Labour / NZ First Government

[Balance]

Not sure where to start in response to that diatribe.

I will take a quote from those pixie fairy’s you are so fond of ‘ok boomer .....’

Coming from a beneficiary breeder, one has to consider that term 'boomer' as a compliment to hard work, self reliance and pride in achieving for oneself, family and community.

[Balance]

Maybe not but a benefit in drag all the same. Comes out of the same budget I'm guessing.

A third generation beneficiary drawing down the ever growing list of numerous benefits provided by this beneficiary breeding government = getting an entitlement? From what contribution?

Woke pixie dust.

[stoploss]

Not sure where to start in response to that diatribe.

I will take a quote from those pixie fairy’s you are so fond of ‘ok boomer .....’

Boysey , some people went to war for this country . Some paid taxes as high as 66 cents in the dollar .
All this on the understanding when they reached retirement they would receive a pension from the government .
Personally I feel most on here could probably do without it . However that’s not the point . The “ agreement or understanding “ was why many toiled away for so many years , when they get there let them enjoy it.

[tim23]

A third generation beneficiary drawing down the ever growing list of numerous benefits provided by this beneficiary breeding government = getting an entitlement? From what contribution?

Woke pixie dust.

Lets just call it a benefit (otherwise you are just playing with words) and pensioners can still apply for food grants etc - gee Balance you've probably lined up for one of those?

[Balance]

Lets just call it a benefit (otherwise you are just playing with words) and pensioners can still apply for food grants etc - gee Balance you've probably lined up for one of those?

This the best you can do? 🤣

[Baa_Baa]

Playing with words doesn’t dilute the simple fact that there are many different entitlements and the recipient is the beneficiary.

It is irrelevant whether one paid for the right to be entitled and receive the benefit. It just fits the convenient narrative of the haves against the have nots in order to conjoin the benevolent government with the wider narrative that some deserve It (they contributed) while others don’t (they did not contribute) ignoring all the grey areas in between, and tag that to an underperforming Government by way of trendy derogatory labels.

The diatribe is pitiful and childish school yard bully tactics which in itself is infantile and bereft of mature debate, though made all the more intolerable by incessant boring repetition and derogatory name calling.

And I won’t vote for labour, but that’s how I see the main actor here who has endless hours and days to spew his fetid myopia.

[fungus pudding]

Lets just call it a benefit (otherwise you are just playing with words) and pensioners can still apply for food grants etc - gee Balance you've probably lined up for one of those?

The paltry amount of superannuation I receive which is $249 per week or approx $13,000 per annum, is a minor fraction of the amount of tax I pay annually. It is not a benefit. It is an entitlement paid to everyone once reaching age 65.
I'm not complaining about our super scheme, it is what it is - but I sure as hell moan if anyone tells me I'm a beneficiary.

[Balance]

The paltry amount of superannuation I receive which is $249 per week or approx $13,000 per annum, is a minor fraction of the amount of tax I pay annually. It is not a benefit. It is an entitlement paid to everyone once reaching age 65.
I'm not complaining about our super scheme, it is what it is - but I sure as hell moan if anyone tells me I'm a beneficiary.

The majority of us would prefer the transferable compulsory super/pension scheme where all individuals contribute to during their working lives - and then draw down as their entitlement when they choose to retire.

NZ had such a scheme up until 1976 which was scrapped by that buffoon Muldoon in favour of national super. His pitch was that the compulsory super would build up to such a humongous amount that the superfund managers would end up controlling NZ. The government was a safer option to manage tax payers’ monies from which super would be universally provided.

The buffoon obviously did not understand international diversification and the electorate were foolish enough to buy his communists (reds under the bed) threat story.

What an opportunity lost for NZ.

[Balance]

Playing with words doesn’t dilute the simple fact that there are many different entitlements and the recipient is the beneficiary.

It is irrelevant whether one paid for the right to be entitled and receive the benefit. It just fits the convenient narrative of the haves against the have nots in order to conjoin the benevolent government with the wider narrative that some deserve It (they contributed) while others don’t (they did not contribute) ignoring all the grey areas in between, and tag that to an underperforming Government by way of trendy derogatory labels.

The diatribe is pitiful and childish school yard bully tactics which in itself is infantile and bereft of mature debate, though made all the more intolerable by incessant boring repetition and derogatory name calling.

And I won’t vote for labour, but that’s how I see the main actor here who has endless hours and days to spew his fetid myopia.

Can’t help it when some people equate popularity with competence, so blinded are they by woke pixie star dust.

In their time, Hitler and Idi Amin were also both enormously popular even though their populist economic policies were ruinous for their countries.

[Blue Skies]

Interesting, a massive majority of NZ'ers trust Labour 62% to handle the economy better than National 26%, National's supposed strongest card.

Paul Goldsmith seems a nice chap, always looks a bit flustered, but a lightweight compared to Grant Robertson.
They need another Bill English.


https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/polit...e-economy.html