Warehouse into rural New Zealand?

In the final analysis, increasing foreign investment of this character means a tax rate too low to cover expenses. So National are left with increasing export revenue as the only way out of this mess. And this hope they set sail in the current world market. They tell us Treasury forecasts support their optimism. But these forecasts were calculated around the time American politicians decided to play Russian roulette with their debt repayment. That is before Italy and Spain started to quake, and before we heard whispers about France, definitely before American police were videoed pepper spraying unarmed non-hostile protestors in a scene reminiscent of “kneeling” Jews, and the latest American Super brain fart.

The situation for National is this. They will not significantly increase export revenue given the current world market, therefore they will not see a rise in tax revenue significant enough such that government expenditure can pay government bills, so they will borrow. This will mean the interest bill on the loan will increase which will require even larger growth in export revenue. It is a death knell, a downward spiral without a contingency plan.

Labour’s plan is to borrow to reinstate kiwisaver, remove gst on fruit and vege, and remove tax for the first $5000. They will increase the minimum wage to $15 per hour. Pay dole to employers and increase youth training. Increase top tax rates to levels prior to National’s reduction of them, and implement a capital gains tax that excludes private residence. They will not sell state assets. They will increase retirement age gradually from some future starting date. So how does their plan fare?

The removal of tax from the first $5000 and the increase in the minimum wage is not altogether a decrease in government revenue. An increase of $2 per hour is an increase of a little less than $5000 per year for someone working 40 hrs per week on minimum wage, and that $5000 is taxable. One would expect an increase in the minimum wage to bring about a desire in many employers to increase the wages of their staff. Although this would increase gains from personal tax, all else being equal it would reduce profitability for the company and therefore decrease tax there. But one would also expect there to be an increase in spending which is likely to offset increased business expenditure via greater sales, and to provide greater government revenue by way of gst.

As for youth loosing jobs, they will only loose those jobs that employers did not need done. If the employer needs a job done, and a youth is trained to do it then there is every chance that youth will be employed, especially in the case of trades where Labour will be offsetting employment costs by paying the dole to the employer. Furthermore, training of youth in fields youth are interested in has to make a better society than condemning them to the Super Cheaps.

Removing gst on fruit and vege is also difficult to quantify. Immediately it seems there would be a decrease in revenue as the government has simply quit taking gst on a range of goods. But if the reduction converts into increased demand for fruit and vege, which is the intention, then the viability of local growers selling into local markets increases. This means employment, including self-employment, and reduction of welfare expenditure. It means local businesses seeing money that generally tends to walk into Woolworths or New World, and the spending by local business in local economies.

For the long term, Kiwisaver is a no brainer, but even in the short term the increased borrowing to fund government contributions is somewhat offset. In the long term we just need to consider a fictional case of a 55year old who committed to Cullen’s fund and has just turned 60. For 5 years they contributed $1000 which was matched by the government (National’s wickedness never occurred in this world). The fund grew at 3% per year compounding. Most of the money was invested off shore. At 60 the retiree cashes in the fund and receives about $11,000 which is shipped from offshore to on shore where the retiree spends it in the local economy. Multiply this by years and by the amount of people in kiwisaver and we should be kicking ourselves that we never listened to Winston earlier.

But even in the short term government’s borrowing $1000 per kiwisaver is added to contributions from employer and the kiwsaver themselves, and the entirety is invested. A proportion of the investment will find its way to New Zealand companies strengthening their profitability and therefore the tax they pay. The kiwisaver investment companies themselves will turn taxable profits. The sale of shares as part of kiwisaver investment portfolios will have capital gains tax applied. But most importantly, as more and more people retire and cash in their funds there is more and more money coming in from offshore and being spent in local economies increasing the profitability of small businesses and the tax revenue government takes.

All of these plans are good for increasing the vibrancy of the local economy, but none of them deal with the problem of increasing government debt and the increasing size of the interest bill. In fact both debt size and interest bill are set to be larger under Labour’s plan, as Labour project to borrow more than National. The difference is, however, that National are totally screwed if export revenue does not significantly increase, for they will have to keep borrowing past a point where increased export revenue could rationally be expected to cover the generated interest bill. Labour, on the other hand, are setting in place streams of revenue that ensure a larger debt and consequent larger interest bill can be paid regardless of whether export revenue increases or not.

In the short term, government revenue is increased by revoking tax cuts National gave to the rich, and ETS compliance. One can add here the continuation of kiwisaver contributions whenever tax from return on that investment beats the interest government must pay on the loan to make the investment; and note, this is not a simple investment of a loan because it involves significant contributions from employers and kiwisavers. We can also add the continued full dividend provided by state assets that should never be sold, especially at the bottom of the market, and especially against the explicit wishes of the majority of the owners of those assets!

In the medium term capital gains tax snowballs expecting to return about $4 billion per year once settled. There will also be increasing numbers of retirees drawing down on offshore investments, including kiwisavers, and spending this money in local economies, most of which money meets the taxman sooner or later.

At the end of the day, under Labour, there will be pressure upon the government to reduce personal and company tax rates because government revenue is set to significantly exceed government expenditure. Confronted by this proposition it is difficult to conceive a scenario where Labour will not quit debt. Contrawise, given the current world economy, it is difficult to see how National will secure the export gains they require to cover expenditure, and this means it is difficult to see how National will not be trapped into a continued increase in debt.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 6:38pm
bereal

hey, ste3e

what was that again ?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:10pm
Elaycee

@Ste3e – is there a link to an Executive Summary? 😀
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:17pm
Pauleastbay

What utter fucking gibberish Ste3e, seriously you have swallowed every bit of crap that labour have put out there.

Everything you write about labours plans has been disproved over and over by economists, by the Government and by commentators here.

Pay attention.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:24pm
Scott Chris

Well, some would say that abortion is culturally acceptable murder, just as for some, smacking is culturally acceptable assault.

Personally, I think both positions are morally dodgy.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:24pm
bereal

st3e
You and Scott Chris can have a huge discussion tonite.
Good luck to both your families.
G.nite
and,
G,luck.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:32pm
nickb

The ANT AND THE GRASSHOPPER FABLE

This one is a little different – in fact two different versions …..as there seems to be different morals in New Zealand these days!

OLD VERSION:

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE OLD STORY:

Be responsible for yourself!

MODERN VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

TV1, TV2, TV3, PRIME News, and Campbell Live show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

The country is stunned by the sharp contrast!

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Sue Bradford appears on Campbell Live with the grasshopper – and everybody cries .

The Green Party stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We Shall Overcome”.

Green Party Leader Metiriea Turei condemns the ant and blames John Key , Rob

Muldoon , Roger Douglas , Capitalism and Global warming for the grasshopper’s plight.

John Minto exclaims in an interview with TV News that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally to gain votes to win an election , the Government drafts the Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act ( EEAAGA ) retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to consider how his hard work and preparation has affected the Grasshoppers Mana and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated under the Government Land Repo Act and given to the grasshopper.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his free-loading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant’s food while the government confiscated house he is in, which, as you recall, just happens to be the ant’s old house, crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn’t maintain it.

The ant has disappeared to Australia, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a Drugs Related Incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of Homeboy spiders who terrorize the once prosperous and peaceful, neighbourhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY:

Be careful how you vote in 2011!

You may wish to pass this on to other ants, but don’t bother sending it on to any grasshoppers because they wouldn’t understand it, anyway.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:40pm
nasska

Thought for the day:

If you run naked, around a tree, at 185979 kilometres/second there is a distinct possibility of fucking yourself. Or, you can vote for Phil Goff to obtain the exact same effect.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:41pm
Pete George

bereal, I’ve been making stands regularly at public meetings over the past four weeks. And I’ve been getting good support, on some things. And at some I’ve been prepared to say unpopular things – like at a forum on child poverty I said that just giving everyone more money wasn’t going to solve much, I’m sure I didn’t attract any votes with that. At another I said Labour were very unlikely to be the next government and I was heckled by the meeting organiser. Actually I said that a few times and usually got heckled for it.

It’s funny I keep getting accused of never making a stand here. If I was happy to always sit on the fence I wouldn’t be putting myself out there while most just keep grizzling here. I’m heckled here, and especially at The Standard, because people don’t agree, ‘fence sitter’, like ‘troll’ is simply a diss absent any argument.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:45pm
nickb

What party does he stand for? UnitedFuture. Mmmmmmm, that’s anwers the question emphaticaly: NO!

Lol

whoops, grasshopper fable already posted.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:51pm
Steve

@ste3e,
your post at 6.38 took all day to compose didn’t it?
Are you going to do any work tomorrow? or just sit on your arse getting paid by the TAXPAYER? Or you could do what nasska said at 7.41pm
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 7:55pm
nasska

A woman walks into the doctor’s office with a swollen nose.
“What happened?”, asked the doctor.
“A bee sat on my nose”, she replied.
“So the bee stung you?”
“Oh no, it didn’t have time. My husband killed it with a shovel.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:00pm
Steve

nasskaat 7.41
that will just make the morons try it, just in case it works (voting for phil goof I mean)
The average Liarbore voter would not know the difference between 185979 and 18600; or M$186 and B$186. Phil Goff has already missed the mark on the numbers game
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:04pm
labours a joke

“and masturbation is mass genocide”

aw thats good , well done. Sav blanc all over keyboard.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:05pm
Scott Chris

Shortest joke ever:

Moi? Pretentious?

(Fawlty Towers)

Another short one:

“…and so the hamster went back to God and said ‘No, I said I wanted to come back as a gangster!’
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:06pm
jcuk

When I heard Phil Goff say how silly it was to sell the house to pay off the mortgage I thought of all those sensible people who do exactly that as they better themselves and move on.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:07pm
Steve

Sell the house to pay the mortgage? Phil Goff supporters do not have a house to sell, but the have a mortgage. That mortgage is owned by us, the TAXPAYERS, the lazy bastards owe the Country big time
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:22pm
nasska

Sister Margaret died and through some error found herself in hell.
She immediately called Saint Peter and said,
“This is Sister Margaret. There’s been a terrible mistake!”
She explained the situation, and Saint Peter said he’d get right on it.
The next day the nun didn’t hear from Saint Peter and called him back.
“Please set this error straight before tomorrow,” she begged.
“There’s an orgy planned for tonight, and everyone must attend!”
“Of course, Sister,” he said. “I’ll get you out of there right away.”
Apparently, her plight slipped his mind, and the following morning he received
another phone call from hell. He picked up the receiver and heard, “Hey, Pete, this is Maggie. Never mind!”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:27pm
Steve

And when God created Labour Party supporters He said ‘Do you want brains?’
The Labour Party supporters thought He said ‘Trains’ and said ‘No thanks, they’re too noisy’
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 8:30pm
niggly

Who’s the muppet of a Green Party candidate for Epsom?

Just saw him on TV1’s Tonight news frothing loudly with anger when John Banks was talking (gawd of all people :-)), what a rude person – sheesh, what a poor example of behaviour for a supposed potential MP!

Crickey, wouldn’t want to even be around him at a party, no doubt he’d be so full of himself but loud and proud about it, ewwwww…. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 10:53pm
niggly

Interesting this court case weighing up whether the PM’s and John Banks’ conversation the other week was a private conversation or not.

I hope we get a definitive answer one way or another, rather than say a ruling arguing politicians are not above the public and the public are used to such intrusions …. worse of all meaning any future occurances may also remain unclear …. meaning futher future court cases (is there some sort of gravey train also running in parallel here….?).

Similarly would that mean all/any employers have the right to listen in, into “private” workplace (office, tearoom, photocopier room) conversations?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 22, 2011 11:17pm