ACT's David Seymour - i like his style.

[dln]

You might find these reprehensible attacks ‘funny’, but many will not.

https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...=1#post1017445

[Aaron]

https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...=1#post1017445

dln I think you missed Logen's point. It is not the cartoons that are reprehensible (deserving censure or condemnation) it is the media they are published in.

Obviously the cartoons you highlighted are OK because they are only posted on share trader and not by the herald. It is not the cartoon itself it is the form of media in which it is presented that is reprehensible apparently.

The Tremain cartoon is funny but I would have had home/wealth owning boomers holding the leash instead, except that might be too close to the truth to be funny.

[dln]

No, didn't miss that.

[Logen Ninefingers]

dln I think you missed Logen's point. It is not the cartoons that are reprehensible (deserving censure or condemnation) it is the media they are published in.

Obviously the cartoons you highlighted are OK because they are only posted on share trader and not by the herald. It is not the cartoon itself it is the form of media in which it is presented that is reprehensible apparently.

The Tremain cartoon is funny but I would have had home/wealth owning boomers holding the leash instead, except that might be too close to the truth to be funny.

No, not quite what I was saying. I’m saying that if our mainstream media only publishes left wing cartoonists giving left wing perspectives, as is currently the case, then you can draw your own conclusions from that.

I could do a cartoon right now and self-publish it somewhere. That doesn’t make it ‘all fair & square’. This is what ‘Tremain’ is basically doing: publishing his own stuff.

[Aaron]

No, not quite what I was saying. I’m saying that if our mainstream media only publishes left wing cartoonists giving left wing perspectives, as is currently the case, then you can draw your own conclusions from that.

I could do a cartoon right now and self-publish it somewhere. That doesn’t make it ‘all fair & square’. This is what ‘Tremain’ is basically doing: publishing his own stuff.

Don't panic Logen from what I gather Steven Joyce, Mike Hosking, Richard Prebble, Bruce Cotterill, Matthew Hooton et al have a right leaning tendency and all have regular herald opinion pieces to fight the good fight for the right.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Don't panic Logen from what I gather Steven Joyce, Mike Hosking, Richard Prebble, Bruce Cotterill, Matthew Hooton et al have a right leaning tendency and all have regular herald opinion pieces to fight the good fight for the right.

Simon Wilson writes from a left wing perspective almost daily for The New Zealand Herald, and as far as I know his pieces are not marked as ‘opinion’.

[Aaron]

Simon Wilson writes from a left wing perspective almost daily for The New Zealand Herald, and as far as I know his pieces are not marked as ‘opinion’.

Just had a look this morning Simon Wilson's is an opinion piece. Hope you are not so sensitive and close minded that you can't stand to hear a differing opinion on the world even if you don't agree.

His column is usually too long and wordy for me. Here is a taste though, probably behind the paywall but you would expect opinions are free.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/electi...CE6LKGQ7D65MU/

In other revelations last week, RNZ reported that since 2021, National has received 7.5 times more large donations than Labour.
That’s $8,206,101 against $1,085, 563. Act received $4,236,393.
Why, really, are those big donors pouring their money into National and Act’s coffers? It’s not about personal tax, is it?
Labour has failed to introduce genuinely progressive tax reform, although they know the surveys say it would be popular. But I imagine they also know - have always known - that any attempt to do this would be met by a wall of money. Superwealthy donors would spend whatever it takes to prevent it happening.
Donors who don’t want the fairer society Labour hopes for and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori have the policies to help achieve, because it would cost them a bit more of their own money.
Labour doesn’t want anyone to build that wall. The tragedy is, it’s there anyway. The money’s in.

Reprehensible????

To quote David Seymour

The fact that they are wealthy doesn’t mean they know more about policies. It does mean that they have got the ability to put the hand in their own pocket and help others should they choose.

Looks like they are digging deep to ensure policies that will be to their own benefit.

I am constantly attacking boomers but maybe my target should be the country’s wealthiest 1% who own more than a quarter of the country’s wealth and pay about half the tax rate of the average kiwi on their overall earnings and capital gains.

The amount of money they are pouring in to their representatives at ACT might indicate that at least some wealthy people are greedy.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Just had a look this morning Simon Wilson's is an opinion piece. Hope you are not so sensitive and close minded that you can't stand to hear a differing opinion on the world even if you don't agree.

His column is usually too long and wordy for me. Here is a taste though, probably behind the paywall but you would expect opinions are free.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/electi...CE6LKGQ7D65MU/

In other revelations last week, RNZ reported that since 2021, National has received 7.5 times more large donations than Labour.
That’s $8,206,101 against $1,085, 563. Act received $4,236,393.
Why, really, are those big donors pouring their money into National and Act’s coffers? It’s not about personal tax, is it?
Labour has failed to introduce genuinely progressive tax reform, although they know the surveys say it would be popular. But I imagine they also know - have always known - that any attempt to do this would be met by a wall of money. Superwealthy donors would spend whatever it takes to prevent it happening.
Donors who don’t want the fairer society Labour hopes for and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori have the policies to help achieve, because it would cost them a bit more of their own money.
Labour doesn’t want anyone to build that wall. The tragedy is, it’s there anyway. The money’s in.

Reprehensible????

To quote David Seymour

The fact that they are wealthy doesn’t mean they know more about policies. It does mean that they have got the ability to put the hand in their own pocket and help others should they choose.

Looks like they are digging deep to ensure policies that will be to their own benefit.

I am constantly attacking boomers but maybe my target should be the country’s wealthiest 1% who own more than a quarter of the country’s wealth and pay about half the tax rate of the average kiwi on their overall earnings and capital gains.

The amount of money they are pouring in to their representatives at ACT might indicate that at least some wealthy people are greedy.

'the fairer society Labour hopes for and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori have the policies to help achieve'

Yeah, Simon Wilson is a paid shill for the Left.

[Aaron]

'the fairer society Labour hopes for and the Greens and Te Pāti Māori have the policies to help achieve'

Yeah, Simon Wilson is a paid shill for the Left.

Not sure he is a "paid shill". Maybe just someone with a different opinion from you. All the other opinion pieces left and right I would suggest are not from "paid shills" just opinionated people who are probably trying to achieve the same thing from different angles. A better country for as many people as possible.

David Seymour probably believes smaller govt and lower taxes will result in a better society. I would tend to disagree.

The Greens probably believe more tax and govt intervention will result in a better society. I would tend to disagree.

There might be some middle ground but I am pretty sure there is no perfect solution that will suit everyone.

What I got from the article is that it would seem really wealthy people can protect their interests through the political process by ensuring their favoured party has sufficient funding to get their message out.

[davflaws]

i am constantly attacking boomers but maybe my target should be the country’s wealthiest 1% who own more than a quarter of the country’s wealth and pay about half the tax rate of the average kiwi on their overall earnings and capital gains.

Yes! Yes! Yes!