National - FFS!

[moka]

Yep, I expected at least one of you to respond with that. But tell me ... why is it ridiculous? We have had to put up with Balance’s never ending, ranting and raving for months now. The same nauseous “Comrade Cindy” and “Kiwibuild anyone?” comments, day after day after day. Some people have tried to meet him halfway with attempts a mature discussion, others, like me, have eventually lost our cool and spoken our minds. Nothing has made any difference. So what is wrong with attempting to pull back on the drama, and give him an opportunity to tell us all what it is he actually wants? Remove all the bull**** and distraction from the equation, and get down to the bare bones.

I want to know what Balance wants from the next government - regardless of which party that ends up being. I want nuts and bolts from him for once. I don’t see how that is a ridiculous request at all. It is an attempt to restore this ongoing drama to some kind of mature and respectful discussion.

But hey, if Balance (or anyone else) can’t see my post in the light it was intended, that’s fine with me. I have had my hand on the front door handle for some time now - I’m happy to walk on out and close it behind me.

Judging from “Balance’s never ending ranting and raving” it seems that what he wants is to do trolling, not to engage in a mature and respectful discussion. He likes the drama.

Trolling behaviours typically include deliberately posting inflammatory comments and argumentative messages in an attempt to provoke, disrupt and upset others. “Trolls” may pretend to be part of the group, but their real intent is to create conflict for their own amusement. They want to cause disruption and trigger conflict among others for their own fun and enjoyment.

They agree with statements such as “I enjoy making someone angry” and “I enjoy embarrassing others”.
These are the rewarding feelings that some people experience when creating social discord, through selfish or self-serving behaviours and interactions. Individuals who troll are likely to enjoy inflicting psychological pain and distress on others.
They may achieve this through exerting negative social influence, power and strength.

This means that while antisocial personality traits do play a role, what really influences trolling behaviour is the social pleasure derived from knowing that others are annoyed by it. The more negative social impact the troll has, the more their behaviour is reinforced.

[BlackPeter]

Labour's problem is beyond Ardern, Robertson and a couple of others there is simply no talent. It's pretty obvious when you see the likes of Twyfod, and Davis way up in their ranks what their problem is. I don't like their coalition mates either. And I hate to think what tax schemes they're dreaming up. Death duties? Gift duties? Or a brand new surprise.

I agree with your assessment that Labours talent pool does have its limits. On the other hand - National lost recently a lot of good people as well (Nicky Kay, Amy Adams, Muller) just because they could not suppress their urges to play dirty politics. National as well did provide plenty of evidence that their hiring process (candidate selection) has nothing to do with looking for talent ... safe seat, no experience or talent required! Not sure what they saw in Ross, Walker or Falloon, but they clearly did get self-serving bullies with actually little desirable talents.

So - if the choice is between a bunch of bully inepts with mean aspirations and a bunch of well meaning inepts with at least good intentions, where are we supposed to go?

Re taxes ... I agree that it is likely they will rise. Somebody will have to pay the bills for Covid. Somebody will need to pay the cost for an increasing number of old people in society - and this is not just the superannuation. Somebody will need to pay to prepare the country for climate change and for still keeping this country worthwhile to live in for young people (i.e. good education, health system and job opportunities).

We can either further increase inequality by making poor people still worse off by increasing austerity and run the country down (look at Greece or Spain if you want examples), or we can find some ways to remove some surplus "fat" from the better off people (who by the way got again richer thanks to the latest crisis). What about a wee Covid windfall tax?

I don't know about you, but I am sure I won't be able to take our money to the after-live (if there is such a thing). Why would an inheritance tax be so terrible? But obviously are there plenty of other options ... Not sure what the best way is, but I am sure that we will need to pay more taxes if we want to keep living in a country which is worthwhile to live in.

[iceman]

I agree with your assessment that Labours talent pool does have its limits. On the other hand - National lost recently a lot of good people as well (Nicky Kay, Amy Adams, Muller) just because they could not suppress their urges to play dirty politics. National as well did provide plenty of evidence that their hiring process (candidate selection) has nothing to do with looking for talent ... safe seat, no experience or talent required! Not sure what they saw in Ross, Walker or Falloon, but they clearly did get self-serving bullies with actually little desirable talents.

So - if the choice is between a bunch of bully inepts with mean aspirations and a bunch of well meaning inepts with at least good intentions, where are we supposed to go?

Re taxes ... I agree that it is likely they will rise. Somebody will have to pay the bills for Covid. Somebody will need to pay the cost for an increasing number of old people in society - and this is not just the superannuation. Somebody will need to pay to prepare the country for climate change and for still keeping this country worthwhile to live in for young people (i.e. good education, health system and job opportunities).

We can either further increase inequality by making poor people still worse off by increasing austerity and run the country down (look at Greece or Spain if you want examples), or we can find some ways to remove some surplus "fat" from the better off people (who by the way got again richer thanks to the latest crisis). What about a wee Covid windfall tax?

I don't know about you, but I am sure I won't be able to take our money to the after-live (if there is such a thing). Why would an inheritance tax be so terrible? But obviously are there plenty of other options ... Not sure what the best way is, but I am sure that we will need to pay more taxes if we want to keep living in a country which is worthwhile to live in.

BP you make some good comments, many that I agree with but to point out "bullying" in National but ignoring the same happening in Labour with Ministers and the biggest bully of them all, the Speaker, undermines your argument:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...aitiri-inquiry
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12262363
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12350150

[BlackPeter]

BP you make some good comments, many that I agree with but to point out "bullying" in National but ignoring the same happening in Labour with Ministers and the biggest bully of them all, the Speaker, undermines your argument:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...aitiri-inquiry
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12262363
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12350150

Fair enough - our system is clearly geared to push bullies to the top, no matter which kind of organisation (party, company, church) we are talking. Not sure either I want to stand here as Labors defender, though I must say - if I run e.g. Adern and Collins through the bully-tester, then I am pretty sure with which of these ladies the buzzer will be louder ;

I agree that a number of the recent Labor ministers did behave in no way better than what I have seen and remember from a number of past National ministers.

I have not enough visibility of new Labor candidates to say whether they are better, worse or similar to Nationals latest harvest. Anyway - not a fan of Labor either, though I think that they would be in the current situation the smaller evil.

If we really apply the ethics test to our MP's along party lines, than I would think that the one sitting MP of ACT as well as most of the sitting Green MP's might look better than the rest ... though I am sure there are good (as well as bad) people in all parties.

I do respect Seymour (but am highly disappointed about his decision to seek support through the gun lobby) and I always thought high of the values of most of the Green MP's I know off ....

[fungus pudding]

Fair enough - our system is clearly geared to push bullies to the top, no matter which kind of organisation (party, company, church) we are talking. Not sure either I want to stand here as Labors defender, though I must say - if I run e.g. Adern and Collins through the bully-tester, then I am pretty sure with which of these ladies the buzzer will be louder ;

I agree that a number of the recent Labor ministers did behave in no way better than what I have seen and remember from a number of past National ministers.

I have not enough visibility of new Labor candidates to say whether they are better, worse or similar to Nationals latest harvest. Anyway - not a fan of Labor either, though I think that they would be in the current situation the smaller evil.

If we really apply the ethics test to our MP's along party lines, than I would think that the one sitting MP of ACT as well as most of the sitting Green MP's might look better than the rest ... though I am sure there are good (as well as bad) people in all parties.

I do respect Seymour (but am highly disappointed about his decision to seek support through the gun lobby) and I always thought high of the values of most of the Green MP's I know off ....

"ACT says if gun laws are worth changing, it is worth doing right."

It's hard to argue with much of what Act says about gun law reform; and few would doubt that the coalition's action was anymore than knee-jerk.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms

[BlackPeter]

"ACT says if gun laws are worth changing, it is worth doing right."

It's hard to argue with much of what Act says about gun law reform; and few would doubt that the coalition's action was anymore than knee-jerk.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms

Top line of the link you provided:

ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register,

This says it all. We do live in a world with many urgent problems. If a party makes however repealing our arms legislation to their top priority then this clearly shows it is for them more important than e.g. climate change, child poverty, education or health (to pick only some in my view ways more crucial problems). Really - either they have lost the plot or more likely they sold out to the gun lobby.

As well - I did grew up in a country with a firearms register (Germany). They do have comparatively little firearms violence (and little firearms accidents, either). I never ever felt threatened by this fire arms register. I do however feel threatened by semiautomatics any wannabe murderer could legally buy in New Zealand. A firearms register is not a threat!

Our current gun legislation might not be the best imaginable (no law is ...), but it is clearly better than the one we used to have. A firearm register is a very sensible proposal and easy to implement - hey, we are able to register cars, so why not firearms?

A party which puts repealing sensible laws on top of their priority list and which calls a sensible proposal for improving our safety a threat clearly does not share anymore my values.

And yes - I am allergic against the crooks from the NRA (North American gun lobby) and the "law repealing" crook in the white house. Not ACT's fault, though they seem to be a bit tone deaf in choosing their words these days ... or maybe they just want to join the populist gravy train ...

Sorry - I guess the money (or the votes) from the gun lobby has been more convincing for them, but they can't have it all.

[Bjauck]

"ACT says if gun laws are worth changing, it is worth doing right."

It's hard to argue with much of what Act says about gun law reform; and few would doubt that the coalition's action was anymore than knee-jerk.

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms

It is ACT's gun lobby policy that is a turn off for me. Otherwise, I had narrowed my choices to three - Lab, Top and Act. Seymour had impressed. Current local electorate MP, who is a Nat, is likely to get my electorate vote.

A complete firearms register is a minimum requirement imo.

[Baa_Baa]

If a party makes however repealing our arms legislation to their top priority then this clearly shows it is for them more important than [...]
Sorry - I guess the money (or the votes) from the gun lobby has been more convincing for them, but they can't have it all.

If you check the ACT policies, gun law reform is 9th on the list of 15, and there is no evidence that it is motivated by the gun lobby, what is your source for that statement? Have you even checked the ACT policies, or just shooting from the lip? https://www.act.org.nz/policies

[Bjauck]

If you check the ACT policies, gun law reform is 9th on the list of 15, and there is no evidence that it is motivated by the gun lobby, what is your source for that statement? Have you even checked the ACT policies, or just shooting from the lip? https://www.act.org.nz/policies

https://www.act.org.nz/firearms
"ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register,"

https://www.waikato.ac.nz/news-opini...urch-shootings
"Had gun registration been obligatory, the police would have known what type of firearms the alleged Christchurch shooter had lawfully acquired. They would have also known how many he had, where he obtained them and the frequency with which he was acquiring them.We can’t know whether this information would have raised a red flag, but it does highlight the possibility that such information may be useful to the authorities. Potential benefits could arise during normal police business. Similarly, when a firearm licence expires, police could identify any associated firearms of the former licence-holder and make sure they are taken out of circulation correctly."

Fo me a register would be a first step in combatting misuse of the weapon.

[BlackPeter]

If you check the ACT policies, gun law reform is 9th on the list of 15, and there is no evidence that it is motivated by the gun lobby, what is your source for that statement? Have you even checked the ACT policies, or just shooting from the lip? https://www.act.org.nz/policies

Look - I was supporting them for many years ... with my vote and as well with the odd donation. Yes, I do know most of their policies. I find it interesting that they only use for their firearms policy the wording "ACT’s priority is to repeal this year’s Arms Legislation Act, including the threat of a firearm register".

And hey, it is not even one of their priorities, it is the priority - i.e. the most important issue for them to achieve.

Which means - it does not matter how good their other policies are (and yes, some are ...). What's these days most important for them is a turn off for me.

This says exactly what I expressed - it is these days the whim of the gun lobby which drives them, the rest of their policies might be nice to haves at best.

I am neither shooting from the hip nor from the lip, but maybe you should read and digest their policies in total before accusing other to do what you are doing ...

Ah yes - and if possible - no shooting at all, please ... ;