PDA

View Full Version : If the Greens win ....



777
19-08-2014, 12:10 PM
If you don't mind Belgarion, I'll leave this thread entirely for you to make a fool out of yourself.

Rant away.

( Sorry I borrowed the above from a previous thread. However I will stick to my word not like yourself.)

winner69
19-08-2014, 12:16 PM
As yet no or very little comment on Green policies ... Not surprising as the Nasties want to target big bad Labour.

The Green Party's policy of raising the top tax rate to generate close to $1 billion to tackle child poverty is not about penalising the rich but sharing the benefits of wealth more fairly, co-leader Metiria Turei says. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/election-2014/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503581&objectid=11310271)

Strikes me as good policy. The Greens would tax those on $140k more to pay for:

The revenue generated would be invested in:

A new Children's Credit that would give an extra $60 a week to families currently missing out — at a cost of $400 million a year.

A non-discriminatory Parental Tax Credit of $220 a week in the first weeks of life for the poorest children - costing $29.4 million a year.

A $500 million-a-year investment in children's health and education to reduce the harm caused by poverty.

Ms Turei said New Zealand children growing up in poverty were three times more likely than those who are better off to be admitted to hospital, five times more likely to die of cot death and 27 times more likely to get rheumatic fever, and die earlier.

Seems like a good policy to me. And as someone who earns more than $140k per annum, I am quite happy to pay for it. It seems like an excellent use of my tax dollars. And there are significant savings to be had by keeping people out of hospital by catching poverty related diseases early!

Ms Turei goes onto say, "Child poverty can be eliminated. We have the tools and techniques. It is now simply a matter of choice."

Indeed it is a choice. What choice will you make Sept 20th? Saving tax payers money by prevention? Or wasting it by being the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff when it far, far too late?

The simple fact that the Greens have such policy is a clear indication that this very mediocre National government doesn't really care about all NZ'ers. It seems to only care about the "haves" and their greedy desire to keep what they have and let others suffer.

Okay! Got your attention? Good!

Please ask National how they intend to fund the huge funding shortfall by an un-changed NZ Super that pays out to the 66% of oldies who on a means tested basis have far, far, far more wealth to support themselves ... Meanwhile sacrificing children through ensuring child poverty isn't addressed. It surely must come as NO surprise to anyone that people nearing retirement and in retirement are voting predominantly for National. Selfish self interest? But who is going to pay for it? It won't be them.

Go on - ask the National Party who is going to pay.

And ask yourself if this is who you are if you're going to vote National.

Yes belg, you are correct for once. you are the one to pay.

But don't forget that the government has put one and frippence in the pound aside for my pension (that's what they told me when I was young)

Promised it was and selfishly I insist on the promise being kept. I willsign up shortly. Payback time

And I expect the younger generation to stop moaning and do something about making sure the country can pay for it.

slimwin
19-08-2014, 12:26 PM
It's part of a solution. Funding for the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. How about also educating people as to whether they can afford that 3,4 or more child.
More reason to have more kids now. The state will pay.
Also badly sold. Better of introducing a raft of policies and the total funding for it.
They've just alienated nearly everybody over 140k by making it their problem only to fix the child poverty problem.
So good ish idea badly done.... The greens for you.

Banksie
19-08-2014, 12:26 PM
And I expect the younger generation to stop moaning and do something about making sure the country can pay for it.Here are a set of policies for you Winner https://www.greens.org.nz/policy. Don't you think this is the younger generation trying to do something to ensure there is a way to both pay for the oldies and ensure a future for their grandchildren?I expect the younger generation are hoping the older generation will open the other eye and help them plan for a future that is beyond their 3 score and 10.

Edit: Oh, I forgot, which party was it that has stopped contributing to the superannuation fund?

Banksie
19-08-2014, 12:31 PM
It's part of a solution. Funding for the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. How about also educating people as to whether they can afford that 3,4 or more child.
More reason to have more kids now. The state will pay.
Also badly sold. Better of introducing a raft of policies and the total funding for it.
They've just alienated nearly everybody over 140k by making it their problem only to fix the child poverty problem.
So good ish idea badly done.... The greens for you.

This is exactly the opposite to the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. Eradicating child poverty is what breaks the cycle of crime, poor education and poor health.

Who have they alienated, at worst the 3% of the population earning above $140k, and I think many in that group are socially aware and actually believe in these policies.


From the Green's FB page:

6153

Cuzzie
19-08-2014, 12:58 PM
I didn't even bother reading your garbage belg. Have you lost your marbles?

slimwin
19-08-2014, 01:04 PM
They've alienated some of the most productive people. Hopefully they give a stuff about all the population as you clearly don't. Badly sold and envy politics. Jumped on with glee by the envious.

Banksie
19-08-2014, 01:11 PM
They've alienated some of the most productive people. Hopefully they give a stuff about all the population as you clearly don't. Badly sold and envy politics. Jumped on with glee by the envious.

Which sectors of the population are you assuming I don't care about slimwin?

So with my post (and belg's admission of being happy to pay more tax), I think I have given examples that some earning above $140k have not been alienated.

Do you have examples of those who feel alienated?

slimwin
19-08-2014, 01:22 PM
Do you two people represent much of the population on over 140k? No.
Did I disagree with the intention of the policy? No. It's just incredibly poor PR to target part of the population to pay for everybody's problem. That's why we have tax collected and expenses paid out of the pot. People can get their feel good factor that things they care about are being fixed with their money but those that don't think that's their problem, can pretend theirs goes somewhere else.

Banksie
19-08-2014, 01:40 PM
Do you two people represent much of the population on over 140k? No.
Did I disagree with the intention of the policy? No. It's just incredibly poor PR to target part of the population to pay for everybody's problem. That's why we have tax collected and expenses paid out of the pot. People can get their feel good factor that things they care about are being fixed with their money but those that don't think that's their problem, can pretend theirs goes somewhere else.

I didn't mean me and belg, I meant belg and the 3 people in the picture Phillip Mills, Chris Morrison and Eleanor Catton. (Yeah I know it's only 4 ;)).

I get your point about the PR. If I was anti-Green it would really get my back up. Sorry, I guess I didn't really understand/read this sentence "Better of introducing a raft of policies and the total funding for it. ". Yup, I think I agree with what you are saying.

slimwin
19-08-2014, 02:59 PM
Yeah, banksie. If the point is to have a workable solution you need to get as many people on board as possible. Not just the converted.
Interesting on my compass poll I came out left of center and national as my party. NZ first as second choice. As if...

Banksie
19-08-2014, 03:10 PM
Yeah, banksie. If the point is to have a workable solution you need to get as many people on board as possible. Not just the converted.
Interesting on my compass poll I came out left of center and national as my party. NZ first as second choice. As if...

It is an interesting exercise the compass poll. I bet the results surprise a lot of people. Takes all the politics of personality out of it and matches you based just on policies.

Whether it sways the vote one way or the other, I just hope that people at least approach it with an open mind and really evaluate their motivation behind their choice.

I got labour with green as a second choice.

Major von Tempsky
19-08-2014, 03:19 PM
Raising the top income tax rate to a punitive level is such an old and failed policy of so many countries over so many decades that I'm amazed anyone is naïve enough to raise it again.

(a) a new raving Loonie Left government/coalition raises the tax rate to 40% or higher

(b) inevitable consequence NZ's brightest and best managers, entrepreneurs, scientists etc leave in droves, mostly never to return even when the dopey tax is reversed. Also NZ gains a bad reputation (give a dog a bad name and it will never live it down) as being inimical to business and investment, investment from overseas dries up and everyone falls over each other to realize their assets and send them overseas.

Stupid! Stupid! Stupid! How stupid can you get?

Snapper
19-08-2014, 03:54 PM
I just did a few numbers on the Green's raising an extra $1 billion in tax revenue. I'm wondering if I have my figures right because this is what I get: (taken from http://www.treasury.govt.nz/government/revenue/estimatesrevenueeffects/personal )

Tax take for earnings over $140,000 $9.106 billion
7% increase $637 million
Offset in company/other tax $99 million
Total increase in tax take $528 million

Anybody improve on those numbers?

Banksie
19-08-2014, 04:27 PM
I just did a few numbers on the Green's raising an extra $1 billion in tax revenue. I'm wondering if I have my figures right because this is what I get: (taken from http://www.treasury.govt.nz/government/revenue/estimatesrevenueeffects/personal )

Tax take for earnings over $140,000 $9.106 billion
7% increase $637 million
Offset in company/other tax $99 million
Total increase in tax take $528 million

Anybody improve on those numbers?

Your figures look correct. I think this statement is what will make it up to the $1 billion.

The Greens would also harmonise the trust tax rate with the top income tax rate, and introduce measures to make it harder for people to avoid paying their fair share of tax — generating close to $1 billion a year, she said [Metiria Turei].

This item always worries me "and introduce measures to make it harder for people to avoid paying their fair share of tax", because although tax avoidance maybe quantifiable I am not sure anyone really has a handle on how collectible it is.

fungus pudding
19-08-2014, 04:35 PM
Your figures look correct. I think this statement is what will make it up to the $1 billion.

The Greens would also harmonise the trust tax rate with the top income tax rate, and introduce measures to make it harder for people to avoid paying their fair share of tax — generating close to $1 billion a year, she said [Metiria Turei].

This item always worries me "and introduce measures to make it harder for people to avoid paying their fair share of tax", because although tax avoidance maybe quantifiable I am not sure anyone really has a handle on how collectible it is.

I have
.

Banksie
19-08-2014, 04:36 PM
Raising the top income tax rate to a punitive level is such an old and failed policy of so many countries over so many decades that I'm amazed anyone is naïve enough to raise it again.

(a) a new raving Loonie Left government/coalition raises the tax rate to 40% or higher

(b) inevitable consequence NZ's brightest and best managers, entrepreneurs, scientists etc leave in droves, mostly never to return even when the dopey tax is reversed. Also NZ gains a bad reputation (give a dog a bad name and it will never live it down) as being inimical to business and investment, investment from overseas dries up and everyone falls over each other to realize their assets and send them overseas.

Stupid! Stupid! Stupid! How stupid can you get?

I would love to debate this with you MVT, are you prepared to without name calling and the such?

1) 40% is far from punitive, in fact it is pretty low compared to other OECD countries
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=105

2) Are a left biased coalition likely to implement 40% marginal rate? I think it will be closer to Labours proposal of 36%.

3) Is there any proof that a higher taxes cause skilled people to move away? And where would they move to given the tax rate is worse in many OECD countries?

4) This policy is talking about personal and trust tax. How does that affect NZ reputation as a business investment?

Edit: OECD average marginal tax rate looks to be around 43%

Banksie
19-08-2014, 04:37 PM
I have
.

Going to enlighten us with an answer then FP :).

fungus pudding
19-08-2014, 04:48 PM
Going to enlighten us with an answer then FP :).

Tax planning is up to the individual, so no.

GTM 3442
19-08-2014, 05:40 PM
Out of curiosity, prompted by the thread title, what would constitute a "win" for the Green Party ?

A confidence and supply arrangement with no formal coalition ?

One MP inside Cabinet ?

One MP in Cabinet, two Ministers outside Cabinet ?

Adoption of some of their policies by one or more mainstream parties ?

How would you quantify this ? (Just so I can recognize it when it happens)

slimwin
19-08-2014, 06:46 PM
When I lived in Luxembourg it was full of Scandinavian business owners who had there headquarters there to avoid Scandinavian taxes. I suspect Switzerland and Belgium are the same.

Banksie
19-08-2014, 07:02 PM
When I lived in Luxembourg it was full of Scandinavian business owners who had there headquarters there to avoid Scandinavian taxes. I suspect Switzerland and Belgium are the same.

I suppose you need to stay on parity with your neighbours. How long ago where you in Luxembourg, cos I see their corporate tax rate has been around 30% for the last 8 years - which is more than Norway 28%, Denmark 25% and Sweden 26%.

Personal tax is quite a bit higher in Sweden( 56%) and Denmark(60%) but similar in Norway(40%) - Luxenbourg is 43%).

Or do these figures not tell the whole story? Is it a cumulative tax burden in the other countries, or easy ways to avoid tax in Luxenbourg that causes the shift?

slimwin
19-08-2014, 07:32 PM
I left in 2008.

Nobody pays that tax rate in LUX. There's so many rebates. You get 1/3 for each child for a start. Lots of 3 kid families. The further you live from your work place the larger the rebate. Designed to get people away from the crowded center. I didn't undestand the French forms so gave the girl in my Local govt tax office two bottles of wine each year to do it for me. The last year I earned 72k pounds and they gave me a 10k euro rebate depite me paying no tax. It was claw back from stamp duty despite the fact I made near 100% profit on an apartment block I developed.

Not sure how the companies do it but they are all there. Especially all the big world wide banks.

Harvey Specter
19-08-2014, 07:34 PM
I suppose you need to stay on parity with your neighbours. How long ago where you in Luxembourg, cos I see their corporate tax rate has been around 30% for the last 8 years - which is more than Norway 28%, Denmark 25% and Sweden 26%.I can assure you that most multinationals that have set up in Lux are not paying 30%.

slimwin
19-08-2014, 07:36 PM
This has actually swung my party vote. Honest.
http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/parties-show-support-religious-instruction-review-6060380

Harvey Specter
19-08-2014, 07:38 PM
How would you quantify this ? (Just so I can recognize it when it happens)A win for Greens would be getting higher than last time, plus being in coalition with Labour. Ideally with more than 1/3 of the politicians so that they can exert some power.

The 'good' think about ACT and UF is you know they have very little influence over National so you know Nationals policies are the ones that matter. With Labour/Greens, I have no idea whose policies win:

40% from $140 v 38% from $150 (or is it 36%?)
no new oil drilling v no 'deep' water oil drilling
Free healthcare for under 18s v free healthcare for over 65
Emissions tax v Emissions trading
etc etc etc

Banksie
19-08-2014, 09:32 PM
I left in 2008.

Nobody pays that tax rate in LUX. There's so many rebates. You get 1/3 for each child for a start. Lots of 3 kid families. The further you live from your work place the larger the rebate. Designed to get people away from the crowded center. I didn't undestand the French forms so gave the girl in my Local govt tax office two bottles of wine each year to do it for me. The last year I earned 72k pounds and they gave me a 10k euro rebate depite me paying no tax. It was claw back from stamp duty despite the fact I made near 100% profit on an apartment block I developed.

Not sure how the companies do it but they are all there. Especially all the big world wide banks.

I suppose the lesson from this is the marginal tax rate, or company tax rate, doesn't tell the whole story. It is a lot more complex than a single figure.

slimwin
20-08-2014, 06:36 AM
Belg. Labour would get my party vote unless they do something in the next month to sway me back. My
Local National mp will get my electorate vote.

elZorro
20-08-2014, 06:46 AM
Belg. Labour would get my party vote unless they do something in the next month to sway me back. My
Local National mp will get my electorate vote.

Slimwin, you did say you were a centrist voter! This is huge, good on yer mate.

slimwin
20-08-2014, 07:11 AM
I've always been a swing voter. That's why I'm centrist. Labour banging on about the Hager book does them no favors for my vote. They have me with one policy that's important to me.

elZorro
20-08-2014, 07:24 AM
I've always been a swing voter. That's why I'm centrist. Labour banging on about the Hager book does them no favors for my vote. They have me with one policy that's important to me.

Which one?:)

Cuzzie
20-08-2014, 09:38 AM
El Z, This one. (And pretty important to me too. Right up there with unemployment & fairness.)
Yep, out the back door goes Christianity & in the front door comes Dark green religion. Those who don't know what Dark green religion is, use your search tool to get up to speed. The common theme with the United Nations is the same religion - New Age, Dark Green religion & Neopaganism. You might need to search for those too. The U.N have already infiltrated first world schools around the globe and New Age is being taught without the knowledge that it is even a religion at all. belg knows exactly what I'm going on about here, will be real interesting to read his comments. The U.N, Greenpeace, Green political parties around the world plus many more orgs. all come under one umbrella - the United Nations & this link here links them all together, plus tells you more about the U.N One World Order plans for all of us.



The Lucis Trust. (http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_lucytrust04.htm)


It is fair to say, "it's very important for me too & that's why I can't vote Left of Center" - EVER!!!

Joshuatree
20-08-2014, 09:43 AM
More than a hint of desperation here;)

Banksie
20-08-2014, 10:28 AM
The Greens have announced their fiscal policy.

https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/smarter-economy/fiscals


The key points:


Run surpluses $2.2 billion larger than National by 2017/18;
Gross Government Debt will be $6.6 billion lower than National by 2017/18;
Investing $3.8 billion over the next three years to maintain real levels of spending in health, education, and environmental protection to reverse National’s major cuts to these areas;
Use new savings and revenues to address growing inequality and lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty by 2017 with a $3.4 billion package of new social policies;
Use new savings and revenues to make rivers and lakes clean enough to swim in again with a $218 million package of new environment policies;
Use new savings and revenues to invest $1.4 billion into kick-starting the transition to a smarter greener innovation economy;
Deliver modest income tax cuts to 97 percent of all New Zealand taxpayers through a climate tax cut, by making the first $2,000 of income tax free;
Cut the company tax rate from 28 percent to 27 percent;
Increase the top marginal income tax rate to 40 percent for all income over $140,000, with a matching increase in the trust tax rate;
A further $2 billion worth of initiatives over three years to be announced before September 20.

Major von Tempsky
20-08-2014, 10:40 AM
You should read the words that are there Belge, rather than the words that you want to be there.

I said raising "the top tax rate to a punitive level", I didn't say "have top tax rates higher than ours" which are the words you put into my mouth.

An old trick of yours and which is why many people can no longer be bothered arguing with you.

Banksie
20-08-2014, 10:44 AM
They even have the confidence to publish an audit of their plan that contains the following concern:


Our second more substantial concern is that the estimates make no allowance for behavioural responses to the tax change. The type of impact is demonstrated in Figure 1, which presents the way that declared income evolved following the introduction of a 39% tax for incomes over $60,000 in the early 2000s. The majority of post 1999 income growth occurs at income levels below $60,000. In particular there is the development of an income spike precisely at $60,000 – a spike that did not exist prior to the tax change in 1999.

If the incentive is large enough people will rearrange their affairs to reduce their tax exposure. The Green Party proposals to change the tax rate for trusts and to increase tax enforcement activities reflect an awareness of this propensity, but the revenue estimates do not reflect this awareness. Tax avoidance is not necessarily illegal, but usually reflects a combination of people perceiving that the system is not equitable and an overly complex tax system. The former creates the incentive, the latter the means, for tax avoidance. Taxpayers will be surprisingly fast at changing their affairs, and most changes will be quite legal.

The Green Party tax revenue estimates take no allowance for a decline in the tax base and as such must be viewed as high-end estimates. We think it would be prudent to base fiscal estimates on considerably lower revenue estimates.


https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/Appendix-Infometrics-ReviewOfFiscalImpact.pdf

Disclaimer: I know I am beginning to sound like a Green "Fanboy" which was not really my intention. But I have been impressed with the way they make announcements and present the facts.

I am less impressed with this quote Our full fiscal costings for our 2014 election priorities which show larger surpluses and pay down debt sooner than National, it does sound a bit like playing the man. I would have preferred it to be worded "...pay down debt sooner that the current fiscal plan."

craic
20-08-2014, 10:46 AM
They left out reinstating a Blacksmiths shop in every town and making Cannabis free under the national health system
The Greens have announced their fiscal policy.

https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/smarter-economy/fiscals


The key points:


Run surpluses $2.2 billion larger than National by 2017/18;
Gross Government Debt will be $6.6 billion lower than National by 2017/18;
Investing $3.8 billion over the next three years to maintain real levels of spending in health, education, and environmental protection to reverse National’s major cuts to these areas;
Use new savings and revenues to address growing inequality and lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty by 2017 with a $3.4 billion package of new social policies;
Use new savings and revenues to make rivers and lakes clean enough to swim in again with a $218 million package of new environment policies;
Use new savings and revenues to invest $1.4 billion into kick-starting the transition to a smarter greener innovation economy;
Deliver modest income tax cuts to 97 percent of all New Zealand taxpayers through a climate tax cut, by making the first $2,000 of income tax free;
Cut the company tax rate from 28 percent to 27 percent;
Increase the top marginal income tax rate to 40 percent for all income over $140,000, with a matching increase in the trust tax rate;
A further $2 billion worth of initiatives over three years to be announced before September 20.

Banksie
20-08-2014, 10:50 AM
They left out reinstating a Blacksmiths shop in every town and making Cannabis free under the national health system

No, I haven't noticed this in any of their published policies, have you?

Do you think this is their secret agenda, or is it just a throw away comment to discourage reasonable political debate?

Harvey Specter
20-08-2014, 12:42 PM
And the same in NZ too. ;)I. think you will find most are paying close to the rate of 28%. The issue is they move revenues overseas by transfer pricing agreements, to countries like Lux where they get a concession for that income.

So in NZ, they minimise the taxable income, but pay at the headline rate.
In 'tax havens' the increase the taxable income, since they get a lower rate (ie. lower tax rate on royalies, interest, dividends, income from overseas etc).

craic
20-08-2014, 01:01 PM
Reasonable debate went out the window years ago. I have restored some measure of reasonable debate by reducing one prolific poster to the IGNORE list and all I see of that persons rants is a line on my screen to the effect that 'this post is hidden as ___----- is on your ignore list. And what makes you think that the Greens will be able to achieve anything more in the foreseeable future?
No, I haven't noticed this in any of their published policies, have you?

Do you think this is their secret agenda, or is it just a throw away comment to discourage reasonable political debate?

Banksie
20-08-2014, 01:19 PM
Reasonable debate went out the window years ago. I have restored some measure of reasonable debate by reducing one prolific poster to the IGNORE list and all I see of that persons rants is a line on my screen to the effect that 'this post is hidden as ___----- is on your ignore list.

Lol - I too have people on the ignore list, and it does make reading these threads easier. I am not belg, and this is my first serious look at politics in NZ, so forget the past, I am sure I am not the only one on here who would appreciate a structured political debate.


And what makes you think that the Greens will be able to achieve anything more in the foreseeable future?

I am not quite sure what you are asking me here, have they failed spectacularly before? I know a couple of years ago they called for quantitative easing, but I believe they have backtracked on that - although pub politicians like to keep throwing it up in discussion.

One argument I often hear against the policies being rolled out just before the election is "where is the money", well it seems to me that the Greens have presented a fiscal policy that shows where the money is coming from. Maybe they have made incorrect assumptions or over/understated values these are good points of debate.

The other argument is ideologically, are we happy with the direction they are taking - but I find so much of that is coloured by prejudice and untruths, it is hard to get to the heart of why exactly people are afraid of seeing the greens with more power. (To be honest, as a recent resident, many of their policies seem to align with the kiwi view of ourselves. Please correct me if I am wrong here.)

Banksie
20-08-2014, 02:14 PM
Nowadays, each time you read an article or post that is critical of Green policy ... trace the author's political leaning. On ST its pretty darn obvious.

I don't mind people being critical, I just wished they had logical arguments.

I did imagine that discussing politics on ST would result in a lot of centre-right and right supporters, but I also expected them to have well thought out arguments and reasons for their choice. It makes me wonder how well researched some peoples investment decisions really are when they clearly don't research their politics.

My local swimming pool is called the Norman Kirk Memorial Pool, so you can imagine how much unbiased opinion I get at the pub - and I guess they have slowly indoctrinated me - so where are the counter arguments?

Banksie
20-08-2014, 03:09 PM
I despair.

After the greens release a fiscal policy and have it independently audited - rather than engage them on the policy JK accuses them of smoking dope. Right on the heels of him moaning about dirty politics. Can the man not see the irony.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11311779

(The story is from the herald so please if someone can show he has been misquoted or quoted out of context I would appreciate it.)

Cuzzie
20-08-2014, 03:32 PM
I despair.

After the greens release a fiscal policy and have it independently audited - rather than engage them on the policy JK accuses them of smoking dope. Right on the heels of him moaning about dirty politics. Can the man not see the irony.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11311779

(The story is from the herald so please if someone can show he has been misquoted or quoted out of context I would appreciate it.)What is wrong with you banksie, have you been smoking dope. There is no way in a million years, the Greens could get within even 50% of National paying off dept faster than National. You are so one eyed both are closed on this occasion. Sort of like when you take a big drag of a smoke:eek2: in.

craic
20-08-2014, 04:22 PM
Two of the Greens policies - Opposition to oil drilling anywhere there might be a snail or a spill into the sea and no fracking - thus preventing any useful chance of mineral developement in NZ. Secondly use of geothermal power in a big way -this has been examined several times and found to be impractical, costly and dangerous beyond the present level. Dozens of bores in Rotorua had to be shut down save the geysers and tourism. Imagine what would happen if they increased the usage for power generation. Massive costs related to re-jigging farming to suit their imaginary clean green image. Crazy ideas about economically suicidal public transport systems - the list goes on.
I don't mind people being critical, I just wished they had logical arguments.

I did imagine that discussing politics on ST would result in a lot of centre-right and right supporters, but I also expected them to have well thought out arguments and reasons for their choice. It makes me wonder how well researched some peoples investment decisions really are when they clearly don't research their politics.

My local swimming pool is called the Norman Kirk Memorial Pool, so you can imagine how much unbiased opinion I get at the pub - and I guess they have slowly indoctrinated me - so where are the counter arguments?

Banksie
20-08-2014, 07:40 PM
Two of the Greens policies - Opposition to oil drilling anywhere there might be a snail or a spill into the sea and no fracking - thus preventing any useful chance of mineral developement in NZ. Secondly use of geothermal power in a big way -this has been examined several times and found to be impractical, costly and dangerous beyond the present level. Dozens of bores in Rotorua had to be shut down save the geysers and tourism. Imagine what would happen if they increased the usage for power generation. Massive costs related to re-jigging farming to suit their imaginary clean green image. Crazy ideas about economically suicidal public transport systems - the list goes on.

Thanks for the reply craic.

Yes, oil or no oil is one of the ideological differences. Do we believe in a future that is oil dominated or one that explores alternate energy supplies. Are the 12% of NZ who believe there is an alternative stupid and ignorant? I like to believe they aren't. NZ have done pretty well without too much dependence on oil exploration up till now. The important thing though is the greens don't rule it out, they are just throwing up roadblocks to make it difficult and make funds available to explore other alternatives. Oil was once the latest and greatest energy source - what if the green investment policies identify a newer energy source that we can profit from without hitting the environment so hard.

i agree - geothermal energy - a lot of what we think is clean and green today, may not be seen as such in future. We have seen a situation with greenies pushing for wind power, then fighting against it because birds were getting sliced up. So yeah - if you don't believe in exploring alternative energy sources - don't vote green. Personally I would like to see a government that at least explores these possibilities - rather than write them off completely.

I could go on about the other points you raised but I realise it will not change your point of view. However, this is the beauty of MMP - you can get people at the table with different ideas debating the issues and putting them to the vote.

From your posts I believe you are an older guy craic (cutting down trees in Napier if I remember rightly) and as such you do need to ask yourself - what am I leaving behind for future generations? Are we maximising short term profits at the expense of long term viability?

Banksie
20-08-2014, 07:51 PM
Attack politics in action ... Yawn!

Lol - cuzzie still feeling the need to abuse me. Hope it made you feel a bit better about yourself mate.

Cuzzie
20-08-2014, 08:41 PM
Lol - cuzzie still feeling the need to abuse me. Hope it made you feel a bit better about yourself mate.No abuse Banksie, just stating facts. If you think the Greens can pay off debt faster than National you are not quite right in the head. There is absolutely no abuse in that statement, just facts. Isn't it a bit late for you, you should be out defacing National Billboards by now.

craic
20-08-2014, 09:50 PM
Thanks for the reply craic.

I am 77 years old and my first action in coming here over twenty years ago was to plant thousands of coppice gums - trees that grow in just a few years and when cut down, grow back much faster than the first crop. According to Consumer, it is the best type of firewood. I am now dropping gums over thirty metres tall along with fifty year old Radiata trees that are past their best. But it doesn't matter, this place will be turned into a block of houses before long, it is too close to town. I don't make a profit, short term or otherwise, it just keeps me fit and healthy and provides some friends and other with firewood. All the money I need comes from this

I could go on about the other points you raised but I realise it will not change your point of view. However, this is the beauty of MMP - you can get people at the table with different ideas debating the issues and putting them to the vote.

From your posts I believe you are an older guy craic (cutting down trees in Napier if I remember rightly) and as such you do need to ask yourself - what am I leaving behind for future generations? Are we maximising short term profits at the expense of long term viability?cccccccccccc

Banksie
21-08-2014, 05:56 AM
Lol, I thought I remembered a story about trees and firewood. So 20 years, you are a pretty new arrival as well :) ....didn't live here before neoliberalism took hold and destroyed the egalitarian utopia I keep hearing so much about. (Btw - I am not having a bar of it, although we have problems now I am sure it wasn't all champagne and candy floss back-in-the-day.)

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 08:14 AM
Below is more common sense from a voter who is not hoodwinked. He makes good points and is well worth the read.


I just listened to Norman on the radio talking about post-election deal making, and my blood began to boil. Labour and the Greens are using MMP as a shield behind which to hide their true intentions, and they ought to be called on it by interviewers.

In this campaign we all know that you cannot have Labour without the Greens, or the Greens without Labour. Why not tell us what they will collectively do so that we actually know the choice we are being asked to make: Nation v Labour/Green?

Labour can promise to do A, B, and C, and pretend to cost it as funded. The Greens can promise D, E, and F, and pretend to cost it as funded. They then get to attract to the left voters who like any of A through F. But they both know they are never going to do it all. It is not much different to misleading advertising.

They say they cannot put their heads together and decide what they would collectively do until they know how many votes they each get. Rubbish. What difference does it make if Labour are 2:1 v the Greens or if they are 4:3 or 5:3 – who cares. They need each other and that is all that matters – as Al Bundy would have it, you can’t have one without the other.

I’m convinced the only they reason they don’t offer a joint platform of main policies (perhaps with other lists of things they would each like to do but might not) is because it allows them to over-promise. And they know they are over-promising. That in my book as a lie, a lie dressed up as respect for democracy. A lie that shows their mutual disrespect for democracy.

The same is true of Winston by the way – he could be honest if he wanted. He could say he’ll go with whichever of National (not counting the rest of the right) or Labour/Green (not counting the rest of the left) gets the most vote, but remain as confidence and supply for them only. If he wanted he could add conditions – no Dotcom or whatever. You can read him positioning as meaning that, but surely the people he asks to vote for him deserve to know? Insincere posturing it all he seems to do.


The same goes with the election bribe/promise/policy costings. The NZ Herald, for example, are running their “Porkometer” with National head to head against Labour.

Now, we know there will have to be some compromise, but ultimately the after election spending will be a combined figure decided by Green and Labour (and Mana, and Internet and possibly NZ First).

The whole system is geared for putting up promises that can’t be kept.

“Oh”, says Labour, “sure, WE were going to put 1.5B into that, but due to the Greens wanting 1B for something else, we no longer can”.

So the whole premise of electing Labour on that policy falls apart.

Or the Greens, for that matter.

In fact, voters have no idea which of the policy bribes made by Labour and the Greens will actually survive post-election. Because one thing is for sure: the country can’t afford both of them.


This was Nicky Hagered by me and is somebody else's words.

craic
21-08-2014, 08:18 AM
I have been in Godzone since 1959 thats longer than most posters on here - 20 odd years on this property
Lol, I thought I remembered a story about trees and firewood. So 20 years, you are a pretty new arrival as well :) ....didn't live here before neoliberalism took hold and destroyed the egalitarian utopia I keep hearing so much about. (Btw - I am not having a bar of it, although we have problems now I am sure it wasn't all champagne and candy floss back-in-the-day.)

fungus pudding
21-08-2014, 08:21 AM
Below is more common sense from a voter who is not hoodwinked. He makes good points and is well worth the read.


I just listened to Norman on the radio talking about post-election deal making, and my blood began to boil. Labour and the Greens are using MMP as a shield behind which to hide their true intentions, and they ought to be called on it by interviewers.

In this campaign we all know that you cannot have Labour without the Greens, or the Greens without Labour. Why not tell us what they will collectively do so that we actually know the choice we are being asked to make: Nation v Labour/Green?

Labour can promise to do A, B, and C, and pretend to cost it as funded. The Greens can promise D, E, and F, and pretend to cost it as funded. They then get to attract to the left voters who like any of A through F. But they both know they are never going to do it all. It is not much different to misleading advertising.

They say they cannot put their heads together and decide what they would collectively do until they know how many votes they each get. Rubbish. What difference does it make if Labour are 2:1 v the Greens or if they are 4:3 or 5:3 – who cares. They need each other and that is all that matters – as Al Bundy would have it, you can’t have one without the other.

I’m convinced the only they reason they don’t offer a joint platform of main policies (perhaps with other lists of things they would each like to do but might not) is because it allows them to over-promise. And they know they are over-promising. That in my book as a lie, a lie dressed up as respect for democracy. A lie that shows their mutual disrespect for democracy.

The same is true of Winston by the way – he could be honest if he wanted. He could say he’ll go with whichever of National (not counting the rest of the right) or Labour/Green (not counting the rest of the left) gets the most vote, but remain as confidence and supply for them only. If he wanted he could add conditions – no Dotcom or whatever. You can read him positioning as meaning that, but surely the people he asks to vote for him deserve to know? Insincere posturing it all he seems to do.


The same goes with the election bribe/promise/policy costings. The NZ Herald, for example, are running their “Porkometer” with National head to head against Labour.

Now, we know there will have to be some compromise, but ultimately the after election spending will be a combined figure decided by Green and Labour (and Mana, and Internet and possibly NZ First).

The whole system is geared for putting up promises that can’t be kept.

“Oh”, says Labour, “sure, WE were going to put 1.5B into that, but due to the Greens wanting 1B for something else, we no longer can”.

So the whole premise of electing Labour on that policy falls apart.

Or the Greens, for that matter.

In fact, voters have no idea which of the policy bribes made by Labour and the Greens will actually survive post-election. Because one thing is for sure: the country can’t afford both of them.


This was Nicky Hagered by me and is somebody else's words.

Labour Greens have in fact announced a joint policy. They are going to reform the electricity market to punish the shareholders and all other taxpayers at the same time.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 08:27 AM
I have been in Godzone since 1959 thats longer than most posters on here - 20 odd years on this property banksie has been here 5 minutes, pretends he knows nothing about politics in NZ and promptly becomes a cheerleader for belg & EZ.

craic is a typical Kiwi, & you are, born in another country who has embraced this wonderful country and it's opportunities. So one pretends and the other one embraces, I know which one I would rather have a beer or a drop or two of single malt with.

BTW craic, if you are ever looking for a hard to find part for your chainsaw, send me a P.M, I might be able to help.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 08:29 AM
Labour Greens have in fact announced a joint policy. They are going to reform the electricity market to punish the shareholders and all other taxpayers at the same time.:ohmy: Let the evil begin. Wonder how Peters would fit in?

Joshuatree
21-08-2014, 08:39 AM
You heard it here first folks John key now known as Mr Smarmyte.:t_up:

Banksie
21-08-2014, 08:53 AM
I have been in Godzone since 1959 thats longer than most posters on here - 20 odd years on this property

Ah - sorry mate I misunderstood. So was it all roses and champagne before rogernomics, or was it as one poster, FP I think, so succinctly put it "just awful".

Contrary to what some like to believe I am no raving leftie. I own shares in one of the power companies, so have a vested interest in maintaining the Nat status quo. But that is what I am questioning; the current economic ideologies seem to have run their course; it appears that for some people to profit others have to be disadvantaged.

A vote for Nats in the election would be more of the same, and I kind of think that a vote for Labour (if they had enough support to govern alone) would also be more of the same. I hope a labour/green et al coalition may throw some of the options out on the table, so that voters can really start thinking about, and discussing, what they would like for a future NZ. In short I believe a step-shift is required in economic thinking and the greens are probable best positioned (at this point) to be the catalyst for this change.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 08:53 AM
You heard it here first folks John key now known as Mr Smarmyte.:t_up:
Call him what you like J.T just remember what you based that on. A fat hacker stealing emails, changing the contents with or without the author, "Little Nicky" who is against that kind of illegal activity and has written books about it, is part of the whole scam. Nicky Hager is your Mr Smarmyte J.T, John Key is just the target.
Massive fail on your part, but let it be a success in that mind of yours, but here is the thing. It's not going to sway any right voters over to the devils side, just the loonie left competing against each other. It's actually really funny to watch & I'm enjoying watching them at their worst.

:)By Crikey, it's another beautiful day out there today, is it not.:)

Joshuatree
21-08-2014, 08:56 AM
Remember marmite is" politician brown "as well ; thats a bonus freebie.:)

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 08:59 AM
Remember marmite is" politician brown "as well ; thats a bonus freebie.:) OMG, I had no idea what that meant so I had to Google it and here it is:


politician brown (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSQzTKcUda0)

:D

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 09:01 AM
:)BTW J.T thanks for the freebie:)

Joshuatree
21-08-2014, 10:25 AM
Politician brown is the new smarmyite blue ,exploding indelible ink. "Listen to a Smarmyte today and all your trust is eaten away".

Banksie
21-08-2014, 10:29 AM
Politician brown is the new smarmyite blue ,exploding indelible ink. "Listen to a Smarmyte today and all your trust is eaten away".Can we shift this to the National thread?I have no idea the context (cos I don't read cuzzies posts) but could we keep at least one of the political threads relatively free of name calling.

Edit: You too belg...although I guess that it is a cheek me asking as you started the thread.

Joshuatree
21-08-2014, 10:34 AM
Good point Banksie; but maybe you need to read cuzzies posts. Unfort I'm guilty of following him down to his level.

Banksie
21-08-2014, 10:42 AM
Good point Banksie; but maybe you need to read cuzzies posts. Unfort I'm guilty of following him down to his level.Thanks mate, it is easy to get sucked in, that is why I have him on my ignore list.

Banksie
21-08-2014, 10:47 AM
Our problem is the Cuz who posts his mindless, drivelling b.s. wherever he feels like. My problem is that I can't not pull the idiot up short.

I'll reply on the appropriate thread in future but it'll get a bit messy.

Cheers....

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 10:50 AM
Good point Banksie; but maybe you need to read cuzzies posts. Unfort I'm guilty of following him down to his level.
Now Joshuatree, you have just declared yourself as part of the special needs club - you throw mud at National, I pick it up and throw it back and you "say down to cuzzies level". I give back what is given to me and you don't like it, great I'll take that as a direct hit be me on you, but don't ever, ever try and make me lower than you because if I come down to your level to give your sh!te back, it is more than obvious you are way down in the sewer already. I call it how it is and I bite back hard, I can understand you don't like that tree so maybe think twice before tangling with me again.
So there you go - A Joshuatree is something that throws cr@p, but complains when it is thrown back otherwise known as special needs.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 11:02 AM
Our problem is the Cuz who posts his mindless, drivelling b.s. wherever he feels like. My problem is that I can't not pull the idiot up short.

I'll reply on the appropriate thread in future but it'll get a bit messy.
Your problem is I wont let you get away with propaganda and your hypocrisy. Is that why you declared to everyone on ShareTrader that you had my I.D though hacking me belg? That's what I call being an idiot and you are belg, an idiot in the first degree. You don't like me defending your cr@p too. You don't get away with any rubbish you post on here if I read about it & you don't like that. Good, I'm doing my job then. And now because I wont let you get away with talking absolute rubbish all of the time, you declare me an idiot. Can't win the argument so attack the poster is the first sign of defeat belg, I think well will see more name calling from you. Pity your banksie plan failed, I saw it for what is was and you were left with egg on your face. Not even a nice try, kids stuff really, but you keep it up, there must be somebody you can con.


Seen the Polls lately? What another beautiful day in paradise is it not!!!

Joshuatree
21-08-2014, 11:03 AM
He is like this on all three political threads; one sided offensive attack ; lowering any coherent discussion to whale blog like tactics to promote national/ himself/ one has to wonder if he is being paid to do this attack if so it will backfire. I will refrain from doing it but if he is allowed to continue discolouring all the threads is that fair?

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 11:23 AM
Cuz. I have reported this post. You are not Whale Oil. And his amoral style isn't going to be tolerated. Yep, that would be right, let Joshuatree have a go at me, you have a go at me and when I pass back your rubbish you complain. That is exactly what I am talking about. You can't have it both ways belg, if you throw rubbish about, expect it back, but you are some kind of special aren't you - you complain when it get it back. MOD, when you read this, please note that I take great offense with belg gloating on ShareTrader that he has Hacked my computer and he has all my details. This is a criminal offence that is punishable with a term in Prison and a large fine. I insist you take this complaint seriously. I will give you the offending post number in a P.M
There you go belg, I've thrown your mud back at you again, with interest of course. Moose knows who hacked him now too. Your a dangerous man when in control of tools that let you dive into peoples personal lives belg & you should be stopped. There is little doubt in my mind why you love hacker Kim Dot Com & Nicky Hager so much, number one fan I'd say.


belgs gloating about hacking my I.D below.


You can? Perhaps you could explain why it took me less than 10 minutes to establish your identity? And then; this'll take longer; why I haven't used this information.
;)

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 11:29 AM
Complaint sent, BTW belg enjoy my emails much did you? Your find nothing but boring emails between friends, family and business colleges, but hey if you feel strongly enough about reading them, go right ahead. No dirt, just normal stuff. Happy reading.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 11:44 AM
Looks like the evil loonie left's grand plan to get me kicked off ShareTrader is in full swing. Get a bunch of them to target me, complain to the MODs and because the MODs gets so many complaints at one time he acts. These fellers learnt this on TradeMe no doubt. Problem is of course the very serious complaint I have over belg which BTW turned out to be true. I have been hacked. Will be interesting to see how the MODs handles this, weather he's swayed by an organised attack by the lowlife loonies or indeed he acts on the criminal activity by belg. One thing the MODs should consider is, I'm as mad as hell at being hacked and I don't walk away when I'm as mad as hell. They will need to take that into consideration.


:)She sure is a beautiful day outside, man I'm enjoying the Polls:)

fungus pudding
21-08-2014, 11:50 AM
:)She sure is a beautiful day outside, man I'm enjoying the Polls:)


You shouldn't be.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 01:50 PM
No Cuz. We just want to you to show some sense and balance. The balance is me throwing back that cr@p. You don't want balance, that is the very root of your problem.




You been kicked of Trademe. Why am I not surprised?No, don't bother with T.M with multiple belgs on there, it is a mugfest.




Not be me you haven't.

Maybe, like Slater, by someone who got really angry at you constants personal attacks and unfounded accusations? Is that why you did it? Is that your only defence? Problem for you here is that you have very publicly stated that you have hacked my Identification at the same time I have been hacked. If you use any of my info for your gain or indeed go into my bank accounts belg, I will trace you through this website and the information about you that I have already received. You did a stupid thing here and by making it public & you said a stupid thing by saying you did it and that is why I said you were not very smart & I am right. You need to think before you type belg and you need to keep your nose out of other peoples personal business. Why is it that the Left think this is some kind of O.K to hack? Skinny & Fats are going to go down and may I suggest you be very, very careful what you do with my info belg.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 02:23 PM
Nice smoke screen, Cuz. I don't believe you've been hacked at all.

And once again a wholly unsubstantiated and unfounded accusation. All part of the Cuz's personal attacks.

You're not Whale Oil mate. Grow up for all our sakes.Who is throwing out smoke screen belg? You can say whatever you like, but that is half your problem right there. Do you know what the word, "truth" means? Anyway, your biggest problem is the fact that you said that you had my details & when pushed by me you said this was done through my Facebook and my Gmail accounts. Firstly my name "cuzzie" won't lead you to my Facebook and Google accounts and secondly how did you even know I had accounts with Facebook and Google?
Your admission that you hacked my details and the fact I have been hacked does not spontaneously occur. You said "I don't believe you've been hacked at all". I say, "how the hell would you know that" This is all too creepy belg, very, very, creepy.

Banksie
21-08-2014, 02:28 PM
You're not Whale Oil mate. Grow up for all our sakes.

Oh well I guess old cuz has trolled another thread. Thanks for trying guys.

I do sometimes wonder if people would actually stand by their posts if they weren't anonymous. Would they be willing for their friends, family, and employers or employees, to see them?

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 02:32 PM
Oh well I guess old cuz has trolled another thread. Thanks for trying guys.

I do sometimes wonder if people would actually stand by their posts if they weren't anonymous. Would they be willing for their friends, family, and employers or employees, to see them?If I was belg I'd run off and make a complaint about you banksie. Your post is what I call wasted space. See my below to keep it on subject.:)

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 02:33 PM
“The Alternative Budget released by the Greens does not even stack up in the eyes of their chosen auditor – Infometrics,” said ACT Leader Dr Jamie Whyte.

"Infometrics' review of the Greens' fiscal plan found revenue estimates to be very much on the high side and said it would be much more prudent to estimate considerably lower revenue from the party’s tax hikes.

"The revenue forecasts of the Greens simply did not take into account quite predictable behavioural responses to the massive increase in both the top tax rate and the trust tax rate that is paid by hundreds of thousands of small businesses and family farms in New Zealand. Infometrics had to call the Greens out on this."

To quote the relevant passages in full, so there is no mistaking the dodgy numbers in the Greens' Alternative Budget:

“Our second more substantial concern is that the estimates make no allowance for behavioural responses to the tax change. The type of impact is demonstrated in Figure 1, which presents the way that declared income evolved following the introduction of a 39% tax for incomes over $60,000 in the early 2000s. The majority of post 1999 income growth occurs at income levels below $60,000. In particular there is the development of an income spike precisely at $60,000 – a spike that did not exist prior to the tax change in 1999."

“If the incentive is large enough people will rearrange their affairs to reduce their tax exposure. The Green Party proposals to change the tax rate for trusts and to increase tax enforcement activities reflect an awareness of this propensity, but the revenue estimates do not reflect this awareness. Tax avoidance is not necessarily illegal, but usually reflects a combination of people perceiving that the system is not equitable and an overly complex tax system. The former creates the incentive, the latter the means, for tax avoidance. Taxpayers will be surprisingly fast at changing their affairs, and most changes will be quite legal."

"The Green Party tax revenue estimates take no allowance for a decline in the tax base and as such must be viewed as high-end estimates. We think it would be prudent to base fiscal estimates on considerably lower revenue estimates.”

The full review can be read here: https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/Appendix-Infometrics-Revie...

“The Greens cannot with any credibility claim that putting the top tax rate up to 40%, and putting up the trust tax rate to 40%, which affects hundreds of thousands of small businesses and family farms, will have no behavioural effects,” said Dr Whyte.

“The Greens cannot have any credible claim to a senior ministerial portfolio after putting out so naive an alternative budget.

"On one hand, the Greens' proposals for a carbon tax are pointless unless there are behavioural changes – people will buy less carbon intensive products. But the Greens then go blind to the obvious behavioural effects of large tax increases when trying to hide their ropey economic analysis and ideological hatred of success, choice and personal responsibility.

"The Alternative Budget of ACT explicitly took account of behavioural of responses of taxpayers to cuts in the top tax rate to 24% and cuts in the company tax rate to 12.5%. Some of the revenue offsets from these behavioural changes are immediate increases – to the order of 10% of revenue.

"The ACT party looks forward to a prosperous New Zealand.

"The Green party wants to tax and regulate New Zealand into poverty."


Nicky Hagered by me from ACT.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 02:56 PM
Cuz ... The link from ACT would have been enough ... Here it is ...

http://www.act.org.nz/posts/green-party-scores-massive-own-goal-as-their-own-policy-auditor-criticises-their-fiscal-plan

Of course, if you had any sensible comment to go along with the link we'd like to see that in your post with the link. No, that's what you would do for you, I copied & pasted it because that's what I wanted to do for me. You stick to how you would like to do things for you belg, don't bother telling me how to do it your way control freak. No comment needed by me, the article states it all and that is exactly why I pasted it for all to read. Understand? Good.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 03:00 PM
From http://psychcentral.com/encyclopedia/2008/paranoid-delusion/...

A paranoid delusion is the fixed, false belief that one is being harmed or persecuted by a particular person or group of people. Paranoid delusions are known technically as a “persecutory delusion.”

It involves the person’s belief that he or she is being conspired against, cheated, spied on, followed, poisoned or drugged, maliciously maligned, harassed, or obstructed in the pursuit of long-term goals.

Small slights may be exaggerated and become the focus of a delusional system when a person suffers from a paranoid delusion.
...
Paranoid delusions are most often diagnosed in the context of schizophrenia. But they can also occur in non-psychotic disorders, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder, or the use of certain medications or street drugs.Here we go. I won't bother answering this, that will confuse the hell out of you. I'm glad I'm not you buddy.

Banksie
21-08-2014, 03:02 PM
“The Alternative Budget released by the Greens does not even stack up in the eyes of their chosen auditor – Infometrics,” said ACT Leader Dr Jamie Whyte.

Sweet a real debate.

Yup, that is what the audit says, I pointed this out in post #46 (before ACT did ;)).

What Dr Jamie Whyte has failed to mention is the summary of the audit which says:



A comparison of the fiscal impact of the Green Party Policies with the BEFU and PREFU forecasts for key summary fiscal indicators are presented in Table 1. The implication is that the proposed Green Party policies lead to moderately higher operating balances, lower debt and higher net worth outcomes than forecast in the BEFU. The critical factors leading to this outcome are that Green Party extra spending plans are typically below the BEFU operating allowance for extra spending and that the Green Party policies also include revenue raising initiatives (see Table 2).


The estimates of the revenue impacts of proposed changes to the top tax rate appear optimistic. However, sensitivity tests reported in the final section indicate that using lower revenue impacts does not materially alter the conclusion of the previous paragraph.

Dr Whyte then goes on to set up and shoot down a straw-man


"The Greens cannot with any credibility claim that putting the top tax rate up to 40%, and putting up the trust tax rate to 40%, which affects hundreds of thousands of small businesses and family farms, will have no behavioural effects,” said Dr Whyte.
The Greens never claimed that behaviour wouldn't be changed and according to the auditors, even if it is, they can still achieve their stated outcomes.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 03:10 PM
belg, may I suggest that it is not me you need to worry about, this should be of more concern to you.




Labour (http://www.stuff.co.nz/interactives/polling/?label=Stuff+%2F+Ipsos+Poll)


Try talking the subject, not attacking me and you might get some respect that you crave from the other lefties. If they respect you already, then go back on the attack towards me, it will make you all look the fools you are. The weakest sign is to attack the author, me on this occasion, and not the subject. Maybe that is what's wrong with the loonie left ... just far too weak.

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 04:13 PM
From http://psychcentral.com/encyclopedia/2008/delusion-of-grandeur/ ...

A delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer’s).

People with a delusion of grandeur often have the conviction of having some great but unrecognized talent or insight. They may also believe they have made some important discovery that others don’t understand or appreciate.

Less commonly, the individual may have the delusion of having a special relationship with a prominent person (such as being an adviser to the President). Or the person may believe that actually are a very prominent and important person, in which case the actual person may be regarded as an imposter.
...
Sometimes, in popular language, this disorder may be known as “megalomania,” but is more accurately referred to as narcissistic personality disorder if it is a core component of a person’s personality and identity. In such disorders, the person has a greatly out-of-proportion sense of their own worth and value in the world. People with this issue can also sometimes have a taste for the finer, more extravagant things in life. Didn't read it after the first three words. What we have here is a very complex feller as you can all see. Do you still think he did not hack me. Seriously I do not need to read his deluded words to know this character belg is in big trouble - with his own mind. Given the fact of your mental state and that you have hacked my details and know what you please about me, I will give you the sternest warning so far and that would be, Hell Hath no Fury if you want to *u** with me, you have not got the full picture and if you did this song what be fitting for you.


belg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypkv0HeUvTc)


You are complex beyond belief and I am not. To prove this Im willing to put my criminal against yours record. I have none and you do, are you up for it belg? How do I know, well you and I know and that would be enough. Needless to say you don't want to talk about your criminal record belg, but please push me to do so.



It's fair to say, "Oakley should not of closed down"

Cuzzie
21-08-2014, 04:16 PM
Why do you think the left have got up to 28% of current polling at best by one party? Because they closed down metal institutions.
Are you OK belg, maybe somebody should phone or something?

Xerof
21-08-2014, 07:13 PM
Hard to reply if you're banned. Belg too.

Banksie
21-08-2014, 07:15 PM
Hard to reply if you're banned. Belg too.

Lol...thx for the update

elZorro
21-08-2014, 07:26 PM
Now what? Should we carry on debating politics, or will it be a mere shadow of the former dynamic situation on these threads? One thing's for sure, Belgarion being banned for the moment didn't stop either Banksie or myself. Very strange :eek2:.

Banksie
21-08-2014, 07:35 PM
So here is a question. Why on earth did the greens publish a fiscal policy and an audit highlighting a problem?

Are they hiding a bigger issue with the numbers?
Was it just bait to draw out responses, like the one from ACT?
Do they want to exhibit a political superiority, by being ultra transparent?

Why did they just not fix the issue before publication?

elZorro
21-08-2014, 07:49 PM
So here is a question. Why on earth did the greens publish a fiscal policy and an audit highlighting a problem?

Are they hiding a bigger issue with the numbers?
Was it just bait to draw out responses, like the one from ACT?
Do they want to exhibit a political superiority, by being ultra transparent?

Why did they just not fix the issue before publication?

I didn't see this as being too bad at all, at least the auditors looked over the whole policy and commented. One share I had, the auditors refused to pass any judgement, as the listed company was obviously not a going concern, for example.

777
03-09-2014, 06:59 PM
No one will know as no one will bother watching. The can promise the earth but it won't matter a damn. Their existence does nothing but stuff up the electoral system.

Joshuatree
03-09-2014, 07:24 PM
"No one"; sounds like you're stuck in a rigid inflexible conservative bubble no 7. Pop that bubble and free yourself and your mind will follow:)