PDA

View Full Version : If National wins ...



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

Harvey Specter
15-05-2014, 03:40 PM
Agree Craic - the biggest issue with the budget is that it does nothing to address superannuation, which is a specific policy and point of difference for National.

It will be interesting to see if the opposition get traction on any issues.

craic
15-05-2014, 04:04 PM
I do not believe that National Superannuation is a problem. To fiddle with eligibility dates saves very little and creates a number of problems. People at age 65 plus are often able to claim other benefits and often do so. By leaving it alone, we avoid the need for expensive social welfare intervention. It also keeps people in jobs longer and reduces vacancies so feeds unemployment. Note that veterans now qualify without the costly structure that assessed needs etc. They are dying at a faster rate than people imagine. Any WW2 veterans are at least in their mid eighties and most would be in some sort of care anyway - the few From Korea are not significant. I think John Key has been doing his sums in this area

Sgt Pepper
15-05-2014, 04:25 PM
Lucky you. I've never been rich. However there is nothing to stop you donating some of that wealth to the IRD if you want to feel better.

FP whats that old saying, the definition of a rich man is someone who has got more money than you. I always remember post 1987 share crash Frank Renouf on TV and disclosing he was down to his last $30million!

Sgt Pepper
15-05-2014, 04:28 PM
I agree Craic. Expect an announcement any day now with massive increase in benefits and support for World War One veterans!

Sgt Pepper
15-05-2014, 04:33 PM
unfortunate for Labour but National are in a very fortunate position today with a better than expected surplus, a collection of Steady-as-you-go increases in the most popular areas such as health and education. They don't have to strain to make promises or offer sweeteners and, in my view, they have strengthened their position beyond anything the opposition will be able to counter before the election. Labour would need some really innovative or creative ideas to counter this and they don't exist. Charismatic leaders have saved them from mediocracy in the past but there are none of those about in the party at this time.

Craic
I work in the health service and believe me the tidal wave of costs catering for the baby boomers ailments in the near future will quickly evaporate surpluses no matter what government we have.

winner69
15-05-2014, 04:44 PM
That sounded like a pretty rousing speech in reply to the budget by the one with no charisma ....pity nobody was listening

fungus pudding
15-05-2014, 04:52 PM
FP whats that old saying, the definition of a rich man is someone who has got more money than you. I always remember post 1987 share crash Frank Renouf on TV and disclosing he was down to his last $30million!

It's an interesting question - what is rich in financial returns. I'd say 10 mill plus.

elZorro
16-05-2014, 06:19 AM
Labour's video reply to the budget.

http://action.labour.org.nz/post-budget?utm_campaign=2014_postbudget&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour

It is true that MPs are there to serve everyone, that's for sure.

There's another block of data from the Herald, also pointing out that the projected surplus is currently within the margin of error. Video from Brian Fallow.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11255347

fungus pudding
16-05-2014, 07:18 AM
Labour's video reply to the budget.

http://action.labour.org.nz/post-budget?utm_campaign=2014_postbudget&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour



I thought you were a supporter of Labour eZ. I'm surprised you would post a link to something so embarrassing to the party.

winner69
16-05-2014, 11:33 AM
Bugger - they don't have these things in Wellington. Would go and support them if they did

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11256215

craic
16-05-2014, 12:08 PM
That kind of arrogance from the left guarantees JKs re-election.

Cuzzie
16-05-2014, 12:33 PM
Bugger - they don't have these things in Wellington. Would go and support them if they did

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11256215 Oh they do & will, just ring your local Greenpeace org. & they will tell you where & when it's planed. Take some photos of your wasted support so we can all have a laugh.

Cuzzie
16-05-2014, 12:35 PM
Pity I didn't know it was on, I could of done some protesting bashing. Looks like some of them got what they deserved - fools.

Cuzzie
16-05-2014, 12:41 PM
I just read the protest had been organised before the Budget was released. winner69 that just shows how arrogant and stupid you are to supporting such action. Might pay to think or read the story before you support pre-organised events before they even know what they are protesting about. Hey, but that's the looney left for you and you just showcased yourself perfectly.

craic
16-05-2014, 10:18 PM
Never ceased to be amazed by the sudden departure of posters of all persuasions on a friday. People are beating each other to death on a thursday - and most every other day but Friday? - they all disappear into the pubs and bars or wherever. I went out to a club tonight and had a few but like most golden oldies, I went home with a good meal and a few to continue in the peace and safety of my own cabinets of liquor. As to the budget and politics in general, all the comments I heard from the various people I met were favourable to the government. Everybody seems happy. Then, on comes the protest with Sue Bradford and a hatchet-faced clown from the Greens on the news, outside a John Key meeting. Do these people actually expect to influence people? Do they think that any rational individual will change his or her position and support their cause. Do they not realise that they are actually likely to alienate individuals who may be on their side of the political divide? I am happy to wager another $1,000 on a National led win in the next election if there is another convinced disciple of the left. Any takers?
Bradford

slimwin
16-05-2014, 11:00 PM
Amen to that craic. Thats pretty much what turned me from center left to center right.

For the record,I was working to midnight on friday night so no beersies for me.

A glass of Cab Sav before bed though...

elZorro
17-05-2014, 08:02 AM
I was out listening to a retired manufacturing business owner who was giving his views on where NZ was heading. While polite, he was lamenting the loss of these types of jobs and real work experience in NZ, the preponderance of managers who have not lifted a tool but are solely academically trained instead. He sees it as a decay in the SME sector that has to be addressed. He's no fan of Steven Joyce et al.

FP, I thought the Labour videos were fairly accurate, they are not embarrassing, maybe you didn't actually view them and take in the words.


The press are still spouting on about how National looks to have recovered from the GFC quicker than the 10 years treasury talked about. The small surplus will come from about a billion of defrayed or sidestepped costs, and no-one from National has mentioned how the indebtedness has been far above what Treasury predicted back in 2008. The govt is still borrowing every day, and I think the amount is about equal to the interest payments due. What a brainless way to run a country.

slimwin
17-05-2014, 08:15 AM
Bill English made a statement the other day about what the debt is now,when it will peak and when it will decline. I forget the figures exactly so wont guess. I think it was part of the budget forecast.

fungus pudding
17-05-2014, 08:26 AM
FP, I thought the Labour videos were fairly accurate, they are not embarrassing, maybe you didn't actually view them and take in the words.




Cunliffe is embarrassing - full stop.

winner69
17-05-2014, 10:51 AM
Cunliffe is embarrassing - full stop.

Not as embarrassing as the leader of UKIP

Pity we don't have interviewers like this guy in NZ


http://www.newstatesman.com/staggers/2014/05/what-racism-nigel-farage-s-disastrous-interview-lbc

Sgt Pepper
18-05-2014, 09:11 AM
Cunliffe is embarrassing - full stop.

FP
Stop being such an old tory grump.David Cunliffe is the leader of the opposition, they tend to oppose things the party in power does. Bill English, Don Brash and JK when leaders of the opposition also opposed things, remember WFF was apparently Communism by Stealth, Its the nature of our Westminster Parliamentary system.
right that's my 2o cents worth Ive been working all night time for some sleep!

elZorro
18-05-2014, 09:22 AM
Bill English made a statement the other day about what the debt is now,when it will peak and when it will decline. I forget the figures exactly so wont guess. I think it was part of the budget forecast.

Slimwin, I'm sad to hear you've moved from 'centrist' to the dark side. Regarding the question above, Rod Oram helpfully mentioned it in the SST today:


Even the Government's mantra about paying down debt has a hollow ring. Despite the return to budget surplus next year, net Crown debt will rise from 59.5b in the June 2015 year to 64.9b by June 2018.


2018 is the new proposed date where net govt borrowing will cease. By then, the govt debt is equal to one full year of revenue, and like any business operation, not much of that income is surplus. By about 2020, National hopes to start paying into the Cullen Super Fund again. No hurry.

What is surely a cynical ploy by the Govt to get back into surplus within their own prescribed and bungled time frame, so as not to lose face, is that they have taken a good proportion of the asset sales money to pay for previously organised upgrades to schools and hospitals. This meant they didn't borrow over the lifetime of the assets, which would be the normal thing to do. These purchases are not directly related to growing the productive economy either, which as Rod Oram pointed out, would be a better use for one-off income like this.

A local example could be upgrades to Waikato Hospital, planning for which was started under the Labour government in 2000. Local National MPs are making much of this progress as it nears completion.

Elsewhere, many are saying that SMEs have a low risk profile, and that contributes to a lower productivity across the board. I think that's about right, and if that sector was properly targeted by this Govt instead of held back in many subtle ways, we'd see real growth. Labour did just that, it worked.

In conclusion Slimwin, Labour has a broad understanding of how to grow a pie. The side you're with at the moment, is far more concerned with dividing up the pie, and they already know who's going to get the biggest slice.

slimwin
18-05-2014, 09:31 AM
Still centrist EZ. Just center right. I don't really see a center left at the moment. Labour is too far left for me with the greens and mana on board.

elZorro
18-05-2014, 10:28 AM
Still centrist EZ. Just center right. I don't really see a center left at the moment. Labour is too far left for me with the greens and mana on board.

Slimwin, I don't really care who you vote for in this election. I'd be more interested in someone commenting on these figures I posted. Surely they are wrong, National is True Blue, they wouldn't con the country - would they?

National is very good at mentioning selective facts, they do it all the time. Like suggesting how powerful Greens and Mana would be in a coalition. I think Labour would have learned something from the first few years under MMP. So, possible coalition partners are not a good excuse to discount Labour. Even if National repeats that mantra, every chance they get.

craic
18-05-2014, 04:11 PM
Maybe, just maybe, the fact that National has the largest group of convinced voters - much larger than Labour - Much large than the Greens - in fact probably greater than the combined left, should indicate to you that astute financial management which includes measured credit or borrowing, if you like, is a formula that is approved by most voters. Or maybe you wish to go on believing that the people - apart from you and the left - are being tricked with some conspiracy designed to take from the poor and give to the rich. I can assure you that when I arrived in NZ donkeys years ago, I was the poorest man in the country. Anything I have came through my own sweat and that has continued to this day and that is the case for most people.

Cuzzie
18-05-2014, 05:42 PM
Maybe just maybe what we should all do when we vote is commit to what we are voting for. You know if you vote for Labour then more tax is applied so you can support the useless & needy even if you are so yourself and if you vote National under the same term of Govt. you get a tax deduction if you create employment and business loans should be at a reduced rate. What do you think because the way I see it a positive for Labour is negitive geared whereas a positive for National is positively geared. You need to create to go forward not disadvantage growth to support the needy.
Just to give you an idea on how it was in NZ just over a generation ago from myself, when my Grandfather was killed in WW11, my Grandmother was kicked out of their family home because she had no way of paying the mortgage before there was even any form of support or default. So my Grandmother ended up raising my dad and my uncle in a cowshed on a dirt floor south of Pukekohe. Every meal was worked for and most of the time it was only enough for my dad and his brother. No support back then and because times were so tough sadly no support from other family members. By right my Grandmother, dad, uncle and so on should all be Labour through & through, they were all strong National supports because they knew plenty of hard work would get them there in the end & it did. No way man, pride and being a New bloody Zealander stopped that in it's stride. The tough get tougher and the weak vote Labour. Pride for yourself and most certainly dignity will always see somebody climb out of the sewer unless somebody or a political party sees a way to keep you in there. Labour is that party to support you so you can be poor for life and get paid for being so.
There is plenty of rich folk who support Labour, become Labour MPs and and go on social media to make this all unfold and you will see one or two right here on this board. They make me want to puke. I too had to climb out of poverty and worked my ass off. Eight years of 14 hour days and my wife working full time without childcare support from any Govt. saw us get ahead. We did it the hard way, not the smart way, Labour makes it kind of happen the lazy way. Fluck that and fluck the lazy, the only people I will support in NZ is those who get out there and do it for themselves. EZ and bulg are rich p!cks that need Labour to get in for there own benefits, what ever they may be.
As said by me, from my heart & brain, not my wallet. EZ, bulg - how say you.

elZorro
18-05-2014, 05:54 PM
Maybe, just maybe, the fact that National has the largest group of convinced voters - much larger than Labour - Much larger than the Greens - in fact probably greater than the combined left, should indicate to you that astute financial management which includes measured credit or borrowing, if you like, is a formula that is approved by most voters. Or maybe you wish to go on believing that the people - apart from you and the left - are being tricked with some conspiracy designed to take from the poor and give to the rich. I can assure you that when I arrived in NZ donkeys years ago, I was the poorest man in the country. Anything I have came through my own sweat and that has continued to this day and that is the case for most people.

Craic, astute financial management is of course approved by voters. That is why National have made great efforts to imply that has been the case in their last term. As you can see from this older trend, Labour has been able to post record budget surpluses, while Nationals' record has been patchy, reaching its poorest deficit position around 1984. I don't agree with all the methods used to pull that state of affairs around, as one result has been much higher unemployment. In other words, the govts of the day didn't grow the economy enough to utilise all those who wanted to work.

You say that everything you've achieved has been through hard work, but of course Labour has been in the driving seat for some of that time. Labour has consistently ensured that more people are employed while they are in office, at least since the 1990s onwards. This effort has helped many business areas, and the economy in general.

More recently, National has posted an annual budget deficit of over 9 billion (includes ChCh costs), and tellingly this was about the total of ten years of small budget deficits predicted by Treasury for 2008-2018, at a time when the GFC had started. National has posted an average of about 4.3bill p.a. of deficits over 5 years. This would be about a mirror image of Labour's record in surpluses. On top of that, core crown debt has ballooned back out to over $60bill, it'll peak higher if we're lucky by 2018, and the debt was well down to only $10bill under Labour, by 2008.

This means that the govt deficits are only part of the borrowing program, as they've borrowed at least twice as much as they needed to fund the deficits, and sold off income-earning state assets as well. But they have also reduced the tax rates for the well off, the clear implication is that this didn't stimulate the economy much, as the corporate tax take is still stubbornly low. And jobs for many, are still elusive. I don't think that's good enough.

elZorro
18-05-2014, 06:13 PM
Maybe just maybe what we should all do when we vote is commit to what we are voting for. You know if you vote for Labour then more tax is applied so you can support the useless & needy even if you are so yourself and if you vote National under the same term of Govt. you get a tax deduction if you create employment and business loans should be at a reduced rate. What do you think because the way I see it a positive for Labour is negitive geared whereas a positive for National is positively geared. You need to create to go forward not disadvantage growth to support the needy.
Just to give you an idea on how it was in NZ just over a generation ago from myself, when my Grandfather was killed in WW11, my Grandmother was kicked out of their family home because she had no way of paying the mortgage before there was even any form of support or default. So my Grandmother ended up raising my dad and my uncle in a cowshed on a dirt floor south of Pukekohe. Every meal was worked for and most of the time it was only enough for my dad and his brother. No support back then and because times were so tough sadly no support from other family members. By right my Grandmother, dad, uncle and so on should all be Labour through & through, they were all strong National supports because they knew plenty of hard work would get them there in the end & it did. No way man, pride and being a New bloody Zealander stopped that in it's stride. The tough get tougher and the weak vote Labour. Pride for yourself and most certainly dignity will always see somebody climb out of the sewer unless somebody or a political party sees a way to keep you in there. Labour is that party to support you so you can be poor for life and get paid for being so.
There is plenty of rich folk who support Labour, become Labour MPs and and go on social media to make this all unfold and you will see one or two right here on this board. They make me want to puke. I too had to climb out of poverty and worked my ass off. Eight years of 14 hour days and my wife working full time without childcare support from any Govt. saw us get ahead. We did it the hard way, not the smart way, Labour makes it kind of happen the lazy way. Fluck that and fluck the lazy, the only people I will support in NZ is those who get out there and do it for themselves. EZ and bulg are rich p!cks that need Labour to get in for there own benefits, what ever they may be.
As said by me, from my heart & brain, not my wallet. EZ, bulg - how say you.

Cuzzie, I think most of us are only a generation or two away from quite impoverished times compared with how we have it now. You're quite wrong with your view of Labour's policies. Sure, most of the Labour voters think that how we look after those most in need, is an important mark of a good society. Should these people be ignored? Of course not. In many cases there is an easy way out of their family situation: reasonably paid jobs close to where they want to live. Not much to ask is it? Labour is a party dedicated to seeing this is more likely to occur.

I, like you, have done many hours of hard graft doing work for customers and other people, and not been reimbursed much on an hourly rate. At one stage I had three part-time jobs. I'm still far from rich now, but I do normally get a small multiple above average take-home pay. It's not guaranteed. I'm not posting on here because I'm running for office - it's obvious I wouldn't have enough time to do both, and I'm not smart enough either.

I have looked at the data though, and I'm convinced that, currently, Labour has very good policies for NZ that we should try out immediately, and National has not much to offer in reply.

blackcap
18-05-2014, 06:17 PM
I suggest a radical but fairer way of electing our government. Well more the way the electoral system works. How about your contribution to society determines how much of a say you have in running said society? That seems fair to me. So the amount of tax you contribute determines the "weighting" of your vote come elections. What do you jokers reckon? Probably a nightmare to administer but the concept deserves some thought or not?

(that way all the tax avoiding and minimising wealthy get a minimal vote, while the big tax paying "poorer" get a larger vote?) :P

elZorro
18-05-2014, 06:24 PM
I suggest a radical but fairer way of electing our government. Well more the way the electoral system works. How about your contribution to society determines how much of a say you have in running said society? That seems fair to me. So the amount of tax you contribute determines the "weighting" of your vote come elections. What do you jokers reckon? Probably a nightmare to administer but the concept deserves some thought or not?

It's a brilliant idea Blackcap, although you would of course need to figure out each person's fuel excise tax, gaming tax, ciggies tax, GST, power contribution, as well as the income tax you're thinking about. It would hurt the bigger income individuals with tax havens, capital gains etc, as although they are well off on paper, they might be nearly invisible as far as IRD are concerned. Now would unpaid work be a factor in your calculation? Like if you worked several hours a day at a Red Cross shop or looked after an infirm relative? Otherwise, the idea is great.. if you see things only in black and white.

westerly
18-05-2014, 06:30 PM
. Or maybe you wish to go on believing that the people - apart from you and the left - are being tricked with some conspiracy designed to take from the poor and give to the rich. I can assure you that when I arrived in NZ donkeys years ago, I was the poorest man in the country. Anything I have came through my own sweat and that has continued to this day and that is the case for most people.

Quote"When I landed illegally in NZ a day or two ago, the police showed some interest until they found that I had not jumped ship, here. They couldn't spell ringbolting so that didn't worry them either. I phoned the immigration Dept, to regularise me presence but was told " you're British and you're entitled to be here so we are not interested in how you got here" Quote

Times have changed Craic You wouldn't get into NZ in that way now. ( If you were a Chinese millionaire you would of course and would even qualify for a one on one with the Minister for immigration in a hotel room ) The days of a shortage of labour skilled or unskilled are long gone, many of the unskilled jobs have been automated or disappeared as factories closed or shifted overseas. Now we have the service industry, professional sport etc to employ those lacking the education or ability to handle complex IT work etc. What chance of a house to live in ?
There has been a definite attempt to remove power from the working class and restore it to where it rightfully belongs. You must not let the peasants get above themselves. The constant personal criticism of Shearer, Cunliffe, Norman and anyone remotely left of centre shows how scared the right is of the left. As Lincoln said "you can fool some of the people some of the time and so on ..."
Westerly

craic
18-05-2014, 09:55 PM
Scared of the left? - you must be joking. Watch what happens at the next election.Have another look at the "rent-a-mob" that performed outside Sky City when JK was inside.

elZorro
19-05-2014, 06:45 AM
Belgarion, I thought this article was interesting.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11256878

craic
19-05-2014, 09:24 AM
I wonder if Dotcom will start binge-eating now that he hasn't got a sexy little Asian to keep him on the straight and narrow? More importantly, what affect will this have on the Lefts charge to victory in a couple of months?

westerly
19-05-2014, 12:03 PM
Scared of the left? - you must be joking. Watch what happens at the next election.Have another look at the "rent-a-mob" that performed outside Sky City when JK was inside.

craic, The left farout number the right -a lot don,t vote for whatever reason . Motivate them and Jk is history.

westerly

BlackPeter
19-05-2014, 12:08 PM
craic, The left farout number the right -a lot don,t vote for whatever reason . Motivate them and Jk is history.

westerly

Hi Westerly, I heard this statement before, but never seen any evidence for it (re left non voters outnumbering right non voters). Do you have any evidence you can show us, or is this just what you would wish?

artemis
19-05-2014, 12:31 PM
Hi Westerly, I heard this statement before, but never seen any evidence for it (re left non voters outnumbering right non voters). Do you have any evidence you can show us, or is this just what you would wish?

Some good analysis here, the title tells the story. Comments are also worth a look.

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/05/it_seems_it_was_more_national_voters_who_stayed_ho me_in_2011.html

BlackPeter
19-05-2014, 02:16 PM
Some good analysis here, the title tells the story. Comments are also worth a look.

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/05/it_seems_it_was_more_national_voters_who_stayed_ho me_in_2011.html

Interesting - Thanks for that. Yes, sounds more logical to me that conservative voters (either disillusioned by the current governments failings or complacent) stay at home or submit a protest vote, than left wing voters (typically more driven by ideology and to a higher degree organised - unions and similar).

craic
19-05-2014, 03:00 PM
Want to have a few dollars on that - I mean the left winning?. The various forums, including this one are filled with wishful thinkers
craic, The left farout number the right -a lot don,t vote for whatever reason . Motivate them and Jk is history.

westerly

craic
19-05-2014, 03:01 PM
Want to have a few dollars on that - I mean the left winning?. The various forums, including this one are filled with wishful thinkers
craic, The left farout number the right -a lot don,t vote for whatever reason . Motivate them and Jk is history.

westerly

westerly
19-05-2014, 05:36 PM
Want to have a few dollars on that - I mean the left winning?. The various forums, including this one are filled with wishful thinkers

LOL as a 10 bob a place punter I am not interested. However 6 guns at 40 paces would be ok. at least one of us would no longer be posting1
westerly

westerly
19-05-2014, 06:55 PM
Interesting - Thanks for that. Yes, sounds more logical to me that conservative voters (either disillusioned by the current governments failings or complacent) stay at home or submit a protest vote, than left wing voters (typically more driven by ideology and to a higher degree organised - unions and similar).

Since mmp there has been up to a 14% difference in voter turnout. 88% in the first mmp election and 74% in 2011. Unions total membership in 2013 was 371613 ( interesting unions must return their membership annually. ) Looking at the list of unions it would seem that quite a few would have members who would not be natural left supporters eg junior doctors, airline pilots, etc. I
With 12 to 26% of non voters in mmp elections I would have no idea which way they would vote but would suggest that to say the average Labour supporter is driven by ideology is a bit off the mark. As with National supporters what is in it for me is probably more a measure of support if they are not
totally committed to one party.

westerly

neopoleII
19-05-2014, 07:12 PM
there is also 600,000 smokers that are a bit peved with the last 4 years of massive tax hikes.
will be interesting to see if they vote with their pockets........

craic
20-05-2014, 07:42 AM
That figure gives us smokers as one in 7.5 of the population? If you rule out almost everyone under 14 years, then that figure looks more unlikely. And how many smokers are thick enough to think that a vote for Labour would improve their position?

Sgt Pepper
20-05-2014, 10:28 AM
That figure gives us smokers as one in 7.5 of the population? If you rule out almost everyone under 14 years, then that figure looks more unlikely. And how many smokers are thick enough to think that a vote for Labour would improve their position?


A lot would me thinks

craic
20-05-2014, 03:20 PM
The official definition on the stats page was anyone who has smoked at least ONE cigarette in the past month/year and one hundred cigarettes in total in their lifetime? Talk about manipulation or misuse of numbers - that takes the cake. I inhale more smoke than that lighting the fire every day. Somehow I can't see Cunliffe making any rash promises to smokers.

winner69
20-05-2014, 04:07 PM
A pretty picture of dear David in the letter box today .... with a big smile the message is 'I got into public service because I want every New Zealander to have the same opportunities I had' ... jeez the photo was as scary as the message

I was grass cutting at the time and put the card on the grass and let the line trimmer do its thing .... good mulch

Shame really - cant vote for the Key and his mates ... and Dave sends a chill up my spine

neopoleII
20-05-2014, 07:15 PM
the problem with stats is they can be and generally are twisted to suit the required outcome from those who need stats for their publications.
here is a link....
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11170102
from the census...... no bias from the census folks.
as you read the article it states 16.5 % of kiwis are smokers.
most smokers smoke more than one a day....... lets face it ...... they are addictive.....
4million / 16.5 = around 600,000.
times that by $20 and compare that to the tax take of some 1.3 billion dollars
and you get a picture of the cash windfall to the government.
as a side note...... all the SOEs in NZ ..... the divis from these all combined is about 2/3s of the tobacco excise tax.
and remember this tax came from the disposable income of the smokers....... so it is alot of money.
also from the stats, maori are the highest uses per category , as a poor folks, they generally dont vote national, even the Maori party that brought in the massive tax
is going to struggle to reclaim votes.
the rest of the smokers ....the majority of users are labourers and tradesman type of folks... ie the working class and they swing their vote generally.
in the meantime..... obesity and diabetes is racing ahead in numbers with no taxes insight..... same a booze.
smokers know they are being screwed by politics..... whether rightly or wrongly.
question is...... will they vote a government out because their pevved ...... like most folks vote governments out.
or will they vote another government "in" thinking the tax will drop?

we know the tax will not drop..... but that might not stop voters voting from their pevved off pockets.

interesting times ahead.

neopoleII
20-05-2014, 07:22 PM
forgot to add this link...
http://www.health.govt.nz/publication/health-new-zealand-adults-2011-12
interesting numbers and future trends

Sgt Pepper
21-05-2014, 08:41 AM
Did anyone see Campbell Live last night? Much seemed to traverse John Keys relationship with the newly appointed head pf GCSB Ian Fletcher. If indeed it turns out that JK did mislead Parliament what are the ramifications of this, does he actually have to resign from Parliament?

craic
21-05-2014, 09:13 AM
And not a word from anyone about Winston Peters and his foul references to a fellow member as a paedophile in the house? That low remark was enough to convince me that neither he, nor anyone who associates with him, has any place in government. I would seriously like to see other leaders state their standards at this point. Seems Trevor Mallard is working along the same lines, tweeting a comparison between the Speaker and a Mafia Don. Problem with our MMP system is that, even if the voters overwhelmingly vote against them, they still get in.

fungus pudding
21-05-2014, 09:22 AM
And not a word from anyone about Winston Peters and his foul references to a fellow member as a paedophile in the house? That low remark was enough to convince me that neither he, nor anyone who associates with him, has any place in government. I would seriously like to see other leaders state their standards at this point. Seems Trevor Mallard is working along the same lines, tweeting a comparison between the Speaker and a Mafia Don. Problem with our MMP system is that, even if the voters overwhelmingly vote against them, they still get in.

Not quite the case. It is not possible to vote against a candidate.

bottlerboy
21-05-2014, 10:07 AM
Did anyone see Campbell Live last night? Much seemed to traverse John Keys relationship with the newly appointed head pf GCSB Ian Fletcher. If indeed it turns out that JK did mislead Parliament what are the ramifications of this, does he actually have to resign from Parliament?

I think the following comment from a reader of David Farrar's Kiwiblog ridiculing this episode of Campbell Live sums it up nicely http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/05/the_campbell_live_dotcom_conspiracy_episode.html#c omments

"It would appear that is is possible to play connect the dots while wearing a straight jacket."

slimwin
21-05-2014, 10:42 AM
Yeah, I started watching and thought, who cares? There's parts of what our secret service do that should be secret. To think we have no need for a secret service is incredibly naive. The Chinese being prosecuted for industrial espionage is a good reason that industry and the secret service need to talk.

BlackPeter
21-05-2014, 11:22 AM
True, NZ (and any other state) need some sort of intelligence service (though I wonder how effective it is what we have ...). But does it really need a GCSB and the SIS? Why couldn't police (internally) and military intelligence (externally) do these jobs anyway? They don't advertise all of their activities either?

Secret Services are (as all other human organisations) subject to power games, abuse of power, inertia of bureaucracy and Peters law. The normal mechanism to manage these risks is balance of power and effective (and transparent) control.

This is where the Secret Service (or better the powers who set it up) let us down. If the only sort of control lays with the PM being informed about what the Secret Service deems worthwhile to let the PM know, than this is clearly deficient. I wouldn't trust the judgement of all PM's - and I certainly wouldn't think that one (anyway quite busy person) can effectively control an organisation who's core competence is to hide their own tracks ...

The way SIS and GCSB are set up in NZ are best case a waste of tax payers money and worst case a threat to personal liberty and democracy.

Sgt Pepper
21-05-2014, 11:22 AM
Yeah, I started watching and thought, who cares? There's parts of what our secret service do that should be secret. To think we have no need for a secret service is incredibly naive. The Chinese being prosecuted for industrial espionage is a good reason that industry and the secret service need to talk.

I guess the critical issue is not whether the electorate cares about the issue, its a legal one of whether substantive proof of misleading Parliament will be established, and if it does what happens next.

craic
21-05-2014, 12:07 PM
Peters? Campbell? Dotcom? Mallard? - I can't help but wonder if this is a conspiracy by The Indian Dairy-shop Owners Association to de-stabilise the left and put cricketers into parliment to run the country. Bring back Monty Python.

slimwin
21-05-2014, 12:46 PM
The govt and the opposition are informed on matters. That's the balance.
The military doesn't have a credible iintelligence service. Gcsb is their source for many parts.
Most info acquired doesn't seem to be of a military nature.terrorism is a domestic issue in ÑZ.

elZorro
22-05-2014, 06:36 AM
I think the prospect of a lower milksolids payout (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11259244)will focus more businesspeople to vote Labour this year. In the meantime the cash is still flowing in the provinces, but it has slowed with the colder weather.

False Profit
22-05-2014, 06:52 AM
Shouldn't this thread be called "When National Wins"?

In this instance, it's up to the government in power to lose the election rather than the shadow government's task to win it. As far as I can see, National, have done very little to cause a stir and Labour have done...not very much at all.

They need John Key to blurt out a Winston Peters "Jimmy Saville" comment for anything to take hold.

iceman
22-05-2014, 07:23 AM
I think the prospect of a lower milksolids payout (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11259244)will focus more businesspeople to vote Labour this year. In the meantime the cash is still flowing in the provinces, but it has slowed with the colder weather.

EZ can you enlighten me on why you think lower international dairy prices will increase the number of business people voting for Labour ? I am lost with that assertion :confused:

craic
22-05-2014, 08:41 AM
EZ can you enlighten me on why you think lower international dairy prices will increase the number of business people voting for Labour ? I am lost with that assertion :confused:
Its called "left" logic. I use it all the time. "Oh! Sorry, Must have left my wallet at home on the piano" or " I haven't got any left" and many variations.

elZorro
22-05-2014, 01:37 PM
EZ can you enlighten me on why you think lower international dairy prices will increase the number of business people voting for Labour ? I am lost with that assertion :confused:

It's quite a simple theory: when the payout is high, your standard agricultural products and services sector, and retail, tends to go better. Even now it's not great. If it all turns turtle, suddenly the SME business sector will look for a party that offers some business incentives in their policies. Well, I hope they would. National is a party that caters much more to larger corporates than small business. But there are a lot of votes from SME owners. Maybe Labour don't spell that out too well, but it's obvious to anyone that has a look at the policies.

westerly
22-05-2014, 05:38 PM
John has a racehorse but did not declare it, the immigration minister thought he had a relative at Gallipoli, but didn't, no comments, they must be National party.
Imagine if they were anyone other than National
westerly

neopoleII
22-05-2014, 06:25 PM
""If it all turns turtle, suddenly the SME business sector will look for a party that offers some business incentives in their policies""

the issue i have with this statement is that labour was in government when we announced that "china is most favoured nation"
and dropped all our tariffs etc and watched the flood of cheap imports come in and then we watched hundreds of SMEs close shop.
and all of a sudden.... once the trade barn doors were swung wide open to a super power to flood our shores with cheap products..........
it becomes nationals fault?
what is it that NZ can produce cheaper than china?...... besides food?
not that long ago a labour mp pontificated that exporting "boxing of air" .. ie .... washing machines was not a direction NZ should be following.....
so F&P moved off shore to save its self.
therefore..... what chance does an SME have?
the greens want us to build green companies like manufacturing solarpanels etc...... trouble is...... our labour costs can never compete with the worlds
biggest green energy producer.... china.
our low tech high wage production sector (basic labour costs) cant compete with superpower nations.
and our hi tech stuff is sold off shore so it can be competitive.
Labour and the Greens ...... are far too focused on welfare and wealth distribution to be able to form genuine long term business plans for this country.

In a perfect world..... national, labour and the greens could form a government that could equally help ALL new zealanders.

having said all that..... Im not happy with national either.
IMHO i think NZ politics has become too franchised to "this lot and that lot" with payoffs here and bribes there to its citizens.
and WE ALL LOSE OUT in the end........

elZorro
22-05-2014, 06:50 PM
""If it all turns turtle, suddenly the SME business sector will look for a party that offers some business incentives in their policies""

the issue i have with this statement is that labour was in government when we announced that "china is most favoured nation"
and dropped all our tariffs etc and watched the flood of cheap imports come in and then we watched hundreds of SMEs close shop.
and all of a sudden.... once the trade barn doors were swung wide open to a super power to flood our shores with cheap products..........
it becomes nationals fault?
what is it that NZ can produce cheaper than china?...... besides food?
not that long ago a labour mp pontificated that exporting "boxing of air" .. ie .... washing machines was not a direction NZ should be following.....
so F&P moved off shore to save its self.
therefore..... what chance does an SME have?
the greens want us to build green companies like manufacturing solarpanels etc...... trouble is...... our labour costs can never compete with the worlds
biggest green energy producer.... china.
our low tech high wage production sector (basic labour costs) cant compete with superpower nations.
and our hi tech stuff is sold off shore so it can be competitive.
Labour and the Greens ...... are far too focused on welfare and wealth distribution to be able to form genuine long term business plans for this country.

In a perfect world..... national, labour and the greens could form a government that could equally help ALL new zealanders.

having said all that..... Im not happy with national either.
IMHO i think NZ politics has become too franchised to "this lot and that lot" with payoffs here and bribes there to its citizens.
and WE ALL LOSE OUT in the end........

I agree with most of what you say there, NeopoleII. But it's not all as impossible as you think it is. Haier couldn't run the risk of losing the design engineers at F&P, so while most of the manufacturing is done elsewhere, the smart work is still being done in NZ. This will see the light of day in world markets, right Craic? We have had cheap Chinese gear coming into NZ for decades, and before that it was Japan amongst others. I think the difference now is that we are seeing some of these prices direct on the web, competition is so fierce that the margins that used to be added by The Warehouse and others are now easier to bypass. But none of these offshore manufacturers can cope with low volume niche manufacturing for export, they'll stay out of that, by and large. We can do it, no problem.

The Greens would know only too well that making PV panels here is a bad idea. The Chinese have recently been investigated for dumping by OECD countries. But we could be world experts at some area in biofuels. We could solve the world's future energy crisis.

Regarding redistribution and welfare, I think the word you are struggling for, with Labour, is equality. A more egalitarian society is what they're working towards. Back towards the way it was once. Not all the way, just in that direction. I heard someone the other day say that a list of Labour's MPs, needs to look like the adult population of NZ does. In other words, near 50% female, some of each age group, etc. They certainly get a lot closer to that ideal than National (currently National have 25% women MPs, Labour have 40% women). The Greens have similar ideas in that regard. When you understand what their internal rules are, it starts to make more sense.

elZorro
23-05-2014, 06:54 AM
Rakon, a good company and all that, but how many smaller firms could have done a bit better with some of the $11mill of R&D funding?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11260022

Tony Alexander thinks a CGT would help in home ownership levels.

http://www.landlords.co.nz/article/5078/cgt-would-lift-home-ownership-levels

Harvey Specter
23-05-2014, 08:21 AM
Tony is right. And there has been no sensible counter arguments to his piece sinse it was published a few days back. Home ownership would increase since hte family home will be exempt - the McMansion effect has been well published. Will home owners pick up the slack for investors? Probably as investors dont normally buy new, they will buy the old house of the people building bigger and bigger PPOR.

fungus pudding
23-05-2014, 08:37 AM
Tony is right. And there has been no sensible counter arguments to his piece sinse it was published a few days back.

This is just another example of how incredibly myopic this very mediocre National government is. Another example is our aging population and retirement ages. They're not willing to tackle ANY long term issues and are playing "banana republic" politics, which unfortunately, the swinging voters appear to like. Alas for our kids!

A CGT would not be plain sailing. There are down-sides as Australians have learnt, not least of which is establishing intent. As it is at present a vendor pays nothing or their marginal rate. With a CGT many will pay the CGT rather than their marginal rate. It's anyone's guess what that will do to the tax take, but I suspect it will be neutral. I'm not against a CGT but it needs to be properly thought through. For a start it should have a repatriation clause, and should not exempt the primary residence.

Sgt Pepper
23-05-2014, 10:24 AM
A CGT would not be plain sailing. There are down-sides as Australians have learnt, not least of which is establishing intent. As it is at present a vendor pays nothing or their marginal rate. With a CGT many will pay the CGT rather than their marginal rate. It's anyone's guess what that will do to the tax take, but I suspect it will be neutral. I'm not against a CGT but it needs to be properly thought through. For a start it should have a repatriation clause, and should not exempt the primary residence.

I agree that often the most simple of economic levers are prone to the laws of unintended. consequences. One aspect of course of the arguments over CGT is the complexities. However one aspect I have found always curious but to date remains unexplored is that if CGT, as implemented in Australia, has been ineffective then why have neither Liberal or Labour governments abolished it despite having having both time and tenure in government to do this?

craic
23-05-2014, 10:25 AM
A capital gains tax is the bit above the line but there is a bit below the line - capital loss and any system is balanced - if you make a dollar, someone else loses a dollar - it is a fundamental principle that is often ignored and for the two to be equated you have a system of administration that is costly to administer. Someone pays and the fundamental "cost" is spread between the users, eg. road tax, and when the winners and losers and payers are finished, the result may be a mile away from the the original intent. A good administration tries to allow its citizens to work and trade with each other and pay taxes through a system that is clearly equitable - GST - is the perfect vehicle. If you spend you pay a little tax, every time - if you save there is no GST to pay and you "help" the country. As to housing - did you make a profit? The house and acerage I occupy - I hate to claim ownership - cost me $123,000 to purchase. I got $150,000 for half the land and then spent something in the order of $75,000 putting the present dwelling in place. So my house and land cost me $48,000 and I would $X for it, a handsome profit? no just the cost of my next place. Once again, a fertile field for lawyers and accountants to make more money. I think John Key has the wisdom to let this sleeping dog lie.

fungus pudding
23-05-2014, 02:52 PM
I didn't think our proposed version had any "intent" element. Its very simple - if it goes up in adjusted capital value, you've made a taxable capital and it'll be taxed. End of story.

Sure, "intent" exists in current tax but would be eliminated with a CGT .... Where does "intent" fit into the new CGT?

CGT is proposed at 15% - current tax is often higher cos it's at marginal rates. So there will still be that line to draw.

artemis
23-05-2014, 03:32 PM
I agree that often the most simple of economic levers are prone to the laws of unintended. consequences. One aspect of course of the arguments over CGT is the complexities. However one aspect I have found always curious but to date remains unexplored is that if CGT, as implemented in Australia, has been ineffective then why have neither Liberal or Labour governments abolished it despite having having both time and tenure in government to do this?

Probably because although it has (apparently) not been very effective in keeping house prices down, it has been quite effective in tipping dollars into government coffers.

fungus pudding
23-05-2014, 03:58 PM
Probably because although it has (apparently) not been very effective in keeping house prices down, it has been quite effective in tipping dollars into government coffers.


That's it. The bit about house prices is a convenient way to sell the idea. A property boom gives the perfect excuse.

blackcap
23-05-2014, 04:12 PM
And to be fair a CGT would have to be inflation adjusted and that just creates a bureaucratic nightmares and inefficiencies.

craic
23-05-2014, 04:13 PM
Nice to see posters around on a Friday afternoon - are the pubs on strike or something? - Sharetrader is usually a wasteland at this time.

fungus pudding
23-05-2014, 04:25 PM
And to be fair a CGT would have to be inflation adjusted and that just creates a bureaucratic nightmares and inefficiencies.

It doesn't have to be; some countries index it but NZ Labour have no intention to do that.

fungus pudding
23-05-2014, 04:42 PM
Sure. There will be many arguments about whether it should be 33% under PAYE or 15% under CGT regime. ...

To me this is fairer and more economically balanced than the choice being 33% under PAYE or ZERO, nada, nothing if there is NO CGT.

Fairer if it is constructed properly, but probably not more balanced. I think there would be a lot that would slip through on CGT that would otherwise attract income tax. I doubt that they will allow repatriation- Phil goff had never heard of it applying to any CGT regime when he was leader.

blackcap
23-05-2014, 04:48 PM
Are you still using an abacus and filing your tax returns on paper?

As fact would have it I do file some tax returns on paper :)

craic
23-05-2014, 10:36 PM
Fairer if it is constructed properly, but probably not more balanced. I think there would be a lot that would slip through on CGT that would otherwise attract income tax. I doubt that they will allow repatriation- Phil goff had never heard of it applying to any CGT regime when he was leader.
Who is Phil Goff? Must be a left Leftover. Maybe now that we are back to a "right" direction things will start to settle down.

slimwin
24-05-2014, 12:06 AM
Sitting in a bar in saigon right now. Perhaps we should become a socialist paradise!

elZorro
24-05-2014, 01:42 PM
Always a lot of discussion about CGT, but no-one admits they hate the idea, and would like to see National in for as long as possible, to stave it off. Craic, you did make a handsome capital gain compared to others around you who bought existing houses, or who had to buy an urban section and then build, without trade experience. The proposed CGT figure is about 15%, which is quite low. In India, it's 20%, and if you sell before three years is up, the gain is taxed at your standard income tax rate. Looks like they have repatriation though, FP.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/other-news/Guide-for-NRIs-Tax-and-repatriation-on-sale-of-inherited-property/articleshow/16686297.cms

All this mechanism looks clumsy, much easier to just have a straight 15% on the sale, and removing your own house makes it even easier. There would need to be a rule on the maximum value of that house, though, that is exempt from CGT.

fungus pudding
24-05-2014, 02:38 PM
Always a lot of discussion about CGT, but no-one admits they hate the idea, and would like to see National in for as long as possible, to stave it off. Craic, you did make a handsome capital gain compared to others around you who bought existing houses, or who had to buy an urban section and then build, without trade experience. The proposed CGT figure is about 15%, which is quite low. In India, it's 20%, and if you sell before three years is up, the gain is taxed at your standard income tax rate. Looks like they have repatriation though, FP.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/other-news/Guide-for-NRIs-Tax-and-repatriation-on-sale-of-inherited-property/articleshow/16686297.cms

All this mechanism looks clumsy, much easier to just have a straight 15% on the sale, and removing your own house makes it even easier. There would need to be a rule on the maximum value of that house, though, that is exempt from CGT.

Removing your own house doesn't make it easier at all.

elZorro
24-05-2014, 05:56 PM
Removing your own house doesn't make it easier at all.

I'm not sure what the figures are for home ownership with or without a mortgage, but the proportion of households and people over 15 who are in that situation is over 50%. It's lower than it was. But if most of those people have no other major capital investment in the line of a business, residential rental or commercial property, farm, then surely a lot of paperwork can be dispensed with under Labour's proposal. They would be free to sell and buy again (not too quickly) without any tax implications. As I said before, with your own house you can't claim interest as a cost, you spend more than normal on upkeep and renovation generally. So it's not a great investment really, but a lot better than renting if you're in a stable setup.

But if someone who lives on the income from renting out properties or running a business sells one of these types of assets, then surely that is another thing entirely. Regardless of whether they take the inflation adjusted extra capital, plus the original investment monies (in the usual situation) and plough it into a new investment, they have effectively made another income that can be spread back over the ownership period of owning the asset.

To argue that there is no cash left over anyway, when you buy your next asset or property to repeat the cash generation process, is a false argument for not paying a CGT (repatriation). Someone who is on wages, taxed for every single dollar of income, plus charged all the normal GST and excise taxes, could also argue that at the end of several years of work, they have no savings because the cost of living and (say) rental accommodation or interest on their mortgage has used it all up, and those costs are ongoing. Would they then be entitled to claim back the income tax they had paid?

winner69
24-05-2014, 06:12 PM
EZ from Stats NZ

The data on home ownership by households shows that 64.8 percent of households owned their home or held it in a family trust in 2013, down from 66.9 percent in 2006. This includes households who made mortgage payments and households who did not.

Of those households who owned their home and specified whether they made mortgage payments, 56.4 percent (398,373 households) made mortgage payments in 2013. This was very similar to 2006 (56.5 percent or 405,267 households

fungus pudding
24-05-2014, 06:13 PM
I'm not sure what the figures are for home ownership with or without a mortgage, but the proportion of households and people over 15 who are in that situation is over 50%. It's lower than it was. But if most of those people have no other major capital investment in the line of a business, residential rental or commercial property, farm, then surely a lot of paperwork can be dispensed with under Labour's proposal. They would be free to sell and buy again (not too quickly) without any tax implications. As I said before, with your own house you can't claim interest as a cost, you spend more than normal on upkeep and renovation generally. So it's not a great investment really, but a lot better than renting if you're in a stable setup.

But if someone who lives on the income from renting out properties or running a business sells one of these types of assets, then surely that is another thing entirely. Regardless of whether they take the inflation adjusted extra capital, plus the original investment monies (in the usual situation) and plough it into a new investment, they have effectively made another income that can be spread back over the ownership period of owning the asset.

To argue that there is no cash left over anyway, when you buy your next asset or property to repeat the cash generation process, is a false argument for not paying a CGT (repatriation). Someone who is on wages, taxed for every single dollar of income, plus charged all the normal GST and excise taxes, could also argue that at the end of several years of work, they have no savings because the cost of living and (say) rental accommodation or interest on their mortgage has used it all up, and those costs are ongoing. Would they then be entitled to claim back the income tax they had paid?

Consider a factory owner who needs bigger premises. it is not his fault that his property has gone up and will almost certainly be a similar percentage rise to the one he now needs (which you might argue he should have bought in the first place). If values haven't changed, there's no problem but if they have he would have to pay tax. As the Labour party concluded in the 80s, CGT stops things happening. It's debatable whether it's worth collecting at all - but if it is introduced then it should be an exit tax; i.e. payable if funds released are used for personal benefit, but not for replacing an asset. Have a drive around a couple of industrial areas in Australia and you can't help notice the ludicrous and ugly extensions on the various factories and warehouses. That's one direct result of a poorly designed CGT.

fungus pudding
25-05-2014, 08:55 AM
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/10077189/We-re-the-biggest-losers

Another example of the b.s. economics from this very mediocre National government. These guy just never think any longer than 3 years.

Quite right. The govt. should supply all foodstuffs to households delivered twice weekly, along with instructions, (recipes and menus). Obviously there will be a cost, but that's easily fixed. Just tax 'the rich' a bit more by increasing the top rate of 33% to Muldoon's 66%.

craic
25-05-2014, 12:37 PM
Economics 101. Yesterday I put a $44 voucher in the TAB machine and placed two $10 bets. Should have pushed the "end with voucher" but forgot and by the time I got back another punter had $24 credit and no one owned up Thieving bastard! Came away on top anyway and went to the Cinema to see The Grand Budapest Hotel. Called through the supermarket to pick up a hot meal from the deli but that was closed so settled for a six-pack of Guinness cans as my only purchase. The checkout girl announced $4.43 or similar and when I suggested that closer to $30 would be more like it she shrugged and pointed to the figure on the machine. I paid and went. Figured later that it was God rewarding me for restraining my violence against the earlier offender. Spent the next hour or so on Google trying to work out who was who and who was paying, in the movie that is. If only politics was that simple.

winner69
25-05-2014, 12:49 PM
Economics 101. Yesterday I put a $44 voucher in the TAB machine and placed two $10 bets. Should have pushed the "end with voucher" but forgot and by the time I got back another punter had $24 credit and no one owned up Thieving bastard! Came away on top anyway and went to the Cinema to see The Grand Budapest Hotel. Called through the supermarket to pick up a hot meal from the deli but that was closed so settled for a six-pack of Guinness cans as my only purchase. The checkout girl announced $4.43 or similar and when I suggested that closer to $30 would be more like it she shrugged and pointed to the figure on the machine. I paid and went. Figured later that it was God rewarding me for restraining my violence against the earlier offender. Spent the next hour or so on Google trying to work out who was who and who was paying, in the movie that is. If only politics was that simple.

Wonder if the 6 pack is still that price today ......go back and get some more I reckon

Bet you that sod lost your money .....but hen again he may have won thousands

The TAB had a promo a few weeks ago .....have a 10 dollar bet on the trots and if you lose we will give your 10 dollars back. Lost the 10 bucks and they gave it back to me.spose they were trying to get me hooked but haven't had a bet since.

slimwin
25-05-2014, 02:14 PM
If God is handing out six packs then I'll start believing. That's way better marketing than the old heaven and hell thing.

blackcap
25-05-2014, 04:16 PM
Interesting that Labour is bad for small business.....

A recent study by Massey University proves what most people know…Labour is bad for business and a four year terms would be better as well.

A four-year election term may help prevent smaller firms listed on the New Zealand Stock Exchange getting into strife as a result of fast-track policy changes made by new governments, says a Massey University academic.

Dr Chris Malone, a senior lecturer in the School of Economics and Finance, says billions of dollars are lost to the economy because firms, particularly smaller ones, are unable to cope with policy changes brought on by a change of government.

“Four years instead of three in the political cycle would give government more time to phase in policy instead of rushing reform through. This could give smaller firms breathing space to adapt and adjust to the new environment,” he says.

Dr Malone’s comments arise from the findings of a research paper he co-wrote with Associate Professor Hamish Anderson, who is also from Massey University. The paper found small firms have performed much worse under left-of-centre governments than right-of-centre governments since 1972. It also found stock returns are generally significantly higher under right-of-centre governments.


Dr Malone says there has been recent global interest in whether stock markets prefer a right-of-centre or left-of-centre governments – and that researchers were surprised when research in the United States showed its stock markets preferred Democrat governments.

The conventional wisdom had been that Wall Street liked a Republican government “but when they went and looked at the long history of returns they found that during Democrat governments things whistled along pretty well,” says Dr Malone.

The opposite, however, is true for New Zealand. While large firms do relatively well under either the left or right, small firms have underperformed significantly during Labour terms. Dr Malone says perhaps in the United States, Republican governments are more likely to get involved in wars and external policies that can damage the sharemarket but, in New Zealand, right-of-centre governments haven’t had this responsibility and their pro-business focus has shown through in stock returns.

While it might be expected that small firms would struggle during periods of intense reform, such as Rogernomics in the 1980s, the Massey research found they struggled generally through all Labour government terms.

“Small firms in particular can’t handle a changing environment very well. They don’t have access to professionals; they typically don’t have the cash resources or the ability to raise cash if things get tight; and they find it harder to pass on business risks.”

Imagine how bad it would be if the Greens were part of the mix.

Ele Ludemann at Home Paddock notes:

The left like to talk about big business as if there’s something wrong with that.

But their anti-business policies hurt small businesses more and anyone with investments, whether they’re personal or through KiwiSaver, will also be disadvantaged by policies which add costs and hamper productivity.

This paper gives people another good reason to give National three more years – #3moreyears

fungus pudding
25-05-2014, 05:46 PM
This paper gives people another good reason to give National three more years – #3moreyears

And it looks like most agree with both TV3 and TV1 polls showing National at over 50% while Labour/Greens are around 40%. However this is MMP so who knows.

blackcap
25-05-2014, 05:53 PM
And it looks like most agree with both TV3 and TV1 polls showing National at over 50% while Labour/Greens are around 40%. However this is MMP so who knows.

Yeah both polls are terrible for Labour. They need to do something about Cunliffe. ie get rid of him and quick, but its probably too late now. So he becomes the fall guy and many in the Labour party will be pretty happy about that is my guess. Labour need to get back to their roots if they want to be a political party of influence.

fungus pudding
25-05-2014, 06:15 PM
Yeah both polls are terrible for Labour. They need to do something about Cunliffe. ie get rid of him and quick, but its probably too late now. So he becomes the fall guy and many in the Labour party will be pretty happy about that is my guess. Labour need to get back to their roots if they want to be a political party of influence.

They won't dump Cunliffe this side of the election.

Sgt Pepper
25-05-2014, 07:39 PM
They won't dump Cunliffe this side of the election.

Specifically the problem with David Cunliffe is what? I well recall the boot, metaphorically speaking being put into one Bill English in 2002, that he was " terrible leader" ineffectual, no charisma, awful retail politician etc etc. Yet now he is lauded. The reality even if the Leader of the Labour party was Mother Theresa fault would be found. Poor guy. By the way FP what do think of the owner of Antoines Restaurant claiming that Helen Clark was and would not be welcome at his restaurant, and he would probably ban David Cunliffe. Oh my goodness has it really come to this in our country? I have friends and family members who vote differently according to their beliefs about who offers the best policies, I have never HATED anyone who doesn't agree with whom I vote for. Its sad and appalling its come to this.

elZorro
25-05-2014, 08:54 PM
Presumably Antoines has so many customers, that any Labour voters need not go there.

Blackcap, if Labour has been so poor at encouraging small business, how do you explain the fact that SME numbers reached a high in 2008, and have dropped back since? Or that the tax take also reached a peak in 2008, fell back and has only now recovered to that level? It's now 2014. GDP per capita was also higher during Labour's last terms.

slimwin
25-05-2014, 09:01 PM
Tax take dropped as taxes were lowered and the world reduced spending. Economy has grown so tax take is up.

fungus pudding
26-05-2014, 02:30 AM
Specifically the problem with David Cunliffe is what? I well recall the boot, metaphorically speaking being put into one Bill English in 2002, that he was " terrible leader" ineffectual, no charisma, awful retail politician etc etc. Yet now he is lauded. The reality even if the Leader of the Labour party was Mother Theresa fault would be found. Poor guy. By the way FP what do think of the owner of Antoines Restaurant claiming that Helen Clark was and would not be welcome at his restaurant, and he would probably ban David Cunliffe. Oh my goodness has it really come to this in our country? I have friends and family members who vote differently according to their beliefs about who offers the best policies, I have never HATED anyone who doesn't agree with whom I vote for. Its sad and appalling its come to this.

English is an excellent minister, but not a leader - never will be. Restaurants can cater for whoever they like.

iceman
26-05-2014, 06:39 AM
Specifically the problem with David Cunliffe is what?

He doesn't connect with voters. Simple really !

elZorro
26-05-2014, 06:46 AM
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/10077189/We-re-the-biggest-losers

More of National's good work. We'll be paying for this for a lifetime.

BlackPeter
26-05-2014, 08:16 AM
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/10077189/We-re-the-biggest-losers

More of National's good work. We'll be paying for this for a lifetime.

LOL So now it is National's fault that people eat too much and exercise not enough? What would you prefer? 100% Tax Rate - a bit of pocket money for everybody and Nanny state is cooking our meals and monitoring our fitness program?

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 08:36 AM
English is an excellent minister, but not a leader - never will be. Restaurants can cater for whoever they like.

FP
If I went to Mr Astles restaurant my obligation is to behave appropriately, respect other diners, and pay my bill in full at the conclusion of the dinner. His obligation is to deliver high quality cuisine matched with good service. I wouldn't expect to be interrogated at the door as to who I vote for. Call me old fashioned but I thought denying someone a good or service based on political beliefs was illegal. As far as Helen Clark goes she might present a somewhat interesting situation should she take her father to Antoines next time she is in Auckland from New York, as he is a former Chairman of the Waikato National Party! "Yes Mr Clark I like your politics but your daughter will have to eat at MacDonalds or wait in the car." The man is an embarrassment to the National Party. However what goes around comes around.

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 08:47 AM
LOL So now it is National's fault that people eat too much and exercise not enough? What would you prefer? 100% Tax Rate - a bit of pocket money for everybody and Nanny state is cooking our meals and monitoring our fitness program?

BP
I think we should have a dedicated PAYE national health tax for individuals based on their body mass index. Insurance companies do this.

fungus pudding
26-05-2014, 08:51 AM
FP
If I went to Mr Astles restaurant my obligation is to behave appropriately, respect other diners, and pay my bill in full at the conclusion of the dinner. His obligation is to deliver high quality cuisine matched with good service. I wouldn't expect to be interrogated at the door as to who I vote for. Call me old fashioned but I thought denying someone a good or service based on political beliefs was illegal. As far as Helen Clark goes she might present a somewhat interesting situation should she take her father to Antoines next time she is in Auckland from New York, as he is a former Chairman of the Waikato National Party! "Yes Mr Clark I like your politics but your daughter will have to eat at MacDonalds or wait in the car." The man is an embarrassment to the National Party. However what goes around comes around.


I've never heard of the restaurant or the restaurateur, but very much doubt that it has anything to do with the National party or any other party.

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 08:58 AM
I've never heard of the restaurant or the restaurateur, but very much doubt that it has anything to do with the National party or any other party.

FP
Apparently its the most exclusive (meaning expensive) restaurant in Auckland. As to Mr Astles and the National Party he is an active and very successful fundraiser for the party, good on him, I have no issue with that, but banning people from his restaurant based on their politics is abhorrent and not the way we do things in NZ

fungus pudding
26-05-2014, 09:16 AM
FP
Apparently its the most exclusive (meaning expensive) restaurant in Auckland. As to Mr Astles and the National Party he is an active and very successful fundraiser for the party, good on him, I have no issue with that, but banning people from his restaurant based on their politics is abhorrent and not the way we do things in NZ

It's ridiculous to generalise on the way all NZers do things. Obviously it is the way this fellow does things.

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 09:29 AM
It's ridiculous to generalise on the way all NZers do things. Obviously it is the way this fellow does things.

FP
No cant really agree with you on this one, I think there is a broad consensus on right and wrong, and active discrimination based on political belief would be captured here

777
26-05-2014, 09:50 AM
But he wanted a couch put in the restaurant. Is this a normal request from a customer?

But turn it into politics if you need to.

Dotcom should not be given the time of day. He is a criminal and should be deported.

fungus pudding
26-05-2014, 10:12 AM
FP
No cant really agree with you on this one, I think there is a broad consensus on right and wrong, and active discrimination based on political belief would be captured here

Well he either did refuse someone or he didn't. You made the claim. Now you don't agree with what you said! Fascinating.

craic
26-05-2014, 10:14 AM
Latest news appear to be a big jump to the right in France? Didn't really read it properly through my fuzzy head but maybe they will have the lead in a counter revolution against the radical muslim infusion of european society. If they get this ball rolling I can see Putin joining hands with them and the american right following. Now wont this be an interesting world? Dot Com? - I thought he only ate McDonalds?

winner69
26-05-2014, 10:45 AM
UKIP doing OK as well in the UK ....even winning votes in Scotland

Report punters calling for Clegg to resign .....poor Lib Dems

Not good for the left it seems but we need the turmoil now for sanity in a few years time.

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 10:47 AM
But he wanted a couch put in the restaurant. Is this a normal request from a customer?

But turn it into politics if you need to.

Dotcom should not be given the time of day. He is a criminal and should be deported.

When he came here in 2010, flush with $$$$$ and was supporting John Banks and was welcomed by National Ministers one suspects that if he made a reservation then nothing would have been a problem " you would like a couch Mr Dotcom? absolutely how many and what colour" ? Fast forward 2014 " Get lost Mr Dotcom, your not welcome at this restaurant" ( subtext in 2010 you had lots of $$$ and you supported National, now you don't, so we don't want to know you)

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 10:50 AM
Well he either did refuse someone or he didn't. You made the claim. Now you don't agree with what you said! Fascinating.
FP
Its in the NZ Standard, so it must be true!
cheers
SP

fungus pudding
26-05-2014, 10:56 AM
FP
Its in the NZ Standard, so it must be true!
cheers
SP

I don't doubt it's true. I'm confused with your statement ' I can't agree with you on that one'. I didn't say anything to agree or disagree with.

Harvey Specter
26-05-2014, 10:59 AM
When he came here in 2010, flush with $$$$$ and was supporting John Banks and was welcomed by National Ministers one suspects that if he made a reservation then nothing would have been a problem " you would like a couch Mr Dotcom? absolutely how many and what colour" ? Fast forward 2014 " Get lost Mr Dotcom, your not welcome at this restaurant" ( subtext in 2010 you had lots of $$$ and you supported National, now you don't, so we don't want to know you)While some may be like that, I dont think it would be like that at Antoines. It is a place where they set the rules - you have to knock to get in as they keep the door locked. They still use manual credit card machine because ???

They would not bring in a couch, even if John Key asked in my opinion.

Cuzzie
26-05-2014, 11:20 AM
Keep an eye on the John Banks trial in the High Court, dot.com might be in for a bit of a shock.:ohmy:

craic
26-05-2014, 11:53 AM
How many volts?

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 02:32 PM
But he wanted a couch put in the restaurant. Is this a normal request from a customer?

But turn it into politics if you need to.

Dotcom should not be given the time of day. He is a criminal and should be deported.

What happened to that ancient but rather enduring bedrock of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty??

Harvey Specter
26-05-2014, 03:15 PM
What happened to that ancient but rather enduring bedrock of our legal system of innocent until proven guilty??He has been proven guilty, on a number of counts. Hacking and share manipulation if I remember rightly.

Sgt Pepper
26-05-2014, 05:36 PM
He has been proven guilty, on a number of counts. Hacking and share manipulation if I remember rightly.

HS
from my understanding the hacking and other charges arose in Germany in 1994 as a 2o year old. However, you are right, I guess it does seem concerning that the National Government granted residency in November 2010 despite these historic conviction,s an issue the government seems curiously reluctant to explore .The current charges arose from an indictment filed in Virginia by the US government in January 2012. The charges remain that -charges.

elZorro
26-05-2014, 05:37 PM
I think those guys are a bit of a sideshow. Have a look at the first page or two of this discourse in parliament about inequality. For those hanging on John Key's every word, and believing all he says, his replies are suitable. But for those of us who know the real facts, and it should be more of us, he's so full of it.

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/50HansD_20140514_00000008/questions-for-oral-answer-%E2%80%94-questions-to-ministers

Labour left us in a mess - false. Multiple good stats to show this wasn't the case at all. The opposite was true.
We're doing better than Australia - highly debatable over the medium term, even the short term.
Power prices went up more while Labour was in (yes, but only because wholesale gas prices had to double as Maui ran out).
More being employed recently, yes, but only because their policies helped put them on the dole in the first place. Unemployment rate still above where Labour had it.
Wouldn't accept that the very rich have had a 50% wealth increase, while the poor in the selected suburb went back by 20% in real terms.

Rob Stock wrote a great article in the SST yesterday, but it's not available on the web yet, about inequality being expected to rise when the July 2014 update comes out.

This should be a very important topic for the upcoming elections. Hard for National to wriggle out of this argument, they don't have the facts on their side.

BlackPeter
26-05-2014, 08:57 PM
He has been proven guilty, on a number of counts. Hacking and share manipulation if I remember rightly.
True - and he fully disclosed these convictions when he asked for NZ residence. I guess at that stage he and his money was quite welcome in NZ. Popular politicians circled around him like moths the light (or should I say like vultures)?

What sort of character would now want to throw him out of the country despite him having done nothing wrong since his immigration in NZ? First taking the money and if things turn sour throw him out? Are you another of his former friends who now wants to get rid of him?

iceman
26-05-2014, 08:58 PM
HS
from my understanding the hacking and other charges arose in Germany in 1994 as a 2o year old. However, you are right, I guess it does seem concerning that the National Government granted residency in November 2010 despite these historic conviction,s an issue the government seems curiously reluctant to explore .The current charges arose from an indictment filed in Virginia by the US government in January 2012. The charges remain that -charges.

Sgt Pepper,
You have made a claim in several posts now that" National Ministers" or the "National Government" supported this criminal´s residency application. You also claim he contributed funds to National. Do you have any info to back up these claims ?

Ministers do not issue residency visas, Immigration NZ does and from what I´ve read, they did so on their own without political influence in Dotcom´s case ! I don´t think they should have as any cursory glance into this guy surely would have failed a character test.

He obviously thinks buying political influence is the right thing to do here in NZ. Started by giving funds to John Banks and then got pi..ed off when Banks wouldn´t return the favour and help him out of jail. Now the revenge is playing out in the courts.

It is on record that he has since had Winston Peters & Russel Norman visit his palace, one assumes to discuss politics.
Then he moves onto Hone/Mana, offering money to buy his so called party a ride on Hone´s coat tails, assuming he will win his seat again.

I think you are barking up the wrong tree with regard to the criminal that is Dotcom.

elZorro
27-05-2014, 05:55 AM
Colin James on the strong links being forged between Labour and the Greens, and policy.

http://www.colinjames.co.nz/a-green-challenge-global-inconsistencies/

BlackPeter
27-05-2014, 06:22 AM
Colin James on the strong links being forged between Labour and the Greens, and policy.

http://www.colinjames.co.nz/a-green-challenge-global-inconsistencies/

good article, worthwhile reading. The Greens would have a lot to offer, if they would not chain themselves at the same time with last century Ideologies.

elZorro
27-05-2014, 06:43 AM
good article, worthwhile reading. The Greens would have a lot to offer, if they would not chain themselves at the same time with last century Ideologies.

One thing that Labour and the Greens agree on, is that farming ruminants might not always be the best use of our land and resources.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/10084900/NZ-economy-facing-multibillion-dollar-hit

Note how loudly National have been saying they insulated houses flat out in their last terms. The Greens say:

http://www.interest.co.nz/property/70100/greens-metiria-turei-launches-policy-spend-nz327-mln-over-three-years-insulate-200000

fungus pudding
27-05-2014, 07:17 AM
Sgt Pepper,
You have made a claim in several posts now that" National Ministers" or the "National Government" supported this criminal´s residency application. You also claim he contributed funds to National. Do you have any info to back up these claims ?

Ministers do not issue residency visas, Immigration NZ does and from what I´ve read, they did so on their own without political influence in Dotcom´s case ! I don´t think they should have as any cursory glance into this guy surely would have failed a character test.

He obviously thinks buying political influence is the right thing to do here in NZ. Started by giving funds to John Banks and then got pi..ed off when Banks wouldn´t return the favour and help him out of jail. Now the revenge is playing out in the courts.

It is on record that he has since had Winston Peters & Russel Norman visit his palace, one assumes to discuss politics.
Then he moves onto Hone/Mana, offering money to buy his so called party a ride on Hone´s coat tails, assuming he will win his seat again.



I don't understand how he can get in on Mana's coat-tails. His is a separate party which will not win a seat or get 5%. . Can anyone enlighten me?

iceman
27-05-2014, 07:57 AM
I don't understand how he can get in on Mana's coat-tails. His is a separate party which will not win a seat or get 5%. . Can anyone enlighten me?

These 2 separate and completely different parties, are planning to register a combined list for both parties, so Hone & his team and whoever will stand for the DotCon party, will stand together despite having no common policies.
So if we assume Hone will win Te Tai Tokerau, then all votes that the Internet party and Mana receive will count towards MPs.
If the Internet Party stood separately, they realise that they would not get any MPs as they have no realistic opportunity to win a constituency seat and are highly unlikely to reach the 5% threshold for list MPs.

But if for arguments sake the Internet Party gets 3% (something I doubt very much) and Hone wins his seat, the list will get about 3-4 MPs.

So DotCon has bought Hone by promising funding for the election campaign in return for putting some of "his" people on the list.
That has the potential for the Internet Party to coat tail on Hone into Parliament. Welcome to MMP and a couple of men (Hone & Dotcom) totally void of any scruples !

fungus pudding
27-05-2014, 08:12 AM
These 2 separate and completely different parties, are planning to register a combined list for both parties, so Hone & his team and whoever will stand for the DotCon party, will stand together despite having no common policies.
So if we assume Hone will win Te Tai Tokerau, then all votes that the Internet party and Mana receive will count towards MPs.
If the Internet Party stood separately, they realise that they would not get any MPs as they have no realistic opportunity to win a constituency seat and are highly unlikely to reach the 5% threshold for list MPs.

But if for arguments sake the Internet Party gets 3% (something I doubt very much) and Hone wins his seat, the list will get about 3-4 MPs.

So DotCon has bought Hone by promising funding for the election campaign in return for putting some of "his" people on the list.
That has the potential for the Internet Party to coat tail on Hone into Parliament. Welcome to MMP and a couple of men (Hone & Dotcom) totally void of any scruples !


Still not sure how 2 parties can have a common list. The mind boggles how far that could be taken with all sorts of half-baked nutter parties.

P.S. Still not sure - using your example - how the list could end up with 3 or 4 MPs, which presumably would have to be in the Mana party.

iceman
27-05-2014, 08:21 AM
Still not sure how 2 parties can have a common list. The mind boggles how far that could be taken with all sorts of half-baked nutter parties.

Sadly nothing stopping it ! Makes no sense at all when there is no common political ground between them, but that is the nonsense we have with MMP.

Nothing stopping ACT and the Conservatives doing the same, for example.

Cuzzie
27-05-2014, 08:46 AM
Have a look at this EZ: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1173658-tradestats.html

Digest the stats and you give me your Positives and Negatives of our exports that drove trade surplus up to $1.2b.

This is the real picture of our economy right now, not your long list of negatives National is achieving in your mind and how Labour and the Greens would do so much better. These are cold hard facts that you hate & I bet my bottom dollar your try your best to downgrade these stats the same way you tried & failed to discredit these stats. http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/key_graphs/current_account/ The current account balance is there to remind us all just how much overspending by the last wretched Labour Govt. there was. Add the Greens. Honi, Winnie-the-Pooh & the fat man into the mix and you have got a comedy show wrecking ball on the way to bankrupting the country for good.

Stats are are good indicator, in fact the real indicator with whats happening concerning our economy and how well our Govt. is doing is it not? You might not like this stat too EZ. http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/key_graphs/household_debt/ Just like the current account balance, the household debt swing shaply downwards after our current National Govt. came into power. Look at this chart http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/key_graphs/mortgage_rates/ and that's partly the reason why. You can't drive interest rates down that low in good time by over spending.

National has done a impressively splendid job in the last two terms & I feel they have set themselves beautifully to do better than that in their third term. Of course if the Comedy show from the Marxist Circus manage to con the country and get in, they will do just fine riding National success wave until that runs out of steam, then the worm will turn. It happened(worm chart) very quickly for National towards the positive back in 2008, but I'm afraid the Left plays the long slow drain game. Once they commit to spending on the lazy and useless, only National can save us ... again, like they always do.

EZ, I'd be really interested in your reply.

Harvey Specter
27-05-2014, 08:49 AM
Still not sure how 2 parties can have a common list. The mind boggles how far that could be taken with all sorts of half-baked nutter parties.

P.S. Still not sure - using your example - how the list could end up with 3 or 4 MPs, which presumably would have to be in the Mana party.Think of it as a marrage - with the new party being called "Internet-NoMana Party" - the Internet Party and the Mana Party are now sub-parties, much like Greens were originally a subparty of the 'Alliance'. They submit 1 list and if the new combined party gets under 5%, they are reliant on Hone winning his seat, which will bring in numbers 2 and 3 (and maybe 4?) from the list, who will be from the Internet sub-party. What will be interesting is whether Hone will get Minto (Bradford has called this the sham it is so has left the NoMana party?) onto the list at 4 or if that is another Internet party person.

So yes, while the right may have cups of tea, the Left go to these ridiculous lengths.

Sgt Pepper
27-05-2014, 08:55 AM
Iceman
your comments are fair. I looked back at my post, my comments of him arriving with "lots of $$ and supporting National" meant that he was a right of centre supporter politically not donating cash to National, as there there is no evidence for that . In so far as his application for residency goes however he was granted residency under the investor plus category by the Ministry. The application was, in October 2010, approved by the then Minister of Immigration Dr Coleman. Now at this point you could speculate that either Dr Coleman was not fully briefed on his past convictions by the Ministry or assuming he was, made, it could be asserted ,an error in judgement in granting him resident status. Time will tell how this all plays out.

craic
27-05-2014, 11:04 AM
Iceman
your comments are fair. I looked back at my post, my comments of him arriving with "lots of $$ and supporting National" meant that he was a right of centre supporter politically not donating cash to National, as there there is no evidence for that . In so far as his application for residency goes however he was granted residency under the investor plus category by the Ministry. The application was, in October 2010, approved by the then Minister of Immigration Dr Coleman. Now at this point you could speculate that either Dr Coleman was not fully briefed on his past convictions by the Ministry or assuming he was, made, it could be asserted ,an error in judgement in granting him resident status. Time will tell how this all plays out.
His convictions were allowed to be erased form the German system after a period of time. And for that reason he did not have convictions at the time. Many agencies in this country frame the question differently. "Have you ever appeared as a defendant in a Court of law" or similar is used by the armed services.

slimwin
27-05-2014, 12:41 PM
Getting young people voting is good. That alliance is not. Interesting that not one of the young guys at my work would vote for them. Word of mouth polls at work pretty much follow what the news polls say. Young people often vote on personalities. That's not good for labour.

craic
27-05-2014, 12:55 PM
IF they are going to vote for this bunch of rabble, leave them alone - let sleeping dogs lie - as they say. I would say that the great certainty of this mess is that a significant percentage of Int. party supporters will baulk at supporting Hone and back off and a similar number of Mana party supporters, including friends of Sue Bradford will have a similar reaction.

slimwin
27-05-2014, 01:18 PM
Spot on Craic.

fungus pudding
27-05-2014, 01:23 PM
IF they are going to vote for this bunch of rabble, leave them alone - let sleeping dogs lie - as they say. I would say that the great certainty of this mess is that a significant percentage of Int. party supporters will baulk at supporting Hone and back off and a similar number of Mana party supporters, including friends of Sue Bradford will have a similar reaction.

The more who vote for them - the merrier. Can't see National losing one single vote to them. But Labour, Greens and NZ first .....now that's another story.

troyvdh
27-05-2014, 02:18 PM
Not very often would I agree with Mrs Bradford..but this time yes...its all about the money for Hone.

I think you are right Fungus.

Have not some folk said that in ten years many will be shaking there heads in disbelief that anyone took this big kraut seriously .

Disclosure a very dear friend of mine was born in Germany.

BIRMANBOY
27-05-2014, 03:51 PM
You forgot to add in "some of my best friends are Maoris" and "we once had a negro to dinner as well". Overweight he is, big he is, German national he is. A "kraut" as in a derogatory reference to Germans is an unnecessary and mean spirited word beloved of those of little imagination and limited intellect....not that I mean that in a derogatory sense you understand.
Not very often would I agree with Mrs Bradford..but this time yes...its all about the money for Hone.

I think you are right Fungus.

Have not some folk said that in ten years many will be shaking there heads in disbelief that anyone took this big kraut seriously .

Disclosure a very dear friend of mine was born in Germany.

iceman
27-05-2014, 05:32 PM
Not very often would I agree with Mrs Bradford..but this time yes...its all about the money for Hone.

I think you are right Fungus.

Have not some folk said that in ten years many will be shaking there heads in disbelief that anyone took this big kraut seriously .

Disclosure a very dear friend of mine was born in Germany.

He could turn into a "sour" kraut if he loses the extradition hearing. No offense intended to anyone else !

elZorro
27-05-2014, 08:23 PM
Cuzzie, how is a 1.2bill trade surplus going to save National in this election, when they don't get the cash, and they are not getting in enough taxes and other income to pay for their outgoing expenses, including interest? Didn't you read the bit about how the trade surplus is probably going to disappear next season on the back of a lower dairy payout?

Belgarian, as you say, at least any votes going to Hone's megaparty won't go to National, and they won't be helping form a coalition on that side of the house.

craic
27-05-2014, 08:47 PM
You're reading the wrong numbers, El Zorro. It's the voters who count, not the frustrated cashiers and self appointed economists. If you want to put Hone, Dot Com ,Cunliffe in a box and try and sell them to the voters as a working package to run the country, then you will lose your deposit.

elZorro
27-05-2014, 09:18 PM
You're reading the wrong numbers, El Zorro. It's the voters who count, not the frustrated cashiers and self appointed economists. If you want to put Hone, Dot Com ,Cunliffe in a box and try and sell them to the voters as a working package to run the country, then you will lose your deposit.

I'd hope just Labour and the Greens will be enough. And I'm sure that advisors like Crosby Textor will be the brains behind the scary false message that you are helping push out into cyberspace Craic..

http://www.stuff.co.nz/510500/Nats-secret-advisers-accused-of-dirty-tricks-in-Aussie

slimwin
28-05-2014, 12:00 AM
That article is from 2008!

So that approach to win centrist voters to the left doesn't work then.

Have labour come up with anything new in the last six years that might turn people to them? Nope nothing new. Just hoping they have enough radical left wing party support to get in and over-rule the center.

elZorro
28-05-2014, 06:47 AM
That article is from 2008!

So that approach to win centrist voters to the left doesn't work then.

Have labour come up with anything new in the last six years that might turn people to them? Nope nothing new. Just hoping they have enough radical left wing party support to get in and over-rule the center.

Well spotted Slimwin, but you can see the theme here, Crosby Textor are very expensive, and their advice will have been written down. Find a weak spot in the opposition, some perception that is less than perfect, then perhaps make some stuff up that is hard to disprove (like 'Labour left NZ with a big mess in 2008') and then hammer the message relentlessly, so that eventually many voters think that it's accurate, and repeat it everywhere they go.

Actually I thought the Kiwibuild policy was a new one, and it's a great one, when you consider all the jobs and training it will provide, along with cheaper houses. At no cost to taxpayers.

Cuzzie
28-05-2014, 07:44 AM
Well spotted Slimwin, but you can see the theme here, Crosby Textor are very expensive, and their advice will have been written down. Find a weak spot in the opposition, some perception that is less than perfect, then perhaps make some stuff up that is hard to disprove (like 'Labour left NZ with a big mess in 2008') and then hammer the message relentlessly, so that eventually many voters think that it's accurate, and repeat it everywhere they go.

Problem is for Labours big mess is backed up by stats that don't lie. Here's the stat you love to hate again http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/key_graphs/current_account/ Just look at 05 to 08 on that chart in the negitive. It tells us what that Govt. has saved less what it invested on & have spent. Labour current account between 05 & 08 was awful to say the least. However when you see National take over the reign, there is a marked improvement.
What we hear from you EZ constantly is the very thing you complain about, you make up stuff.
Labour left NZ in a terrible state and Labour fanboys try to turn that into a National problem. They are the fixes of our economy EZ, not the breakers like Labour are. It was a National Party problem back in 08 alright & they bloodywell fixed it - just like they always do.

Cuzzie
28-05-2014, 07:57 AM
Cuzzie, how is a 1.2bill trade surplus going to save National in this election, when they don't get the cash, and they are not getting in enough taxes and other income to pay for their outgoing expenses, including interest? Didn't you read the bit about how the trade surplus is probably going to disappear next season on the back of a lower dairy payout?.

Clearly you think a 1.2bill deficit would also have no change on our economy if you think a 1.2bill surplus is not going to help. Left wing thinking right there.

Yes, I did read that more than likely there will be an adjustment towards a lower dairy payout, but what you are not adding is that this is from record highs. Think about that for a second or two.

EZ, thanks for proving me right, you could not nor would not acknowledge the positive in a trade surplus increase that's up to $1.2b as said by me in post #3882, but you most certainly could find a negative in there somewhere. You proved me right EZ, oh yeah I do feel your pain right now.

Question, why is Labour and its followers so negatively geared, why?

fungus pudding
28-05-2014, 07:58 AM
Cuzzie, how is a 1.2bill trade surplus going to save National in this election, when they don't get the cash, and they are not getting in enough taxes and other income to pay for their outgoing expenses, including interest? Didn't you read the bit about how the trade surplus is probably going to disappear next season on the back of a lower dairy payout?

Belgarian, as you say, at least any votes going to Hone's megaparty won't go to National, and they won't be helping form a coalition on that side of the house.

Surely you don't imagine this lot in coalition with Labour/Green? Winston first would go begging to National to prevent that.

elZorro
28-05-2014, 09:16 AM
Problem is for Labours big mess is backed up by stats that don't lie. Here's the stat you love to hate again http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/key_graphs/current_account/ Just look at 05 to 08 on that chart in the negitive. It tells us what that Govt. has saved less what it invested on & have spent. Labour current account between 05 & 08 was awful to say the least. However when you see National take over the reign, there is a marked improvement.
What we hear from you EZ constantly is the very thing you complain about, you make up stuff.
Labour left NZ in a terrible state and Labour fanboys try to turn that into a National problem. They are the fixes of our economy EZ, not the breakers like Labour are. It was a National Party problem back in 08 alright & they bloodywell fixed it - just like they always do.

Cuzzie, if you are going to post stuff about the current account and trade surpluses ad infinitum, please look up wikipedia or something, to find out what they mean, or represent. The current account deficit is all of us spending more than we earn, not the govt's domain at all. It'll be trending negative under National's watch too. We've already covered this numerous times. The 1.2bill trade surplus is temporary, and is the sum of all export sales minus imported goods costs. Again, not directly to do with govt. Both are indicators.

The Budget Surplus/Deficit is another thing entirely. That is competely up to the govt in power. Labour had budget surpluses every year they were in, over 9 years. National has posted deficits (bl..dy big ones!) every year since they got in. By juggling some figures, they are trying to post a small surplus next year, all the while still borrowing to pay off new interest costs. Sorry Cuzzie, your beloved National Party is a fraud.

Harvey Specter
28-05-2014, 09:22 AM
Think of it as a marrage - with the new party being called "Internet-NoMana Party" - the Internet Party and the Mana Party are now sub-parties, much like Greens were originally a subparty of the 'Alliance'. They submit 1 list and if the new combined party gets under 5%, they are reliant on Hone winning his seat, which will bring in numbers 2 and 3 (and maybe 4?) from the list, who will be from the Internet sub-party. What will be interesting is whether Hone will get Minto (Bradford has called this the sham it is so has left the NoMana party?) onto the list at 4 or if that is another Internet party person.While Hone has lost his Mana and integrity in this deal, he did manage to secure places 1,3,4 on the list so he has the potential to bring in more MP's. Looks like all DotCom wants is one person in the house to stir things up.

elZorro
28-05-2014, 10:03 AM
Surely you don't imagine this lot in coalition with Labour/Green? Winston first would go begging to National to prevent that.

I'd hope the Internet-Mana party stay in the wilderness, but achieve something else the country needs: pulling votes away from National, to make sure they only get two terms of making a mess of the economy. Labour and the Greens have too much to offer NZ, I don't want to wait another three years to see the work being started.

BlackPeter
28-05-2014, 10:06 AM
The Budget Surplus/Deficit is another thing entirely. That is competely up to the govt in power. Labour had budget surpluses every year they were in, over 9 years. National has posted deficits (bl..dy big ones!) every year since they got in. By juggling some figures, they are trying to post a small surplus next year, all the while still borrowing to pay off new interest costs. Sorry Cuzzie, your beloved National Party is a fraud.

Hi EZ, aren't you doing the same thing you blame National of? Blaming National for running budget deficits in the post GFC and Christchurch earth quake era and comparing that to Labour's surpluses they achieved during one of the largest boom phases, leading directly into the GFC (pre-GFC)?

It sort of feels like praising a mediocre farmer for harvesting some crop in autumn, while beating up a top framer for not doing the same thing during winter ....

Not sure, whom you want to convince with repeating the same (nonsensical) comparison again and again - did you too get advise from this Australian consulting firm?

If Labour / Green wants to do something about their poor performance in the polls, than they better look at themselves. Difficult to gain a majority if the strategy is to exclude the center. At this stage there are 3 parties who all seem to compete for the extreme left: Mana, Green and Labour, leaving the center field wide open for National. IMHO did Labour kill its chances to win the election when they gave David Shearer the boot and choose instead a leader nobody except the unions seems to want (not even Labour voters).

Harvey Specter
28-05-2014, 10:13 AM
I'd hope the Internet-Mana party stay in the wilderness, but achieve something else the country needs: pulling votes away from National, to make sure they only get two terms of making a mess of the economy. Labour and the Greens have too much to offer NZ, I don't want to wait another three years to see the work being started.Unlikely that they will pull votes of National but they may get some of the non-voters to actually turn up.

westerly
28-05-2014, 01:23 PM
Just finished reading the paper. The local Hospital Board is worried by the number of mental health patients it must accommodate because there is no where else for them to go. The NZIER warns of social harm if people could never afford to buy a house and Local Government NZ wants a discussion on housing affordability.
Never mind they must all be negatively geared Labour followers ( according to Cuzzie who probably works for Crosby- Textor)
The Current Account deficit is down, probably because we have all these rich Asians buying their way into the Country and donating to the National Party.
ACC is doing so well we can expect large drops in levies and of course it helped Bill wih his budget surplus. Forget the dramas when National took office and ACC was about to collapse. Forget the large numbers refused assistance because their problems were age related wear and tear etc.
All is well,the centre right National Party, heavily balanced to the right is doing OK
westerly

slimwin
28-05-2014, 02:14 PM
Interesting the mental health bit. My bro used to work high up in management for the mental health services in NZ. About five years ago he was saying they are just seeing a dramatic rise in patients in their 50's who were chronic weed smokers in their teens and twenties. This was before the advent of hydroponic super weeds and chemical versions. Aparrenlyt it hits one in three and happens later as the brain deteriates. It'll be interesting to see how our country is in 30yrs if the greens get it legalized.

slimwin
28-05-2014, 02:17 PM
Maybe some national voters may have voted for the big guy to get free internet. I just can't see them voting for the alliance. There'll be a few of course. The same way there'll be a few that vote for the conservatives. And a few that still think the world is 6000 years old...

craic
28-05-2014, 03:12 PM
Can't be THAT old or Labour would have worked out an effective strategy for governing the country by now.

Cuzzie
28-05-2014, 06:52 PM
Cuzzie, if you are going to post stuff about the current account and trade surpluses ad infinitum, please look up wikipedia or something, to find out what they mean, or represent. The current account deficit is all of us spending more than we earn, not the govt's domain at all. It'll be trending negative under National's watch too. We've already covered this numerous times. The 1.2bill trade surplus is temporary, and is the sum of all export sales minus imported goods costs. Again, not directly to do with govt. Both are indicators.

The Budget Surplus/Deficit is another thing entirely. That is competely up to the govt in power. Labour had budget surpluses every year they were in, over 9 years. National has posted deficits (bl..dy big ones!) every year since they got in. By juggling some figures, they are trying to post a small surplus next year, all the while still borrowing to pay off new interest costs. Sorry Cuzzie, your beloved National Party is a fraud.

EZ, get current account deficit out of your mind, it is the Current Account Balance and forget about wikipedia as anybody can edit it and stick to what the Reserve Bank states which is: The Balance of Payments statements set out a country’s transactions with the rest of the world. The current account balance is the sum of the balances of trade in goods and services, current transfers, and investment income. More simply, the current account measures what a country saves minus what it spends or invests. The graph shows that since 1990, New Zealand has been a net borrower. Thus, the current account deficit has reflected the amounts of other countries’ savings that New Zealand has had to borrow, in order to finance spending. The last time that New Zealand was a net saver — that is, had a current account surplus — was 1973.
So the country as a whole EZ was doing very bad while Labour was in power between the years of 2005 and 2008. Meanwhile the country as a whole was doing far better, in fact many times better under National from 2008 to now - what part of that can't you compute EZ because it is clear to me. Like I said, I feel your pain and pain is what we see every time you post.

As for your next rant, please supply as with hard cold facts that Labour has "had a budget surplus every year they were in, over 9 years & National has posted deficits every year since they got in". Links that are not Labour propaganda would be good.

And by the way it is completely not competely, you're welcome.

What does a Funnyliffe, a Pooh, a Hone now with Money, an Angry Green Man, a Fat Crim and a Harré got in common? Not a lot and will be even less fun finding out.

elZorro
28-05-2014, 08:56 PM
EZ, get current account deficit out of your mind, it is the Current Account Balance and forget about wikipedia as anybody can edit it and stick to what the Reserve Bank states which is: The Balance of Payments statements set out a country’s transactions with the rest of the world. The current account balance is the sum of the balances of trade in goods and services, current transfers, and investment income. More simply, the current account measures what a country saves minus what it spends or invests. The graph shows that since 1990, New Zealand has been a net borrower. Thus, the current account deficit has reflected the amounts of other countries’ savings that New Zealand has had to borrow, in order to finance spending. The last time that New Zealand was a net saver — that is, had a current account surplus — was 1973.
So the country as a whole EZ was doing very bad while Labour was in power between the years of 2005 and 2008. Meanwhile the country as a whole was doing far better, in fact many times better under National from 2008 to now - what part of that can't you compute EZ because it is clear to me. Like I said, I feel your pain and pain is what we see every time you post.

As for your next rant, please supply as with hard cold facts that Labour has "had a budget surplus every year they were in, over 9 years & National has posted deficits every year since they got in". Links that are not Labour propaganda would be good.

And by the way it is completely not competely, you're welcome.

What does a Funnyliffe, a Pooh, a Hone now with Money, an Angry Green Man, a Fat Crim and a Harré got in common? Not a lot and will be even less fun finding out.

I just posted this a few days ago, you must have missed it Cuzzie. Regarding Wikipedia, it is self-correcting, much like the way we on the left have to point out the errors or misleading statements you make.

Wikipedia on its own accuracy:


Dan Gillmor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Gillmor), a Silicon Valley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_Valley) commentator and author commented in October 2004 that, "I don't think anyone is saying Wikipedia is an absolute replacement for a traditional encyclopedia. But in the topics I know something about, I've found Wikipedia to be as accurate as any other source I've found."[49] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia#cite_note-Who-49)
I'd go along with that.

Sorry about the typo, you (curiously) didn't have any in your post.

iceman
28-05-2014, 09:40 PM
National voters are no smarter than any other voters ... Of course they'll get some from National! Doh!

I am relieved after seeing the detail that has come out about the marriage without any mana between the Mana Party and the Internet Party (Alliance) . It is now obvious that Dotcom’s promised $1M will ensure a 3rd term for a National lead Government.
While Belgarion may be right that some National party voters may consider voting the IP, that wish of his has evaporated with the announcements detailing the deal. There is nothing in it for the IP (whoever they are) but Hone will benefit if things turn out as he hopes. The wildest optimistic result would be that they got 3% and 4 MPs, which would be Hone, Annette Sykes, John Minto and Laila Harré. I don’t know any National voters/supporters that would willingly vote for that bunch.
It is as left wing as left wing can be. An apt name would be the Dotcommunist Party as Barry Soper points out.
But this causes major problems for the Labour/Greens. Most of the votes for the Alliance is likely to come from the Greens and is highly unlikely to increase the Left blocks vote more than at the margins. Instead it will further fragment it and make Cunliffe’s job even more impossible. It is also highly likely to alleviate and scare more voters. This hotchpotch of parties offering themselves up to change the Government has gone even further over to the Left than an alternative Labour lead Government was a couple of days ago, further away from most voters.
I predict more Labour leaning voters will now head towards National, not the other way around.
Equally important is the fact that this will scare the living daylights out of Winston and he will most certainly not be supporting a Labour lead Government where the Greens and the Alliance’s bunch will have equal or more influence than himself. That leaves him with only National to finish of his political career in a constructive Government, singing his swan song on the NZ political stage.

Now just wait for National to drop a “hint” to their Maori supporters in Te Tai Tokerau to sign up to the Maori roll and vote for Labour’s Kelvin Davies. R.I.P. Mana and Internet parties.

Dotcom may not realise it but it appears that his misguided foray into NZ politics and his spending of $1M has given John Key an easier ride into 3rd term as PM. Dotcom will have plenty of time to reflect of the folly of his ways, from whatever mansion he will be residing in come early 2015 !

craic
28-05-2014, 10:27 PM
Another missed opportunity by Labour. Laila Harre would have been a great catch for them and as a replacement for David Cunliffe, could have lifted the part by a point or two. The only stray left around the place the man with the hole in his head, Minto and he wouldn't be much good to them at this late stage.

elZorro
29-05-2014, 06:39 AM
Sounds like you're trying some spin of your own, Iceman. Here's a right-wing article with notably no balanced comment from the other side. It's pure electioneering.

http://www.interest.co.nz/personal-finance/70148/finance-minister-says-governments-tax-reforms-have-led-significant-income-red

All wage/salary earners pay income tax, but that's a fairly average sized part of total govt revenue, GST being a component that affects everyone, including those without jobs. That was not mentioned in the article, of course not. Then there are the levies on power, fuel, ciggies, alcohol, gaming etc. If Bill English is correct about the improved income redistribution, why have the poor become poorer, and the rich list has gone up in value by 50% in just a few years? Sit this article beside the actual GINI index rework coming up in July, and we'll see who is spinning a line.

Major von Tempsky
29-05-2014, 08:07 AM
Yawn.
A hackneyed old chestnut.

Easiest way to disprove that is observe Australia.

Australia has been growing much faster and much richer than NZ for yonks. i.e. they have been concentrating on the size of the cake rather than a static redistribution of the cake which stops the cake from growing.

Now look at the size of Australian welfare benefits per recipient compared to NZ.
QED - quod erat demonstrandum.

elZorro
29-05-2014, 08:23 AM
Yawn.
A hackneyed old chestnut.

Easiest way to disprove that is observe Australia.

Australia has been growing much faster and much richer than NZ for yonks. i.e. they have been concentrating on the size of the cake rather than a static redistribution of the cake which stops the cake from growing.

Now look at the size of Australian welfare benefits per recipient compared to NZ.
QED - quod erat demonstrandum.

MVT: Australia has been able to take some easy money out by mining resources. Sort of like an oil well, it runs out eventually. But as you say, they have grown the cake.

That is exactly what Labour did in their last three terms. The number of SMEs reached a peak, manufacturing was recovering, employment at a good high, GDP per capita strongly trended upwards, the tax take trended upwards to a new high, they posted strong budget surpluses and paid off historic debt. Welfare payments were of course reducing, because more were in work.

Your argument appears to be that National is growing the cake. On which of those metrics that I've mentioned, did they do that after 2008? All of those metrics trended down after 2008, and are only now recovering to 2008 levels - some have not made it back. Or perhaps more accurately, what you mean is that after helping the GFC along and dropping NZ in a hole, National is only just now starting to get the economy moving?

I would argue that most of this response has been due to very high export dairy prices in the last two years or so, and logging prices and other commodities being stronger than they were. National has achieved nothing notable, but I'm patiently waiting for data to disprove that, from someone on the blinkered right.

Cuzzie
29-05-2014, 10:22 AM
I just posted this a few days ago, you must have missed it Cuzzie. Regarding Wikipedia, it is self-correcting, much like the way we on the left have to point out the errors or misleading statements you make.

Wikipedia on its own accuracy:

I'd go along with that.

Sorry about the typo, you (curiously) didn't have any in your post.

EZ, thanks for posting your chart for budget surplus and deficits. Now I must ask you this question, do you even know what these stats mean? By definition, a budget surplus is excessive taxation for what the Government is doing. Labour had no disasters to cope with during their tenor, National did, yet Labour mostly spent money on welfare while robbing the workers. I must admit I was shocked to see just how little Cullin paid back debt I honestly thought Labour must of been in a Budget deficit at least once in an effort to pay back debt they were growing.

Between 2000 and 2007, the New Zealand economy expanded by an average of 3.5% each year as private consumption and residential investment grew strongly. Annual inflation averaged 2.6%, comfortably within the Reserve Bank's 1% to 3% target range, while the current account deficit averaged 5.8% of GDP over this period. The world economy was in good shape and there were no Canterbury earthquakes or mining disasters. Put Clark & Co in power from 08 to now and we would be done for, these were Global Economic good times.

From 2008 on the New Zealand economy entered recession in early 2008, before the effects of the global financial crisis set in later in the year. A drought over the 2007/08 summer led to lower production of dairy products in the first half of 2008. Domestic activity slowed sharply over 2008 as high fuel and food prices dampened domestic consumption while high interest rates and falling house prices drove a rapid decline in residential investment.
The outlook for the New Zealand economy deteriorated sharply following the intensification of the global financial crisis in September 08. Similar to experiences across advanced economies, business and consumer confidence plummeted as uncertainty dominated the global financial and economic environment. In addition, local banks access to funding in overseas markets was temporarily curtailed at the height of the crisis. Economic activity contracted 0.9% in the December quarter 08, with production GDP affected by a reduction in manufacturing, construction and wholesale and retail trade. On the expenditure side, investment fell sharply while the extent of uncertainty in the global economy was evident in large declines for both services and goods exports. Overseas importers ran down stocks in the face of the uncertainty, while inbound tourism continued to weaken as fears around job security and declining incomes weighed on decisions to travel. These were Global Economic Bad times.

Given the above as we go into the election campaign, the focus should be on getting the most bang for our buck and reducing the tax burden, not dreaming up new ways to increase spending to reduce the surplus.

Our National Govt. has battled through the global financial crisis, disasters and an economic downturn the last few years and come out on top. EZ, here is the thing, there was no way National was ever going to have a budget surplus given what they had to play with & if they did that, this would of been achieved though lack of spending where it was most needed. That my friend would have the loonie left with plenty of ammo & a Labour Govt for the last three years. National did what they had to & did it well.
Now the country as a whole can reap the rewards. I know if the looney left wing circus wins the next election, they will most certainly appreciate all the positive work National has done, unlike the mess Labour left us in 08.

So in short a "Budget Surplus Should Pay Back Debt", not hold onto it like Cullin did. That is the message upheld from the New Zealand Taxpayers Union too and that is exactly what John Key is doing.

BTW EZ, you have been on my case plenty of times about my poor spelling at times & fair enough - I'm not a good speller. I thought you were, but that was just pretence too.

westerly
29-05-2014, 10:45 AM
Between 2000 and 2007, the New Zealand economy expanded by an average of 3.5% each year as private consumption and residential investment grew strongly. Annual inflation averaged 2.6%, comfortably within the Reserve Bank's 1% to 3% target range, while the current account deficit averaged 5.8% of GDP over this period. The world economy was in good shape and there were no Canterbury earthquakes or mining disasters. Put Clark & Co in power from 08 to now and we would be done for, these were Global Economic good times.

Perhaps Labours good management enabled National to survive all the diasters you mention. Interestingly the last current account surplus was under a Labour Government
But Labour usually makes the hard decisions while the Conservatives just carry on

westerly

craic
29-05-2014, 11:42 AM
[FONT=arial]
But Labour usually makes the hard decisions while the Conservatives just carry on

westerly
Well it looks like Labour can relax for an election or two, repaint all their banners and possibly go into battle, refreshed, with a new leader. But who will it be Son of DotCom? Weeny Harawira or possibly even a South Islander?

elZorro
29-05-2014, 05:29 PM
You are a whopper, Cuzzie - faced with real facts you now say Labour must have been overtaxing us. No, they levied fair taxes and grew the pie. Thousands of new SMEs formed. What's more important is what they did with the money. In many cases they did the most prudent thing they could, they repaid old debts, most of which had been around since the Muldoon years. Your National mates implied this was a bad idea, yet it saved them from a more embarrassing position over the last few years, didn't it.


Cuzzie: Our National Govt. has battled through the global financial crisis, disasters and an economic downturn the last few years and come out on top.

Where have they been battling ( I think they plodded), and in what way are they "on top" ? This is Crosby Textor speak (https://blog.labour.org.nz/tag/crosby-textor/)- I have it on good authority they are still involved behind the scenes for National. This means that any oft-repeated message has come from them, it's a result of a survey session, the slightest doubts in Labour being able to govern are amplified with the help of hefty fibs, lies and obfuscations, and belted out at every occasion in the house, on radio and on TV, and in the press. That doesn't mean that any of it is true. Because Labour did a great job of running the country over three terms.

But National, for example, are bringing us a bright future. They've been doing this since 2008 apparently. We'll have more jobs, better pay for everyone, and a budget surplus. Just a small one, in case taxpayers think they are being 'done'? Don't forget we also need to pay the interest on all those new govt loans.

Regarding your spelling, that's not bad at all, most times, it's just curious it's perfect sometimes, and loose on other posts. How many people are posting using the Cuzzie moniker?

westerly
29-05-2014, 05:37 PM
Yawn.
A hackneyed old chestnut.

Easiest way to disprove that is observe Australia.

Australia has been growing much faster and much richer than NZ for yonks. i.e. they have been concentrating on the size of the cake rather than a static redistribution of the cake which stops the cake from growing.

Now look at the size of Australian welfare benefits per recipient compared to NZ.
QED - quod erat demonstrandum.

Australian tax rates $80000 to $180000 = 0.37c
Above $180000 = 0.44c
No wonder there welfare benefits are better. If you are a non resident you are also taxed at higher rate. The recently elected Govt has also slashed expenditure in a similar way to JK ' s Party.

westerly

elZorro
29-05-2014, 08:45 PM
Westerly, here's another article on inequality that gives some more detail. The GINI index never looks at capital gains, and NZ is one of the few places where slow and steady capital gains are still untaxed (nod to FP). The very wealthy tend not to fill out surveys, either.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11229270

Cuzzie
29-05-2014, 08:56 PM
You are a whopper, Cuzzie - faced with real facts you now say Labour must have been overtaxing us. No, they levied fair taxes and grew the pie. Thousands of new SMEs formed. What's more important is what they did with the money. In many cases they did the most prudent thing they could, they repaid old debts, most of which had been around since the Muldoon years. Your National mates implied this was a bad idea, yet it saved them from a more embarrassing position over the last few years, didn't it.



Where have they been battling ( I think they plodded), and in what way are they "on top" ? This is Crosby Textor speak (https://blog.labour.org.nz/tag/crosby-textor/)- I have it on good authority they are still involved behind the scenes for National. This means that any oft-repeated message has come from them, it's a result of a survey session, the slightest doubts in Labour being able to govern are amplified with the help of hefty fibs, lies and obfuscations, and belted out at every occasion in the house, on radio and on TV, and in the press. That doesn't mean that any of it is true. Because Labour did a great job of running the country over three terms.

But National, for example, are bringing us a bright future. They've been doing this since 2008 apparently. We'll have more jobs, better pay for everyone, and a budget surplus. Just a small one, in case taxpayers think they are being 'done'? Don't forget we also need to pay the interest on all those new govt loans.

Regarding your spelling, that's not bad at all, most times, it's just curious it's perfect sometimes, and loose on other posts. How many people are posting using the Cuzzie moniker?
Now you're accusing me of being more than one person. EZ, you really are the most delusional one eyed lefty one could ever come across. I will say it again, by definition a budget surplus is excessive taxation for what the Government is doing. I will add that a surplus is grown by not putting the money gained back into the community or not paying off their debt. Kind of like what Lefty Brown is doing to parts of Auckland right now. National has grown with the country by putting back into it. What is your take on a budget surplus? Furthermore to that, nobody can deny Labour ran the country in better Global economic times than National - nobody & would love to see you try. Add the disasters National had to cope with and they still came out smelling of roses. When Labour lost by a massive landslide back in 2008 they were smelling more like what you put around roses - horse dung.
As for fibs and lies that's Clarks best tool, fabrication of the truth. A signed painting that was not her work and a speeding Crown limo come to mind.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, Employment is up & it is. Fact.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, we will have a budget surplus even after paying off more debt from the last Labour Govt. gone through a major Global financial crisis & we can't forget the Christchurch earthquakes. Fact, I feel like you're starting to see the light through all that fog.
A good Govt. can do that EZ, thank goodness we didn't have the likes of Cullin gambling and losing taxpayer money during the last two terms.
Right now I'm feeling a bit like the guy you are about to lose your bet with EZ - pretty smug. I don't have to get into bed with the clowns Labour has to.
We don't hear the loonie left on here talking up Pooh, Hare, Fatman, Honi with the Fatmans money , Funny... what's his name(you know, the tall dude that thinks he's a leader) plus the Angry Little Green Man much do we. EZ, belg, westerly, why don't you all tell us how happy and excited you all are about this multiplicity of freaks. A collection of the odd and unusual. If they did get in what would the odds of them even surviving half a term?

elZorro
29-05-2014, 09:39 PM
Now you're accusing me of being more than one person. EZ, you really are the most delusional one eyed lefty one could ever come across. I will say it again, by definition a budget surplus is excessive taxation for what the Government is doing. I will add that a surplus is grown by not putting the money gained back into the community or not paying off their debt. Kind of like what Lefty Brown is doing to parts of Auckland right now. National has grown with the country by putting back into it. What is your take on a budget surplus? Furthermore to that, nobody can deny Labour ran the country in better Global economic times than National - nobody & would love to see you try. Add the disasters National had to cope with and they still came out smelling of roses. When Labour lost by a massive landslide back in 2008 they were smelling more like what you put around roses - horse dung.
As for fibs and lies that's Clarks best tool, fabrication of the truth. A signed painting that was not her work and a speeding Crown limo come to mind.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, Employment is up & it is. Fact.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, we will have a budget surplus even after paying off more debt from the last Labour Govt. gone through a major Global financial crisis & we can't forget the Christchurch earthquakes. Fact, I feel like you're starting to see the light through all that fog.
A good Govt. can do that EZ, thank goodness we didn't have the likes of Cullin gambling and losing taxpayer money during the last two terms.
Right now I'm feeling a bit like the guy you are about to lose your bet with EZ - pretty smug. I don't have to get into bed with the clowns Labour has to.
We don't hear the loonie left on here talking up Pooh, Hare, Fatman, Honi with the Fatmans money , Funny... what's his name(you know, the tall dude that thinks he's a leader) plus the Angry Little Green Man much do we. EZ, belg, westerly, why don't you all tell us how happy and excited you all are about this multiplicity of freaks. A collection of the odd and unusual. If they did get in what would the odds of them even surviving half a term?

Cuzzie, you implied that at the time labour left office, the adult minimum wage was
"$9.60. Fact" No it wasn't, here are the actual figures.

http://www.dol.govt.nz/er/pay/minimumwage/previousminimum.asp

After all this time, it's only slightly above where it was sitting in 2008, and it's well below a liveable wage for someone with a family on one income.


Cuzzie -National has grown with the country by putting back into it.


What does that mean? It sure sounds good. You should help to write the incredulous bylines that National is using. They seem to have dropped "Brighter Future" and have stuff about families, and a new website look, with not too much detail in behind it. As shallow as their policies.

Cuzzie, go back in the Hansard and you'll see that in 2006-2008, National were spewing forth about how Labour should return some taxes to NZers. Of course it wouldn't have been much per person, but the main aim was for a lower tax on the higher earners, and National duly put that in place above all else, even while the tax take was rapidly dropping after the GFC. Labour had achieved solid budget surpluses (not a big percentage of the total income to govt) and repaid old loans with some of it, to greatly reduce the interest burden on future budgets. National has been lucky that interest rates plummeted worldwide, so at the moment, the overhang of interest that will be due from their new loans is not that noticeable. But we'll all have to pick up the tab from their crappy handling of the economy (part funded by those loans) sooner or later, and judging from the rich list performances over the last few years, the wealthy have not had any issues with National. It's the rest of us who have had to tighten our belts.

slimwin
29-05-2014, 10:50 PM
So your complaining that they borrowed money for the economy and to rebuild chch when interest rates were low? That sounds like good business to me.

elZorro
30-05-2014, 06:04 AM
So you're complaining that they borrowed money for the economy and to rebuild chch when interest rates were low? That sounds like good business to me.

It makes perfect sense up to a point, to borrow in that situation. But even taking the Christchurch effect out, National still borrowed huge amounts, and at a quicker rate, than Treasury had predicted for the GFC in 2008. They have not reduced the annual costs affecting the govt budget with all their slashing about the place, partly because more were put on the dole through National's actions, and others in the private sector as a follow-on effect. If you reduce the size of govt, some retailers and businesses in the private sector will be affected. That reduced the tax take further, so they presided over an overall drop in the productive base of our economy. That's shown clearly by the drop and stall in GDP per capita. It had been strongly trending upwards before 2008. Net population is trending upwards, so the economy needs to expand each year on average, just to keep pace.

National can run all the spin they like, this data is still there in the record, anyone can see they haven't done the job too well at all.

elZorro
30-05-2014, 06:43 AM
I'm having a good dig around looking for National Party links to Crosby Textor. Here is a link to a whole chapter in "The Hollow Men".

http://www.nickyhager.info/the-manipulators-chapter-10-of-the-hollow-men/

Fascinating then, it's even more amazing now, that some of the latest blogs about the place still repeat these old messages as though they are fact. They were fabricated and put out there by Crosby Textor through the National Party, now they have a life of their own.

Brash outright lied about Crosby Textor when first asked in 2005, he'd already met both principals in 2004, and they were spending money with them. The latest National crop would be a lot more circumspect about mentioning using Crosby Textor, but it sure looks like they are using the same Crosby Textor techniques that have worked for them in the past.


A lot of the words in this message plan (reprinted in full in the notes) come straight from the first Crosby/Textor report. It repeated the leveraging opportunities:
* While the economy is going well currently, it has nothing to do with the Labour Government. They have been lucky.
* Labour has been distracted by its social reform agenda, and is doing nothing to ensure a strong economy going forward.
* We have lost the New Zealand Values of Initiative and Rewards for working hard and ‘Getting Ahead’.
* There is no incentive for individuals to better themselves, be it through the tax system, the education system or the welfare system; and
* If we don’t put in place plans for a stronger economy now, we will suffer badly in the next economic downturn.29
Textor returned for more meetings with National on 23–24 February 2005. These included ‘Peter Keenan and Textor meeting with Leader [Don Brash] on styles of lines to use and language re framing/positioning’.30 This is another important part of the Crosby/Textor technique. Textor explained that by ‘framing’ he meant ‘setting a notion not about the issues people think about but giving them a WAY to think about the issues in question, that is giving them a model or a structure or equation’.31


Belgarion: is middle NZ that susceptible to this sort of brainwashing? I think I already know the answer.

iceman
30-05-2014, 07:26 AM
[QUOTE=elZorro;483578]I'm having a good dig around looking for National Party links to Crosby Textor. Here is a link to a whole chapter in "The Hollow Men". "

My golly you must be bored EZ.
Why the fetish with this Australian outfit ?

elZorro
30-05-2014, 09:18 AM
[QUOTE=elZorro;483578]I'm having a good dig around looking for National Party links to Crosby Textor. Here is a link to a whole chapter in "The Hollow Men". "

My golly you must be bored EZ.
Why the fetish with this Australian outfit ?

Because I think Labour are being too polite in this election process. I'm trying to explain what they are up against. Crosby Textor don't come cheap, and since 2004 they appear to have been the main force behind an erroneous perception of the wonderful gods who are National, and the poor cousins (Labour). In fact, Labour has done the hard yards in an attempt to set the NZ economy up for greater things. Quite a bit of that work might have been dismantled by National after 2008, but it wouldn't take long for Labour to get things going again.

Real export income, not a process of looking after landholders and big business in the hope that something will happen. They'll sell us out, those favoured few certainly don't want to be big employers if they can help it. Witness the decay in the general manufacturing sector.

iceman
30-05-2014, 09:46 AM
[QUOTE=iceman;483580]

Because I think Labour are being too polite in this election process. I'm trying to explain what they are up against. Crosby Textor don't come cheap, and since 2004 they appear to have been the main force behind an erroneous perception of the wonderful gods who are National, and the poor cousins (Labour). In fact, Labour has done the hard yards in an attempt to set the NZ economy up for greater things. Quite a bit of that work might have been dismantled by National after 2008, but it wouldn't take long for Labour to get things going again.

Real export income, not a process of looking after landholders and big business in the hope that something will happen. They'll sell us out, those favoured few certainly don't want to be big employers if they can help it. Witness the decay in the general manufacturing sector.

It is much simpler than that. Labour with a Leader & leadership team that completely fails to connect with voters is up against a highly popular PM & Government that in reality is so centrist that is taken over both center right and center left. In doing so it has pushed Labour out on the left flank where the votes are few and far between !
Just relax and accept Labour is broken and needs another couple of terms in Opposition to rebuild ;)

Cuzzie
30-05-2014, 09:56 AM
Cuzzie, you implied that at the time labour left office, the adult minimum wage was No it wasn't, here are the actual figures.

http://www.dol.govt.nz/er/pay/minimumwage/previousminimum.asp

After all this time, it's only slightly above where it was sitting in 2008, and it's well below a liveable wage for someone with a family on one income.



What does that mean? It sure sounds good. You should help to write the incredulous bylines that National is using. They seem to have dropped "Brighter Future" and have stuff about families, and a new website look, with not too much detail in behind it. As shallow as their policies.

Cuzzie, go back in the Hansard and you'll see that in 2006-2008, National were spewing forth about how Labour should return some taxes to NZers. Of course it wouldn't have been much per person, but the main aim was for a lower tax on the higher earners, and National duly put that in place above all else, even while the tax take was rapidly dropping after the GFC. Labour had achieved solid budget surpluses (not a big percentage of the total income to govt) and repaid old loans with some of it, to greatly reduce the interest burden on future budgets. National has been lucky that interest rates plummeted worldwide, so at the moment, the overhang of interest that will be due from their new loans is not that noticeable. But we'll all have to pick up the tab from their crappy handling of the economy (part funded by those loans) sooner or later, and judging from the rich list performances over the last few years, the wealthy have not had any issues with National. It's the rest of us who have had to tighten our belts.

EZ, it might pay to read the written word if you are going to quote from that statement. I said and copy & paste, "You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact." Post #3926



You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact.


That statement is 100% true. You have taken your own spin on my written words to try to say I'm wrong. Typical loonie left ignorance.
Read what I say sloooowly EZ - Again, "You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact." The $9.60 is the minimum wage one could earn. Since 2008 and under National that has been raised 20%, that's not bad. A hard working new entrant working 60 hours per week would be earning $29952.00 back in 08 under the repression and on the minimum wage would now be earning $35568.00 or about $108.00 a week better off. So much for Labour looking after the youth.

My calculations have been based on the minimum wage back in 2008 which was $9.60 under Labour and that was after a big increase by them of $0.60 the year before. I've added the minimum wage from 2014 into the equation which is $11.40. EZ made the mistake of thinking the adult is less than new entrants into the workforce. Don't know how he did that because I said the minimum wage only and nowhere did that include adults min. wage.

Here's the calculations for a new entrant into the workforce on the minimum wage working 60 hours a week for 2008 & 2014 before tax.

2008 - 60 hours X $9.60 = $576.00 or $29952.00 a year.
2014 - 60 hours X $11.40 = $684.00 or $35568.00 a year.
Difference is $108 a week or $5616 a year better off in 2014 under National.




So there you go EZ, the youth are $108.00 a week better off now than the scungy halfpennies Labour used to offer. I guess that confirms what I always thought, under National if you are young and are prepared to work, you will be rewarded. Under Labour you will be rewarded for sitting on your a$$ and the workers will have to support you all the way.

craic
30-05-2014, 10:04 AM
You do indeed. The answer is: Of course they are! Alas not only "middle NZ" but everyone.

Been known about since 2008 ... http://www.stuff.co.nz/510500/Nats-secret-advisers-accused-of-dirty-tricks-in-Aussie

The current National philosophy is about "winning at any cost". Only by doing so can they ensure the privileged few - who are terrified about the future and terrified by democracy - keep making themselves richer and richer so when Armageddon comes - they're safe above the strife. These few are fairly pathetic and (almost) well hidden. Key is one of them - hence the reason he has a bolt hole in Hawaii.

The National party are putting forward one party with a possible pair of semi-independents. The left are trying build a pyramid of losers of every persuasion from Maori radicals, gofers of the super rich, and a collection of Green Semi-green and colour blind recycled exes and you say that National are the "win at any cost" side? You wouldnt like to put a few shekels on the result? I have another grand to bet on a National Led gov. after the votes are counted if you are game.

Cuzzie
30-05-2014, 10:38 AM
BTW an adult earning the min. back in 2008 & working 60 hours a week would have earned $720.00 before tax. Fast forward to now under the same circumstances, the min. per week would be $855.00 which is $135.00 each and every week better off. That's a $7020.00 a year increase, way better than what Labour did.

bottlerboy
30-05-2014, 11:32 AM
Cuzzie, why are you using a 60 hour week?

Doesn't really change the picture much.
This chart is copied from David Farrar's Kiwiblog.
It shows that taking into account tax cuts and cost of living increases, someone on minimum wage has had an increase in their real disposable income of 11% under the last six years of national

5879

elZorro
30-05-2014, 11:33 AM
[QUOTE=elZorro;483619]

It is much simpler than that. Labour with a Leader & leadership team that completely fails to connect with voters is up against a highly popular PM & Government that in reality is so centrist that is taken over both center right and center left. In doing so it has pushed Labour out on the left flank where the votes are few and far between !
Just relax and accept Labour is broken and needs another couple of terms in Opposition to rebuild ;)

Iceman, I'm worried about you, comrade. I wouldn't mind being told that it's a simple situation, if my data was wrong. I don't think it is, because the really savvy ones on this thread never take me to task about the figures. So you can all see the bad data from National's policies, but that doesn't seem to matter, as we're "heading in the right direction now".

Look past the spin, and if you guys were really concerned about NZ's future, instead of being far more interested in your own slice of the pie, you would have to vote Labour. We can't all be millionaires. Some of us have to get jobs and make stuff, provide backup services for other NZers. We have to be able to apply the education we spend a lot of money on, increasingly a student cost. If we can't do that in a better way, we may as well pack our bags and try somewhere else.

elZorro
30-05-2014, 11:56 AM
Doesn't really change the picture much.
This chart is copied from David Farrar's Kiwiblog.
It shows that taking into account tax cuts and cost of living increases, someone on minimum wage has had an increase in their real disposable income of 11% under the last six years of national

5879

David Farrar- he doesn't vote Labour does he?

How is it that the CPI index change for the 2010-2011 area doesn't seem to factor in a change in GST from 12.5% to 15%. I'd have thought that would have had a big impact. I realise there were changing tax rates to balance some of that. CPI seems to include rents. Of course they are racing upwards at the moment. Takehome pay isn't. Despite fuel being more expensive than it was, the budgeted household costs for that have decreased. Why? People are using their cars less, because that's a fact of life. They can't afford to run them like they used to.


The figure shows that $23.55 of every $100 spent by households on goods and services covered by the CPI is spent on housing and household utilities, compared with $22.75 in 2008. This reflects increased spending on rent. Food accounts for $18.79 of every $100 spent, compared with $17.83 in 2008. This increase reflects a 14.2 percent rise in food prices from the June 2008 quarter to the June 2011 quarter. Consumers price index review: 2011 8
Other groups declined in relative importance, including transport (down from $16.18 to $15.12 of every $100 spent), with lower spending on cars contributing to the fall. Petrol declined from $5.47 to $5.27 of every $100 spent.

fungus pudding
30-05-2014, 12:02 PM
[QUOTE=iceman;483629]

Iceman, I'm worried about you, comrade. I wouldn't mind being told that it's a simple situation, if my data was wrong. I don't think it is, because the really savvy ones on this thread never take me to task about the figures. So you can all see the bad data from National's policies, but that doesn't seem to matter, as we're "heading in the right direction now".

Look past the spin, and if you guys were really concerned about NZ's future, instead of being far more interested in your own slice of the pie, you would have to vote Labour.

I have no concerns about my own future, having taken it upon myself to look after my own financial situation. However I am concerned about NZ's future. Therefore I will vote in the most effective way to keep Labour/Greens and Internet-Mana away from the treasury benches.

Harvey Specter
30-05-2014, 12:05 PM
How is it that the CPI index change for the 2010-2011 area doesn't seem to factor in a change in GST from 12.5% to 15%. I'd have thought that would have had a big impact. I realise there were changing tax rates to balance some of that. CPI seems to include rents.He has used the official measure of inflation rather than leaving them unadjusted like most would you - you cant really fault him.

If you have a better measure of inflation, let us know.

Cuzzie
30-05-2014, 12:20 PM
Cuzzie, why are you using a 60 hour week?Because I used to work a 70 hour week over 5 days to get ahead, it worked.14 hours a day working for myself. Eight years of 14 hour days all without one holiday. My 21 year old son works 60 hours over a six day period now. When you're young and learning you tend to do it the hard way, not the smart way. I just carried on the same formula for the adult wage, but will concede that we tend to do it the smarter way by then and hours decrease.

slimwin
30-05-2014, 12:50 PM
Labour need to get meaner you say EZ?Their shout in the face, incessant picking at small points and small minded politics is what has shifted me from them. If the figures really worked in their favour , they would use them.
And to not think every party uses spin is idiotic.
Yep, your sane and the rest of the world is crazy huh?

westerly
30-05-2014, 01:06 PM
ou are about to lose your bet with EZ - pretty smug. I don't have to get into bed with the clowns Labour has to.
We don't hear the loonie left on here talking up Pooh, Hare, Fatman, Honi with the Fatmans money , Funny... what's his name(you know, the tall dude that thinks he's a leader) plus the Angry Little Green Man much do we. EZ, belg, westerly, why don't you all tell us how happy and excited you all are about this multiplicity of freaks. A collection of the odd and unusual. If they did get in what would the odds of them even surviving half a term?
You lose all credibility when you resort to childish name calling .
To my knowledge no party has said who they would work with at the next election. It is all conjecture at this stage but given your given your rather extreme right wing views
it is only to be expected I suppose
westerly

iceman
30-05-2014, 04:46 PM
[QUOTE=iceman;483629]

Look past the spin, and if you guys were really concerned about NZ's future, instead of being far more interested in your own slice of the pie, you would have to vote Labour. We can't all be millionaires. Some of us have to get jobs and make stuff, provide backup services for other NZers. .

EZ anyone can dig up numbers to suit their political agenda and defend them in the myopic way you do. Pretty pointless though. I am surprised to see you stoop to personally offensive statements like that above.

elZorro
30-05-2014, 05:58 PM
[QUOTE=elZorro;483679]

EZ anyone can dig up numbers to suit their political agenda and defend them in the myopic way you do. Pretty pointless though. I am surprised to see you stoop to personally offensive statements like that above.

I didn't single anyone out in my comments, and of course we are all victims of self-interest at times. However the data stands up by itself, those graphs and stats are from Statistics NZ. They paint a picture of a stagnating economy and savage borrowing against crown assets. I wonder how many of the people who strongly support National on this forum, have commercial property or rental housing lease income. This would produce a clear conflict of interest when we discuss CGT, for example. My comments about wanting Labour in after the election, is all about seeing this economy of ours employing people over a wider area than it does at present.

fungus pudding
30-05-2014, 07:01 PM
[QUOTE=iceman;483785]

I didn't single anyone out in my comments, and of course we are all victims of self-interest at times. However the data stands up by itself, those graphs and stats are from Statistics NZ. They paint a picture of a stagnating economy and savage borrowing against crown assets. I wonder how many of the people who strongly support National on this forum, have commercial property or rental housing lease income. This would produce a clear conflict of interest when we discuss CGT, for example.

That's hardly a conflict of interest. It's simply a direct interest and all voters/taxpayers have some direct interest, which is why the masses vote and why Labour exists. That is because votes are easily bought. Promising to Rob Peter to pay Paul always attracts a lot of Pauls.

Cuzzie
30-05-2014, 09:59 PM
You lose all credibility when you resort to childish name calling .
To my knowledge no party has said who they would work with at the next election. It is all conjecture at this stage but given your given your rather extreme right wing views
it is only to be expected I suppose
westerlyWell then westerly, all you could do is have a go at me, fair enough after all it was name calling. I apologise, now tell me how happy you are that Labour need to do deals with NZ First, The Green Party, Mana and the Internet Party in order to topple New Zealands most popular party, National? What makes you think the Internet founder will be in any position to be Honi's sugar daddy heading into our election when the world is folding on him all be it with one hell of a buckle. Sorry, my mistake - I forgot you have not got a humorous side to you, but here is the thing westerly, mate you have just got to laugh. Make no bones about it - National is looking more than likely right now & so they bloodywell should be.

The left of centre is no more, it's gone - National now owns both sides of centre. But I hear Labour say that they see light at the end of the tunnel. I say go out and buy some more tunnel because you are going to need it.

Winston Churchill once said "Some men change their party for the sake of their principles, others their principles for the sake of their party. This represents the NZ left wing marxist circus that is now a world-wide joke. They are laughing at us all which is not fair. Lefties short your ****e out for goodness sake, you are nothing but the laughing stock you deserve to be. Plus I really miss a solid strong opposition party Labour used to be. The greens are half they are already in popularity, good grief what a misdemeanour that is right there. Can't even hold off a bunch of NWO fraudsters.

How's that then westerly, steamed you up a bit? Hope so and hope you get so fired up you can go out and do something to save your party. Like I said, we need a strong opposition party to get the best out of this Govt. You would be doing John Key & me a favour as well as Labour in the long run.

craic
30-05-2014, 11:08 PM
The best example of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" I have seen in years. Who has not been calling Collins "Crusher" in recent posts to name but one. "no party has said who they would work with" once again selective reading of the facts. Harre is the best example apart from her German principal who has stated "not national under any circumstances and the list goes on
You lose all credibility when you resort to childish name calling .
To my knowledge no party has said who they would work with at the next election. It is all conjecture at this stage but given your given your rather extreme right wing views
it is only to be expected I suppose
westerly

craic
31-05-2014, 08:17 AM
Ask Sue Bradford and she will point out Laila Harre AND her Northern Maori associate Jumping into bed with the biggest fattest capitalist on the block. At least Sue Bradford did not "change her principls for the sake of the party"
Who is laughing, Cuzzie? Care to substantiate that assertion with a few examples?

Cuzzie
31-05-2014, 12:50 PM
Who is laughing, Cuzzie? Care to substantiate that assertion with a few examples?
All National supporters for one and they live in every corner of the Globe. The question should be, why aren't you laughing belg.? I'll have a crack and say, "because you find yourself and your party in this unfortunate situation", rather you than me. How about you tell me just how happy you are with what is going on for Labour and the things they have to do to get into power. The things they have to do that they don't want to do. National should make it by themselves as they are polling over 50% right now, this must make you very jealous because right now Labour are only good enough to hover in the 20's. With the collective bunch of misfits, they might get as high as 45%. I, like you would like to see Labour polling that high, but then you can't say that if you support the misfits. Your probs - not mine. Lifes good right now and will be a hell of a lot better after the next election. belg, I'm laughing too.

Sgt Pepper
31-05-2014, 04:50 PM
ref: Crosby Textor

I anticipate that the Prime Minister will come under intense pressure to disengage himself and the National Party with Crosby Textor. As Parmalatt, the Italian global dairy company, which has a substantial share in the Australian fresh milk market engaging Crosby Textor as its advisor as they are so concerned at the inroads the New Zealand Company A2 Corporation is having in Australia.

Not a good look for John Key to be associated with Crosby Textor at this time if its actively working to discredit a successful New Zealand company .

westerly
31-05-2014, 05:35 PM
[QUOTE=craic;483862]The best example of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" I have seen in years. Who has not been calling Collins "Crusher" in recent posts to name but one.

Not me craic

westerly

iceman
31-05-2014, 06:48 PM
ref: Crosby Textor

I anticipate that the Prime Minister will come under intense pressure to disengage himself and the National Party with Crosby Textor. As Parmalatt, the Italian global dairy company, which has a substantial share in the Australian fresh milk market engaging Crosby Textor as its advisor as they are so concerned at the inroads the New Zealand Company A2 Corporation is having in Australia.

Not a good look for John Key to be associated with Crosby Textor at this time if its actively working to discredit a successful New Zealand company .

The fetish with this outfit continues. Every political party uses advisors and advocates. Big deal. This Parmalat attack in Australia has been exposed by the media and Parmalat looks bad and A2M has had great free advertising.

I have not seen any leftwingers on here voice concerns over a multi millionaire (most likely all ill gotten) neo-liberal German citizen funding a scam list to USE a Maori seat to get his own people into Parliament in order to influence an incoming Labour lead (dream on) Government to block his extradition to the US.
The Left receives him with open arms as some sort of saviour. The Left in NZ today is desperate and totally bereft of ANY principles. This includes leftie commentators on this thread where noone seems to be concerned about this, but very concerned about Crosby Textor or whatever they´re called. Only Sue Bradford has taken a principled stand.

Cuzzie
01-06-2014, 08:15 AM
Rodney Hide nails Labour and Co beautifully right here: Lonely Cunliffe must soldier on. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11265392)

fungus pudding
01-06-2014, 11:31 AM
The machinery of central Government stood back through the disastrous decade until 2010 watching house prices double and land prices triple on the Auckland isthmus, quietly cheering the rising wealth of voters in mortgage belts.
...
NZIER principal economist Shamubeel Eaqub also pushed back against the supply-side myopia this week when he sheeted the blame for Auckland's housing crisis squarely on rampant demand from rental property investors, who are still targeting tax-free capital gains powered with cheap credit from banks keen to lend to buyers with plenty of equity.
...
... the Government continues to put its fingers in its ears and intone the supply-side mantra when confronted with Treasury and Reserve Bank research showing a rising population puts pressure on infrastructure, house prices and interest rates.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11265402

As I said before, this very mediocre Nat government is pandering to their base and swing voters at the expense of the rest and the damage they are doing is going to takes years to unwind!

The Auckland property bubble will burst and when it does National (and Labour to a far lesser extent) will be to blame for not controlling it using a very simple mechanism - a capital gains tax!


Don't delude yourself that CGT will make any difference to property investors. Whatever the pros and cons are it will not discourage investors or affect prices.

fungus pudding
01-06-2014, 04:43 PM
Thanks for supplying your opinion, fungus.

I'll file it in the very small pile of anti-CGT views which is currently dwarfed beside the pro-CGT views expressed by economists, business leaders and deep thinkers.

I have never said I am against CGT. I am against badly developed CGT schemes, e.g. Australia's.

slimwin
01-06-2014, 05:42 PM
That economist is the same guy that recommended never buying a house. Always rent. He also spends all his spare money on shoes.

iceman
01-06-2014, 08:18 PM
[I]The machinery of central Government stood back through the disastrous decade until 2010 watching house prices double and land prices triple on the Auckland isthmus, quietly cheering the rising wealth of voters in mortgage belts.
...


As I said before, this very mediocre Nat government is pandering to their base and swing voters at the expense of the rest and the damage they are doing is going to takes years to unwind!

The Auckland property bubble will burst and when it does National (and Labour to a far lesser extent) will be to blame for not controlling it using a very simple mechanism - a capital gains tax!

Belg, he talks about the DISASTROUS DECADE UNTIL 2010. He is talking about the Clark/Cullen legacy !

elZorro
01-06-2014, 10:02 PM
Here's a film documentary based on "The Hollow Men". Produced in 2006, the very end of the last clip mentions John Key signing up Crosby Textor (2006)as part of the 2 year plan to be the next PM.

http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/the-hollow-men-2008

iceman
02-06-2014, 07:15 AM
Here's a film documentary based on "The Hollow Men". Produced in 2006, the very end of the last clip mentions John Key signing up Crosby Textor (2006)as part of the 2 year plan to be the next PM.

http://www.nzonscreen.com/title/the-hollow-men-2008

They must be good."the 2 year plan" worked did it not ?

Can't believe you're reading what conspiracy theorist Nicky Hager said in 2006. You're better of getting back to quoting today's left wingers like Rod Oram !

craic
02-06-2014, 08:10 AM
Or better still, wait until the facts are published by the NZ electorate in September - that will be irrefutable fact. Then sit down with a pencil and paper and work out where you went wrong.

Harvey Specter
02-06-2014, 08:19 AM
Very clever Carbon tax policy by the Greens*. Labour could learn off them.

Labour should say "We are introducing a CGT and all the tax raised from that will be offset by reductions in the personal tax rate, specifically a tax free threshold"

Hard to argue against that. However, what they are really saying is "we will impose a CGT on rich people so we can waste more money on election promises.

* I dont want to get into a climate change argument. The fact is this is a policy that is the very meaning of their party and they have managed to keep it neutral of any left/right politics by giving tax cuts to all, including rich prices like John Key

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 09:50 AM
They must be good."the 2 year plan" worked did it not ?

Can't believe you're reading what conspiracy theorist Nicky Hager said in 2006. You're better of getting back to quoting today's left wingers like Rod Oram !
Iceman, but that's his best shot, Hager should try a Non-fiction book next time. I'd like to talk more about John Minto. EZ & belg - what are your thoughts on Rent a Crowd far as you go left -' Minto', because the way I see him, he's so far left even the communists are right of him?

I'd also like to hear your thoughts about Cunliffe seen 'absolutely open' to Harre, Harawira proposal to kneecap Kelvin Davis. The link to that is Cunliffe culls his own to try to save his own a$$! (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/cunliffe-kneecap-ck-156978-p) Not very nice, but what else would you expect from the likes of Cunliffe?

Maybe you two can enlighten us on this one here - Harre, Dotcom and hypocrisy (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/election-2014-harre-dotcom-and-hypocrisy-rh-p-156966).

belg, BTW say or think what you like about Rodney Hide, fact is his hit the bullseye in that article & you know it. Your probs, not mine.

National now own the middle ground lock, stock and barrel. Labour is now a far left political party. When you hang out in the fringes like Labour is now doing, you become Fundamentalists, Radical Socialist, Communists, Anarchist and so on just like the Minto's, Harre's, Hager's, Norman's and McCarten's of this world. What a sad bunch that is.

EZ & belg answer me this; Do you think most Labour supporters are happy with this relationship with the Marxist circus run by ring master Fat Dotcom and even more importantly (mainly because I don't give a damn about the left wing fanboys) do you think sitting Labour MPs and those in the next level down are completely happy and relaxed with one 'David Cunliffe' like National supports are of 'John Key'?

My perdition is National by not too much unfortunately & "I don't pay my bills Cunliffe" a Goneburger within one week after the election. Mark 'Cunliffe' down as just another meal eaten up by 'Dot'.

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 10:05 AM
Very clever Carbon tax policy by the Greens*. Labour could learn off them.

Labour should say "We are introducing a CGT and all the tax raised from that will be offset by reductions in the personal tax rate, specifically a tax free threshold"

Hard to argue against that. However, what they are really saying is "we will impose a CGT on rich people so we can waste more money on election promises.

* I dont want to get into a climate change argument. The fact is this is a policy that is the very meaning of their party and they have managed to keep it neutral of any left/right politics by giving tax cuts to all, including rich prices like John Key
I do give a damn about climate change argument & consider myself very clued up on the subject. Feel free to go head to head with me about the fear mongering garbage that we get shoved down our throats from the Labour Party, Green Party, Al Gore, the U.N, The NZ Met Service & so on. Try me on any or everything you like. When you tell untruths the facts always remain and when you fabricate facts you will always be found out by the rules of science. Augie Auer knew this and made a stance. Remember how our MetService treaty him when he did? The MetService continues to back Al Gore and his lies, more fool them.

There is no Global Warming!!!

elZorro
02-06-2014, 10:36 AM
Cuzzie, most of the experts who refute Anthropological global warming have to admit that there is indeed global warming, over the last hundred years or so. If that wasn't the case, we'd still have sea ice all around the Artic all through the year, and the glaciers in NZ wouldn't be retreating noticeably.

Iceman, re Crosby (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/09/lynton-crosby-lobbying-cameron-johnson)Textor and National, I am merely pointing out that politics is a long game, and the big players on the right think nothing of spending years, and hundreds of thousands of dollars, in moving public opinion. The left usually relies on a lot less funding, plenty of helpers, and good policies, for their votes.

Sgt Pepper
02-06-2014, 11:08 AM
They must be good."the 2 year plan" worked did it not ?

Can't believe you're reading what conspiracy theorist Nicky Hager said in 2006. You're better of getting back to quoting today's left wingers like Rod Oram !

Morning Iceman
Whats the obsession about Rod Oram??. Left winger? Rod Oram , prior to his arrival in our country was a journalist with the Financial Times, not exactly from my reading of FT a hot bed of leftist intrigue. Rod Oram does not hesitate to criticise the governments economic policies when criticism is warranted and usually provides a thoughtful, non political analysis to back it up. One I can recollect was John Keys proposal to establish a scaled international financial services industry in NZ, it was never going to be starter and Rod Oram simply pointed out why this was so. Sure enough nothing happened, for the simple fact it didn't make sense for large financial services provider to relocate/expand here, just one example.

You seemed rather grumpy with me recently regarding my post about Crosby Textor. My rationale was a rather simple one. As a shareholder in A2 Corporation I believe its on an exciting growth trajectory, consequently I believe John Key should do the proper , and patriotic thing and disengage with an organisation that is developing a strategy that could, it could be argued, hurt/derail A2s interests and get political strategy advice from another PR company.

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 11:12 AM
Cuzzie, most of the experts who refute Anthropological global warming have to admit that there is indeed global warming, over the last hundred years or so. If that wasn't the case, we'd still have sea ice all around the Artic all through the year, and the glaciers in NZ wouldn't be retreating noticeably.
No so and is not the case. The Arctic has been cooling over the past 60 years, and is now one degree Celsius cooler than it was in the 1940s. There was a record amount of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere in 2001 & the last two winters. Several vessels were icebound in the Arctic in the Spring of 2007 - EZ the Spring of 2007 - not the Winter.

The glacial melt began in the 1820s, long before humankind could have had any effect, and has continued at a uniform rate since, showing no acceleration since humankind began increasing the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. Total ice volumes in three of the last four Ice Ages were lower than they are today, and “global warming” had nothing to do with that. Next!!!!

Harvey Specter
02-06-2014, 11:21 AM
There is no Global Warming!!! As I said, I dont want to get into a debate on climate change, mainly because I have no idea. My point was some people do beleive, they are natural supporters of Greens, so Greens have set out this policy which is agnostic on whether you are left or right.

Now the fact Greens have a deep hatred for the right sort of makes this irrelevant. But what would Greens do if National said we will support this policy (and home insulation again), if you give us confidence and supply.

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 11:49 AM
As I said, I dont want to get into a debate on climate change, mainly because I have no idea. My point was some people do beleive, they are natural supporters of Greens, so Greens have set out this policy which is agnostic on whether you are left or right.

Now the fact Greens have a deep hatred for the right sort of makes this irrelevant. But what would Greens do if National said we will support this policy (and home insulation again), if you give us confidence and supply.Harvey Specter, BTW that was not directed at you, it was directed at everyone. I should of worded that better and your point is spot on. The Greens are basically told what to say and how to act by the U.N. The Green movement worldwide has been hijacked by the big spending U.N and are no longer in control of themselves. Greenpeace has a general consultative status with Helen Clarks joint, the United Nations and they do what they are told. The United Nations had it's beginnings from the Lucis Trust formerly known as the Lucifer Trust. Read more about that here. (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_lucytrust04.htm) I would not trust the U.N, the Greens or anybody associated with them one little bit.
I suppose that's why we find Fat Dot.com on this side, after all he's not just Megaupload, Dot.com is also Megaporn and Megaerotic. He is where he belongs, after all the Lucis Trust and him are batting for the same side.

craic
02-06-2014, 12:13 PM
[/FONT]I suppose that's why we find Fat Dot.com on this side, after all he's not just Megaupload, Dot.com is also Megaporn and Megaerotic. He is where he belongs, after all the Lucis Trust and him are batting for the same side. [/QUOTE]

Just googled Megaporn and Megaerotic as it had never crossed my mind that Dot Com was into that sort of stuff and I still can't make a clear connection as they don't usually publish the names of their people. I wonder how many of his supporters would hang around if they saw where his money comes from?

Snow Leopard
02-06-2014, 12:26 PM
No so and is not the case. The Arctic has been cooling over the past 60 years, and is now one degree Celsius cooler than it was in the 1940s. There was a record amount of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere in 2001 & the last two winters. Several vessels were icebound in the Arctic in the Spring of 2007 - EZ the Spring of 2007 - not the Winter.

The glacial melt began in the 1820s, long before humankind could have had any effect, and has continued at a uniform rate since, showing no acceleration since humankind began increasing the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. Total ice volumes in three of the last four Ice Ages were lower than they are today, and “global warming” had nothing to do with that. Next!!!!

I am so with you on this one. This morning I went for my usual dawn walk round the rice fields, stopping off to buy breakfast, AND I HARDLY SWEATED AT ALL! (But the volcanoes looked particularly beautiful with the red/orange/pink/blue early morning sky behind them).

Not only that but the night guard was wearing a knitted hat yesterday morning!!

So there you are two cool mornings in a row - that proves that this so called 'global warming' is absolute rubbish.

Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

[More] Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

Snow Leopard
02-06-2014, 12:32 PM
I feel that the Internet Party has completely lost it's credibility by buying Laila Harre to be their leader.

I wish I could vote in the NZ Elections (been away too long) just so I could not vote for them.

Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 01:50 PM
[/FONT]I suppose that's why we find Fat Dot.com on this side, after all he's not just Megaupload, Dot.com is also Megaporn and Megaerotic. He is where he belongs, after all the Lucis Trust and him are batting for the same side.

Just googled Megaporn and Megaerotic as it had never crossed my mind that Dot Com was into that sort of stuff and I still can't make a clear connection as they don't usually publish the names of their people. I wonder how many of his supporters would hang around if they saw where his money comes from?[/QUOTE] Nor did I until I read this article: Big Fat Dot Coms Porn Empire (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/harre-confirms-she-being-paid-dotcom-and-how-much-ck-157052)

elZorro
02-06-2014, 04:26 PM
No so and is not the case. The Arctic has been cooling over the past 60 years, and is now one degree Celsius cooler than it was in the 1940s. There was a record amount of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere in 2001 & the last two winters. Several vessels were icebound in the Arctic in the Spring of 2007 - EZ the Spring of 2007 - not the Winter.

The glacial melt began in the 1820s, long before humankind could have had any effect, and has continued at a uniform rate since, showing no acceleration since humankind began increasing the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. Total ice volumes in three of the last four Ice Ages were lower than they are today, and “global warming” had nothing to do with that. Next!!!!

Some of what you said in the first paragraph might be true, but you're looking on the wrong scale. Here's a decade or three, and it paints a different story Cuzzie. That's a trend if ever I saw one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/18/arctic-sea-ice-has-not-recovered-in-7-visuals/

Conclusion: there is a definite warming trend in the Arctic. Vote Green/Labour. The Green's new climate change policy is here in detail. (https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/green_party_climate_protection_plan.pdf)Farmers who demonstrate good on-farm techniques will get some of it rebated.

iceman
02-06-2014, 05:49 PM
Morning Iceman
Whats the obsession about Rod Oram??. Left winger? Rod Oram , prior to his arrival in our country was a journalist with the Financial Times, not exactly from my reading of FT a hot bed of leftist intrigue. Rod Oram does not hesitate to criticise the governments economic policies when criticism is warranted and usually provides a thoughtful, non political analysis to back it up. One I can recollect was John Keys proposal to establish a scaled international financial services industry in NZ, it was never going to be starter and Rod Oram simply pointed out why this was so. Sure enough nothing happened, for the simple fact it didn't make sense for large financial services provider to relocate/expand here, just one example.

You seemed rather grumpy with me recently regarding my post about Crosby Textor. My rationale was a rather simple one. As a shareholder in A2 Corporation I believe its on an exciting growth trajectory, consequently I believe John Key should do the proper , and patriotic thing and disengage with an organisation that is developing a strategy that could, it could be argued, hurt/derail A2s interests and get political strategy advice from another PR company.

Good morning to you too Sgt Pepper. Not so good one over here though. Blowing about 70 kts and 12-15 mtrs seas so apologies for any spelling mistakes !

EZ regularly quotes and links Rod Oram. I simply suggested it would be more relevant and interesting if he continued quoting him rather than conspiracy theorist Hager.

I too am a shareholder in ATM. It is one of my bigger holdings and I am a great enthusiast for the company. The attack on them by Parmalat has been exposed by Australian media for what it is and I believe it has been positive over all for A2M.

With regard to that Crosby Textor outfit, which I admit to knowing nothing about, I just don't see thee problems. As with when I select a lawyer or even a surgeon, I go for the best. Don't care who their other customers have been !

Back to dodging the waves

westerly
02-06-2014, 06:12 PM
I'd also like to hear your thoughts about Cunliffe seen 'absolutely open' to Harre, Harawira proposal to kneecap Kelvin Davis. The link to that is Cunliffe culls his own to try to save his own a$$! (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/cunliffe-kneecap-ck-156978-p) Not very nice, but what else would you expect from the likes of Cunliffe?

Maybe you two can enlighten us on this one here - Harre, Dotcom and hypocrisy (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/election-2014-harre-dotcom-and-hypocrisy-rh-p-156966).

belg, BTW say or think what you like about Rodney Hide, fact is his hit the bullseye in that article & you know it. Your probs, not mine.

National now own the middle ground lock, stock and barrel. Labour is now a far left political party. When you hang out in the fringes like Labour is now doing, you become Fundamentalists, Radical Socialist, Communists, Anarchist and so on just like the Minto's, Harre's, Hager's, Norman's and McCarten's of this world. What a sad bunch that is.

My perdition is National by not too much unfortunately & "I don't pay my bills Cunliffe" a Goneburger within one week after the election. Mark 'Cunliffe' down as just another meal eaten up by 'Dot'.

The NBR article is all supposition. Read the link at the end of the article.
As for Rodney Hides bit in the Herald you could well have written that or are you Rodney?
Fundamentalists? your right wing - lbertarian views are in line with their strategy to destroy the left by any means possible. Fair or foul
Perdition?
westerly

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 06:24 PM
Some of what you said in the first paragraph might be true, but you're looking on the wrong scale. Here's a decade or three, and it paints a different story Cuzzie. That's a trend if ever I saw one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/09/18/arctic-sea-ice-has-not-recovered-in-7-visuals/

Conclusion: there is a definite warming trend in the Arctic. Vote Green/Labour. The Green's new climate change policy is here in detail. (https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/green_party_climate_protection_plan.pdf)Farmers who demonstrate good on-farm techniques will get some of it rebated. Knock me down with a feather EZ, you have got to be kidding me. By using the Washington Post as an example, you have just confirmed and backed up what I'm saying. Who owns the Washington Post? Answer - Nash Holdings LLC. Who is Nash Holdings? Jeff Bezos, that Amazon CEO who is worth about USD$25 billion. Bezos is part of the Bilderbergers org. and that is a NWO org. Before then the Graham family ran and owned the Washington post from 1947 until 2013. Donald Graham, who sold the Post last year is one of the main members the Bilderberg Club. These members have met every year since 1954 to orchestrate the takeover of the United States of America. Google away and you will find I'm not joking. Very powerful men upon the New World Order and through the Washington Post they will say it like it isn't. Give me the same stats from another source and if I can't debunk that on the spot, then you are correct. Fire away EZ on know my s**t on this crap. The Greens new climate change policy is based on a lie.

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 06:28 PM
The NBR article is all supposition. Read the link at the end of the article.
As for Rodney Hides bit in the Herald you could well have written that or are you Rodney?
Fundamentalists? your right wing - lbertarian views are in line with their strategy to destroy the left by any means possible. Fair or foul
Perdition?
westerlyNo mate I'm not Rodney, he can spell. Pertition kind of fits though don't you think?

elZorro
02-06-2014, 07:07 PM
Knock me down with a feather EZ, you have got to be kidding me. By using the Washington Post as an example, you have just confirmed and backed up what I'm saying. Who owns the Washington Post? Answer - Nash Holdings LLC. Who is Nash Holdings? Jeff Bezos, that Amazon CEO who is worth about USD$25 billion. Bezos is part of the Bilderbergers org. and that is a NWO org. Before then the Graham family ran and owned the Washington post from 1947 until 2013. Donald Graham, who sold the Post last year is one of the main members the Bilderberg Club. These members have met every year since 1954 to orchestrate the takeover of the United States of America. Google away and you will find I'm not joking. Very powerful men upon the New World Order and through the Washington Post they will say it like it isn't. Give me the same stats from another source and if I can't debunk that on the spot, then you are correct. Fire away EZ on know my s**t on this crap. The Greens new climate change policy is based on a lie.

So all the points on that graph are incorrect? Or just some of them? The last two lined up with your post perfectly. The seasonal lowest arctic ice area made a 60% recovery last year. But the trend implies that it'll be back down again, either this August or the August after that. If the world is cooling down as you suggest, why are the sealevels rising and the seas warming at the same time? When you consider the enormous heat energy contained in the seas, it takes a lot to change the average. But it is changing. Upwards.

I'm not sure who owns the paper that published a report on this, but the graph will take a bit more disproving than that.

Here's one of the comments afterwards, from a real wordsmith:


I just love these selectively "one eye open, the other dim as a burned out Christmas string bulb" self-described "just skeptically following the money" climate denialists. This kind of self-flattering/humanity-deprecating nonsense is all over the web. Somehow, they've convinced themselves in their likeminded circle-rants in the echo chamber, that climate scientists are getting fabulously wealthy studying this supposed "hoax" and those dumb-as-bricks PhDs (in physics, chemistry and so on) really couldn't find work in a hamburger joint if it weren't for this "totally made up field where our Congress pays them to lie" (even though Congress is demonstrably and nearly completely bought out by fossil fuel interests these days - I never hear how that part of it works).

Meanwhile, the trillion dollar industry which has billions in marginal profits at stake if humankind were to suddenly start doing the sane thing for its survival, AND IS KNOWN TO BE FUNDING ALL OF THE DISINFORMATION SITES that people like WMarion (read Cuzzie) & Co. frequent to get their latest dose of distorted non-science to then spread all over the web, is BEYOND EXAMINATION. They couldn't possibly be feeding these "soldiers of the truth" anything that maybe "tilts" things to SAVE THEIR BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF PROFITS. Oh no - that money does not need to be "followed". At least not with the Eagle Eye that you need to watch these sneaky scientists - who (let's face it) just took their exceptional brains and burning curiosity since age 5 and put them through about ten years of gruelling education and a monk's lifestyle because they were hoping to one day lie for a living.



In a way it's important to understand the whole deal behind climate change denial. The same misinformation is pedalled by political think-tanks, it's the same process. Sometimes it's the same think-tanks.

elZorro
02-06-2014, 08:28 PM
I am so with you on this one. This morning I went for my usual dawn walk round the rice fields, stopping off to buy breakfast, AND I HARDLY SWEATED AT ALL! (But the volcanoes looked particularly beautiful with the red/orange/pink/blue early morning sky behind them).

Not only that but the night guard was wearing a knitted hat yesterday morning!!

So there you are two cool mornings in a row - that proves that this so called 'global warming' is absolute rubbish.

Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

[More] Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

PT, I hope you are not too hot over there, while we head into winter. I'm sure you'll miss the election process, the waiting to see who gets in.

I just found someone else (Alan Papprill) (https://plus.google.com/107386894805270593216/posts) who is disturbed by John Key's helpers, and here are more links to Philip Morris, who coincidentally were raided to supply a new National candidate in Southland.


http://theirasciblecurmudgeon.blogspot.co.nz/2013/07/the-links-between-key-cameron-and.html


A link he posted, about how IT doesn't necessarily provide a lot of jobs.

http://www.social-europe.eu/2014/02/whatsapp/

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 09:21 PM
So all the points on that graph are incorrect? Or just some of them? The last two lined up with your post perfectly. The seasonal lowest arctic ice area made a 60% recovery last year. But the trend implies that it'll be back down again, either this August or the August after that. If the world is cooling down as you suggest, why are the sealevels rising and the seas warming at the same time? When you consider the enormous heat energy contained in the seas, it takes a lot to change the average. But it is changing. Upwards.

I'm not sure who owns the paper that published a report on this, but the graph will take a bit more disproving than that.

Here's one of the comments afterwards, from a real wordsmith:



In a way it's important to understand the whole deal behind climate change denial. The same misinformation is pedalled by political think-tanks, it's the same process. Sometimes it's the same think-tanks.My apologies EZ, but I did not even bother reading the article or viewing the graphs, perhaps I should. I just knew the history behind the W.Post owners and laughed. Look there is a lot of misinformation in certain newspapers worldwide and even more stuff that should be reported and is not. Control the media and you control what you want known for you and what you want to remain unknown. Rupert Murdoch is a member of the Bilderberg Club too. Give me graphs that support your theory from that (W.P) media source and I will shoot you down every time. Give me evidence, real cold hard facts from a scientific abstract direct from its author and you will get more credence from me. If it is based on Al Gores fairy tales though, I will easily knock it down so be warned.

Moving on to the rising sea levels and our oceans warming up. Gore’s presentation of the imagined imminent threat of a 6 m (20 ft) sea-level rise, with his account of the supposed impact on the present day populations of Manhattan, the Netherlands, Bangladesh, Pacific Islands etc., etc, was not a correct statement of the mainstream science on this question. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (I.P.C.C) says sea-level increases up to 7 m (23 ft) above today’s levels have happened naturally in the past climate, and would only be likely to happen again after several millennia. In the next 100 years, according to calculations based on figures in the IPCC’s 2007 report, two ice sheets between them will add a little over 6 cm (2.5 inches) to sea level, not 6 m (this figure of 6 cm is 15% of the IPCC’s total central estimate of a 43 cm or 1 ft 5 in sea-level rise over the next century). Gore has accordingly exaggerated the official sea-level estimate by approaching 10,000 per cent.
There have been no mass evacuations of populations of Pacific Islanders as suggested by Gore, though some residents of Tuvalu have asked to be moved to New Zealand, even though the tide-gauges maintained until recently by the National Tidal Facility of Australia show a mean annual sea-level rise over the past half-century equivalent to the thickness of a human hair. 50 years to only rise to the thickness of a human hair. Lets look at Tuvalu, the max. sea height in the last 21 years was back in 2006, hardly a sea level rising. That chart is Monthly sea levels for TUVALU (http://www.bom.gov.au/ntc/IDO70056/IDO70056SLD.shtml)

Oceans warming up - It is the atmosphere, not the Sun that warms the ocean but even if it was the sun, we have not had Global warming since the 1990s. There has been a 29 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, the equivalent of 857,780 square km. Antarctic sea-ice spread to a 30-year record extent in late 2007. I know I just told you not to use media as a reference, however this article gives you both sides of the story here: Global warming? No, actually we're cooling, claim scientists (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html). Some people think it's a big debate, some believe in Global Warming & others know it is just a big Con job. Perhaps you won't enjoy reading this article here: The game is up for climate change believers (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/non_fictionreviews/10748667/The-game-is-up-for-climate-change-believers.html), because it tells us just how dirty the Greens and the left wing are.

I love talking about something I have followed and study for many years though EZ, next question please. This is about politics, Global Control Freaks that the Greens adore.

Cuzzie
02-06-2014, 09:53 PM
EZ, just a little background on me. I was a Greenpeace member along with my wife and are still Green at heart. I call myself common sense Green & I am. Greenpeace co-Founder Dr. Patrick Moore left the org. back in the eighties. I also turned my back on them as things just did not add up. B.S was the king then and still is now.

Dr. Moore testified recently before the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee & took issue with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim that “Since the mid-20th century it is ‘extremely likely’ that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming."

Moore pointed out that “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth's atmosphere over the past 100 years,” arguing that “perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of extreme certainty is to look at the historical record.”

He told the committee: “When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an Ice Age occurred 450 million years ago when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than today.”

Moore noted that “The increase in temperature between 1910 and 1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970 and 2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910–1942 to human influence.” Why then, he asks, “does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by human influence, when it has no explanation for a nearly identical increase from 1910 to 1940?"

When previously asked on Fox Business News who is responsible for promoting unwarranted fear and what their motives are, Moore said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue."

Read the rest here: http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/global-warming-ipcc/2014/05/12/id/570760/

westerly
03-06-2014, 06:46 PM
Patrick Moore seems to have been fairly controversial since he left Greenpeace.

westerly

Cuzzie
03-06-2014, 08:46 PM
Patrick Moore seems to have been fairly controversial since he left Greenpeace.

westerlyControversy, is telling porkies about the Global Climate Non-crisis. Moore is on the ball 100%, make no bones about it.

westerly, maybe you can give us your thoughts on John Minto. Bob Jones wrote a few thoughts about him in the Herald today. I had no idea Bob thought so highly of him. He really needs to harden up a bit and not be so nice about Minto. Maybe Bob is getting soft in his old age. If it was me writting a story about Minto I would not be so kind. Here's B.Js commentary on the idiot. John Minto: Shut up!!! (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11266262)

elZorro
04-06-2014, 06:39 AM
Here's a bit about the terms of trade turning back from a post 1973 high. The extent won't show up until after the election date. It's not desperate, but worth keeping an eye on.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/10115576/Falling-dairy-price-likely-to-hit-NZs-terms-of-trade

craic
04-06-2014, 11:19 AM
So Labour promise to remove "coat tailing" in elections from the law and reduce the minimum percentage to 4%. Probably the most predictable change since someone discovered that night follows day. I doubt that John Key will do any more then smile and say that they intended to make the change after the election anyway. Not much chance of MMP being scrapped but it will certainly be revised in the near future. Look at the mess. The country potentially led by Kim Dotcom, Laila Harre, John Tamihere. Winston Peters and the like. I predict a rise in Doomsday Preppers befor long.

J R Ewing
04-06-2014, 02:47 PM
What's the bet that if they did get rid of coat tailing we would STILL have an ACT MP elected in Epsom. Elected with 65% of the electorate vote and 0% of the nationwide party vote. And still a rort.

They also need a provision that in order to take up your seat for winning an electorate you MUST win the proportionate share of the party vote nationwide as well.

fungus pudding
04-06-2014, 03:04 PM
What's the bet that if they did get rid of coat tailing we would STILL have an ACT MP elected in Epsom. Elected with 65% of the electorate vote and 0% of the nationwide party vote. And still a rort.

They also need a provision that in order to take up your seat for winning an electorate you MUST win the proportionate share of the party vote nationwide as well.

That flies in the face of any democratic system by disallowing an individual to stand as an independent.

Jay
04-06-2014, 03:08 PM
Playing devils advocate, your provision would not be democratic JR would it??
If a MP is voted in via the electorate then why should he/she not be a MP regardless of what votes the party got overall


At present Epsom would either be a ACT seat or National seat, don't think it would be anything else
Disc: Not in the Epsom electorate!

Got in first Mr/Mrs/Miss Pudding

westerly
04-06-2014, 06:24 PM
Controversy, is telling porkies about the Global Climate Non-crisis. Moore is on the ball 100%, make no bones about it.

westerly, maybe you can give us your thoughts on John Minto. Bob Jones wrote a few thoughts about him in the Herald today. I had no idea Bob thought so highly of him. He really needs to harden up a bit and not be so nice about Minto. Maybe Bob is getting soft in his old age. If it was me writting a story about Minto I would not be so kind. Here's B.Js commentary on the idiot. John Minto: Shut up!!! (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11266262)

Cuzzie, There are too many people whose main objective in life appears to be telling others what to do. Bob Jones was a very good in his field of property, and appears to know something about boxing. Over the years he became someone the media turn to when they want a quote or story to raise the odd eyebrow. Outside of his field of expertise he should have ( along with most columnists been put out to pasture after half a dozen columns) Plenty of opportunity to bore us with his views.
I read the Press and just about all their writers along with most of the reporters have long past their use by date. The reporters are experts at turning private tragedies into public entertainment.
As for Minto, Jones probably had a point, he should take up bowls or something but would probably want to change the rules. I would ask Banks, Hide, Roger Douglas, and all the others who have had countless opportunity to inflict their views on a weary public to do the same.
As for global warming, one day it will either be real, or not, and that is when mankind will know who is correct. Then another crisis will be be dreamed up and arguments will carry on. In my simple minded view the world has only one major problem – too many people and apart from China no one is doing anything about it. And send Dotcom to the US - that covers everything.
westerly

Cuzzie
04-06-2014, 08:54 PM
Cuzzie, There are too many people whose main objective in life appears to be telling others what to do. Bob Jones was a very good in his field of property, and appears to know something about boxing. Over the years he became someone the media turn to when they want a quote or story to raise the odd eyebrow. Outside of his field of expertise he should have ( along with most columnists been put out to pasture after half a dozen columns) Plenty of opportunity to bore us with his views.
I read the Press and just about all their writers along with most of the reporters have long past their use by date. The reporters are experts at turning private tragedies into public entertainment.
As for Minto, Jones probably had a point, he should take up bowls or something but would probably want to change the rules. I would ask Banks, Hide, Roger Douglas, and all the others who have had countless opportunity to inflict their views on a weary public to do the same.
As for global warming, one day it will either be real, or not, and that is when mankind will know who is correct. Then another crisis will be be dreamed up and arguments will carry on. In my simple minded view the world has only one major problem – too many people and apart from China no one is doing anything about it. And send Dotcom to the US - that covers everything.
westerly This is my favorite westerly post so far. Lots of sensible things said by him. I have opposite views on a couple of points but for the sake of ruining most things said well, I'll leave that and congratulate you westerly on a great post.

iceman
05-06-2014, 08:05 AM
A blog post worth reading with an interesting take on the hopeless situation Cunliffe finds himself in. He's got fights raging all around him on the left, before he even glances towards National. To win this election, National just have to stay head down and make no mistakes. The Left's infighting will take care of the rest :ohmy:

http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/on-the-logic-behind-a-strategic-loss/

Jay
05-06-2014, 08:23 AM
Interestinmg blog there iceman

Will Hone win Te Tai Tokerau. Not a forgone conclusion, will some of his support dessert him due to the tie up with the Internet party??

Cuzzie
05-06-2014, 08:35 AM
If the Marxist circus win the election this will be the first quote I will post on here:

"Our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. I think we're being run by maniacs for maniacal ends and I think I'm liable to be put away as insane for expressing that. That's what's insane about it."
~John Lennon~

winner69
05-06-2014, 01:57 PM
Judge says 'Mr Banks, I find you guilty'

Until next month that is. Discharged without conviction

We can't have one of them being a crim can we ....we'll make sure he cleared

Harvey Specter
05-06-2014, 02:22 PM
ACT MP John Banks has today been found guilty of filing a false electoral return.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11268276

So the obvious next question is - How much did John Key know?

Has he been sitting on information, that in his role as Prime Minister, he should have divulged?

And, exactly what's on the "tea" tapes? Has there been a cover-up? Was Police impartiality compromised?My view is Key knew nothing and Banks has been found guilty of knowing something he should have known about, but because he lost, didn't give a sh.. about trying to recall (he didn't prepare the form, and probably didn't even read it before he signed it).

The tapes were just Key saying Winston's support is dying - literally.

There is no scandel here. Just Banks being a bit lazy and not taking full care in relation to a statutory declaration he signed.

J R Ewing
05-06-2014, 02:24 PM
Not at all. You can still stand as an independent, you just need 0.83% of the nationwide vote. That's proportional representation. Voting for "independent endorsed by party x" as a list candidate and "party x" with the party vote is simply double dipping. It would sort of be fair if that tactic was available in all electorates. We would then have 100 odd proportional list MP's and another 100 odd electoral independent MPS's as a overhang.

Xerof
05-06-2014, 02:26 PM
Goodness, even Roy Morgan appears to have changed camp

blackcap
05-06-2014, 02:34 PM
Goodness, even Roy Morgan appears to have changed camp


Wow with that result, National will not even need ACT, let alone any other coalition partner.

winner69
05-06-2014, 02:45 PM
Asked if he accepted that he had done something wrong Banks said: "From day one I have told you I have never filed a false anything let alone a false return."

Good one banksie, you tell them

Major von Tempsky
05-06-2014, 04:31 PM
Good riddance to bad rubbish! He's a fraud, a hypocrite and a religious fundamentalist moron. And I had been splitting my vote between National and ACT but no way I'm voting for Banks. He deserves to swing.

craic
05-06-2014, 04:37 PM
That poll result suggests that the gyrations of the gypsy left have not impressed the voters people are moving away from the probable debacle that would be created with a Labour leader with hands up his back working his brain from KDC, LH, the Greens and Uncle Tom Cobley and All.

winner69
05-06-2014, 06:19 PM
So will we see Banks, the soon to be convicted felon, do the honorable thing and resign?

Probably not! NZ's descent into a Banana Republic continues and it's elected officials become more and more morally bankrupt and the public just yawn and don't care as they're powerless to do anything about it .... :(

Love the way people are coming out to defend him .... he has only been found guilty and hasn't been convicted yet so give the man a bit of space

Parliament sits again next Tuesday .... bugger John will be on sick leave, stress and all that