If National wins ...

[Banksie]

A wonderful read as Hosking confirms all we expected. He's a self-absorbed, immature, intellectual lightweight.

So belg, at the risk of arguing with myself (Cuzzie, this is a joke, the winking emoticon is common used after a light-hearted or sarcastic remark.), reading his article at face value he doesn't see such a bad sort (I never watch him on TV so haven't got a preconceived bias).

He likes some centre-left policies and some centre-right policies and this is kind of where I find myself.

[Banksie]

Suggest you do. It'll all become clear.

He does the seven-sharp show right, the rehash of the news with light banter - yeah, I guess anyone doing that, I shouldn't take too seriously.

That is one of the things that frustrates me though, so many people are basing their choice on the opinions of people like him, rather than finding out the facts and forming their own opinions. It is kinda "lazy democracy".

[Cuzzie]

Oh Dear Cuz ... http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11302217

So we have one National minister displaying either ignorance or contempt and another National minister displaying ineptitude or outright lying?

Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. [Key in a quiet voice: Geez. Do you think they're onto us?] #TeamKey

There's no news there, the Antarctic toothfish is clearly legal to eat in Singapore and I've shouted meals that have cost more than that.

BTW, fat.com should be in line next for paying the bribery money. Same as prostitution before it was legalised by Helen Clark, both parties are guilty.

[elZorro]

Just to add my 2c worth, I'd quite like to have a beer with Banksie and Belgarion sometime. I'm sure there would be three of us. Cuzzie, it's up to you to disprove that.

You must have more spare time than me Banksie, when I get home I'll send some compiled graphs through as a post. They show a deteriorating trend from 2008 onwards, in many areas. That's a big part of why "right" supporters tend to talk about people, not policies. Anything but policies.

I heard the tea tape, it was posted on the internet for a while. Poor quality recording, but most of the salient bits have already been widely reported. Banks and Key were sitting there, figuring out amongst themselves who would say what to the press afterwards, how to put a good PR spin on the deal. John Banks helping to direct Key's words. In between that, they were slinging off at Winston and Don Brash. I hope Winston remembers all this post election.

[BlackPeter]

Can I suggest that you don't jump to too many conclusions regarding my motivation, seeing as we are debating online, with out the benefit of body language or facial expression...but I will give you this, I am bored at work and do enjoy a good political debate that does not degenerate into mud-slinging and name calling (I save that for later when I do it at the pub with a jug of Monteiths (does drinking monteiths make be a commie b@$tard or a greenie pinko I wonder ).

Nothing wrong with drinking a jug of Monteiths (even without name-calling) - maybe we found another common interest (but political debate)?

Re the unemployment numbers: great that the NZ numbers start even looking flash compared to the Aussies (who didn't feel the GFC thanks to their mining boom - what a horror for a Green supporter). Maybe you should run the comparison as well against Spain, Italy, Ireland - now this would make our National government look flash ...

Greed Tax ... yes, I do see that Labour moderated somewhat its taxing the "Rich" policy. The original version was probably too unpopular. But even the modified proposal doesn't make it right and not effective. Any government must find a way to put a fair tax on everybody including corporates (which are currently shifting their profits internationally around) instead of just putting the thumb screws on to the poor bastards who can't shift their income abroad. I would very much prefer everybody paying say 20% tax (or in that vicinity) of their total income - and I mean EVERYBODY, instead as now (under National as well as under Labour) many (really) rich people paying (basically) nothing and Labour going the easy way of just screwing up the taxes for the better off salary earners.

[Cuzzie]

How very typical of a Nastie. Throw the mud based on nothing more than a conspiracy theory. Hope it sticks. And make no effort whatsoever. Shameful behaviour. Thoroughly unprincipled behaviour and you call yourself a Christian!

I must of missed this. Funny how you call National supporters nasties when all the deception comes from the left. You may be right though, I would more or less call people names if they didn't accept my tomfoolery if I was that way inclined. Yes you are right, very shameful behaviour by me exposing you. Dare I say it, I'm a scab too. Name calling, little games, lies all the negative things in life are left of center. What do you know, here is just another lie by belg, where have I ever called myself a Christian. It's alright belg, I'm used to your misinformation. I'll just let it slip and push that aside with all your other sh!te. What else do we expect from you? Nada man, nada.

Hey belg, I thought you would of asked for your profile. Nevermind - perhaps another day.

[Cuzzie]

Just to add my 2c worth, I'd quite like to have a beer with Banksie and Belgarion sometime. I'm sure there would be three of us. Cuzzie, it's up to you to disprove that.

No EZ, I think that would be a great idea for you all to get together for a beer, nothing wrong with that and good on you. I can see it now and you all turn up - all two of you.

[Banksie]

Greed Tax ... yes, I do see that Labour moderated somewhat its taxing the "Rich" policy. The original version was probably too unpopular. But even the modified proposal doesn't make it right and not effective. Any government must find a way to put a fair tax on everybody including corporates (which are currently shifting their profits internationally around) instead of just putting the thumb screws on to the poor bastards who can't shift their income abroad.

Yeah, so I don't see the extra 3% tax on people earning over $150,000 bring in too much additional revenue. And it is probably a safe policy for labour as I think, if I understand the stats right, that only 10% of the population earn in this bracket. (I couldn't quite work out if it was 10% of workers or 10% of households).

I suppose labours ideological reasons for "thumb screwing" the top earners is that the society as a whole have created a system that allows those top earners to be top earners - and recycling that money through the system allows other to also be top earners (i.e. giving people a chance to dream cuzzie).

I do wish someone would have the gumption to propose something really alternative such as Tobin or Robinhood taxes, and see if it could be made to work.

As an aside on this issue as to who's paying tax and who's getting the benefit I have an opinion (no facts), that a large amount is moved from the taxpayer, cycled through the beneficiaries, and lands in property owners (landlords) pockets.

[Banksie]

No EZ, I think that would be a great idea for you all to get together for a beer, nothing wrong with that and good on you. I can see it now and you all turn up - all two of you.

Cuzzie, I am not sure what I have done to earn your derision, and I do like to believe people are inherently good, and do what they believe is fair and equitable (even if that does not agree with my world view). But you do seem to contribute to the forum only to insult. <strike>Were you bullied a lot as a kid?</strike>. Sorry I know you don't like questions.

[Harvey Specter]

Yeah, so I don't see the extra 3% tax on people earning over $150,000 bring in too much additional revenue. And it is probably a safe policy for labour as I think, if I understand the stats right, that only 10% of the population earn in this bracket. (I couldn't quite work out if it was 10% of workers or 10% of households).

Must be households as less than 2% earn over $150k!! http://www.ird.govt.nz/aboutir/exter...t-of-ind2.html

a few of those will just retain profits in their company (taxed at 28%) provided their lifestyle isn't to much. That just leaves the rich CEO (ie. non owner employess) left to suck it up.