Nat/act/nzf 2023

[mistaTea]

And they are applying ethnicity criteria as a solution to every conceivable problem out there, be it social or economic - with the same outcome. Disaster.

Yeah, and so the exodus will continue.

No way do I want my son growing up here. Crime, crap economy, limited prospects for a young man…

No country is perfect, and Ireland has its own challenges … but the opportunities are greater there. And that includes the opportunity to travel and experience much more of the world. Mainland Europe at your doorstep. Can even be in New York in 5 hours.

Just working through whether we keep the house and rent it out. Or sell and buy something there right away.

No rush I guess and the house is mortgage free so if we rent it out initially it will generate good cashflow while we get set up.

[Daytr]

You are making huge assumptions here. I haven't yet seen Jones implement anything that indicates he has "complete disregard for the environment". Many of the failed policies of the last Government and unintended and negative effects on the Government, such as increased coal imports and no investment in our own gas production.

You have obviously not been listening, remember 'goodbye Freddie'. The Fast-track process hasn't been introduced yet so Jones hasn't had the chance to introduce anything.
He only stepped away from support of seabed mining due to his other donors the commercial fishing industry kicking up a stink.
Jones is a big supporter of commercial fishing including the destructive practice of bottom trawling, he also advocated against the use of cameras on boats. Nothing to see here...

[Daytr]

NZF campaigned on repealing the 2022 smoking legislation - fact. And it delivered on its promise. Hardly extreme in any case.

Compare and contrast with the numerous broken promises made by Ardern, Hipkins and Labour. Where would you like to start?

As for extreme, how about Labour implementing the racially divisive and racist Maorification policy with zero consultation with NZers?

Without campaigning on it?

And doing it by stealth - by the self-promoted and self-proclaimed most transparent government ever and from the one source of truth.

You just made that 'fact' up.
They did not campaign on it, as they knew it could have cost them getting into Government and probably would have. They buried it in their manifesto that nobody reads and never said a word.

https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/stubbing-out-democracy-no-government-mandate-smokefree-repeal

I would say a policy that goes against medical advice, enrages the entire medical fraternity and repeals a policy that had cross party support, until NZF made it a coalition condition is extreme to say the least and anybody with half a brain knows the motivation for it to be so high on their list of priorities. How can anyone have trust in a party with absolutely zero integrity.

They are a grubby little party that has no moral fiber. Jones with the PGF used as his own pork barrelling fund. How much money was wasted?
Projects with bloated budgets, no oversight and just got lumped with masses of cash.

Even after allocating an incredible $400M to his own electorate they rejected him and he didn't manage to challenge either of the major parties. Why? Because he just comes across as a little bit dodgy.

[nztx]

You just made that 'fact' up.
They did not campaign on it, as they knew it could have cost them getting into Government and probably would have. They buried it in their manifesto that nobody reads and never said a word.

https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/stubbing-out-democracy-no-government-mandate-smokefree-repeal

I would say a policy that goes against medical advice, enrages the entire medical fraternity and repeals a policy that had cross party support, until NZF made it a coalition condition is extreme to say the least and anybody with half a brain knows the motivation for it to be so high on their list of priorities. How can anyone have trust in a party with absolutely zero integrity.

They are a grubby little party that has no moral fiber. Jones with the PGF used as his own pork barrelling fund. How much money was wasted?
Projects with bloated budgets, no oversight and just got lumped with masses of cash.

Even after allocating an incredible $400M to his own electorate they rejected him and he didn't manage to challenge either of the major parties. Why? Because he just comes across as a little bit dodgy.


Zero Integrity = The Reason why Labour, Greens and the rest of the gutless cling-ons got the boot last year

Zero Integrity = Public confidence in Labour, the Greens & other freeloaders Labour desperatelly needed to go anywhere; Hipkins, Ardern, Robertson & the rest of the clueless talent. Look no further than Labour's failed projects for the best examples of out of control spending, bloated & blown budgets, halfwit talent that should never have been brought on board period,, Wholesale wastage, Lack of Foresight you name it - all given a kick in the butt out last elections. And there are still a few who wonder why that happened ? ;)

Nothing for the bunch of clueless twits who got the boot to go fossicking after all sorts of other taxes to ramp up to try cover earlier deep holes & disasters .. What did Comrade Parker let slip was going to happen to Fuel Taxes if Labour got in ? .. Wasn't UP UP UP like no tomorrow .,, and that was before the inventory of large Pot Holes and deep chasms the Sausage roll gobbling Finance A/hole had managed to excavate on the way through,

Labour, Greens & Other Cling-ons = a Special Type of UNTRUSTWORTHY Grubby little cretins that the majority of the public up & down the land wanted gone, emptied out of the Government front benches for good .. wonder why that was ? :)

Let's not forget the idiot approach by the failed regime towards trying to control the Property market which only cost everyone significantly more, drove homelessness higher, made housing even more unaffordable. The idiot reverse back 100 years Labour / Greens policies on Energy - leaving us where on future energy ? a National Grid incapable of standing up to what it was supposed to do & deliver, infrastructure later found wanting & off such poor standard, and the raft of extra electricity defacto price ramp ups courtesy of the blind Labour Energy Gnome - Woods having a fiddle and completely missing what that would do to end user costs .. ;)

$400 million ? sounds like more than Labour have raised in the past 150 years and then some more pink dreams on top, in their continually failing & destructive campaigns .. that is if the boy even has his figures right .. $400 mills published somwhere .. or not ?

[Daytr]

Zero Integrity = The Reason why Labour, Greens and the rest of the gutless cling-ons got the boot last year

Zero Integrity = Public confidence in Labour, the Greens & other freeloaders Labour desperatelly needed to go anywhere; Hipkins, Ardern, Robertson & the rest of the clueless talent. Look no further than Labour's failed projects for the best examples of out of control spending, bloated & blown budgets, halfwit talent that should never have been brought on board period,, Wholesale wastage, Lack of Foresight you name it - all given a kick in the butt out last elections. And there are still a few who wonder why that happened ? ;)

Let's not forget the idiot approach by the failed regime towards trying to control the Property market which only cost everyone significantly more, drove homelessness higher, made housing even more unaffordable. The idiot reverse bac 100 years policies on Energy - leaving us where on future energy ? a National Greid incapable of standing up to what it was supposed to do & deliver, and the raft of extra electricity defacto price ramp ups courtesy of the blind Labour Energy Gnome - Woods having a fiddle and completely missing what that would do to end user costs .. ;)

$400 million ? sounds like more than Labour hae raised in the past 150 years oand then some more pink dreams on top n their continually failing & destructive campaigns .. if the boy even has his figures right ..

If you want to talk about Labour go to the Labour thread.

I find interesting when something cannot be defended you resort to saying someone else is as bad or worse, so thanks for reinforcing my point about NZF.

You also need to refer to a dictionary and look up the word integrity, as your definition won't be found. Incompetence perhaps?

You have blamed Labour for many things they weren't responsible for, but as this is the wrong thread, I won't bother refuting your work of fiction.

Do you even know what you are posting about? The $400M was what was allocated to Northland from the PGF, not political donations. 🤣 This isn't America

[nztx]

If you want to talk about Labour go to the Labour thread.

I find interesting when something cannot be defended you resort to saying someone else is as bad or worse, so thanks for reinforcing my point about NZF.

You also need to refer to a dictionary and look up the word integrity, as your definition won't be found. Incompetence perhaps?

You have blamed Labour for many things they weren't responsible for, but as this is the wrong thread, I won't bother refuting your work of fiction.

Do you even know what you are posting about? The $400M was what was allocated to Northland from the PGF, not political donations. �� This isn't America


They must have been pretty bad to have been tossed overboard frequently along the way .. not one flagship project a success or achieved in all of 6 years and the finance talent responsible for large chasms & robbing the bank has to go back to Uni to escape attention .. talent running, jumping, getting stabbed & pushed overboard all over the place, including dear Leader for whatever flaky or other reasons .. ;)

Labour & Trustworthiness, Labour & Integrity - long proven that they have neither term after term going back = same answer .. make a large F**^-up then get emptied out - the damage needing to be fixed by the next lot ;)

Call it LACK of Integrity, Incompetence .. same answer each time .. and there's always some twit afterwards wondering why ;)

$400 M of bridges & infrastructure that Labour lost their way on in Northland .. their initiatives must have been pretty backwards & deficient in terms prior for that to happen .. and all the same not a good show for Labour that NZF have picked it up where Labour failed ;)

How many trips to Northland by Labour & failed to wake up to what Northland needed .. or too hard for a bunch of spinning Comrade incompetents only interested in riding crisis after crisis for the political points & feel good ? ;)

Undoubtedly if Labour has spent it in their terms then they would be grandstanding the achievement or maybe not in someone's book ? .. possibly too embarrassing .. even for the shameless & Integrity devoid lost cause of the previous 6 years ;)


If Labour were so good - then why dont you go back to the Labour thread & start spinning in there for the very few who still want to know & read about Labour's most recent 6 years of crisis & disasters they have brought on themselves ?

[Daytr]

Where did I say Labour were good?
Another fiction and on the wrong thread.
Your post is just silly and as I said a work of fiction.

This is a thread about the coalition not Labour, which is pretty obvious to everyone but you.

In regards Northland, it's was a safe blue seat for decades until they got sick of being ignored and that's how Winston took it off the Nats briefly in the by-election.
Jones didn't get close to winning it last year even after all the pork barrelling.

[Balance]

You just made that 'fact' up.
They did not campaign on it, as they knew it could have cost them getting into Government and probably would have. They buried it in their manifesto that nobody reads and never said a word.

https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/stubbing-out-democracy-no-government-mandate-smokefree-repeal

I would say a policy that goes against medical advice, enrages the entire medical fraternity and repeals a policy that had cross party support, until NZF made it a coalition condition is extreme to say the least and anybody with half a brain knows the motivation for it to be so high on their list of priorities. How can anyone have trust in a party with absolutely zero integrity.

They are a grubby little party that has no moral fiber. Jones with the PGF used as his own pork barrelling fund. How much money was wasted?
Projects with bloated budgets, no oversight and just got lumped with masses of cash.

Even after allocating an incredible $400M to his own electorate they rejected him and he didn't manage to challenge either of the major parties. Why? Because he just comes across as a little bit dodgy.

What a pathetic pathetic attempt to hide the truth and fact that NZF had repealing the 2022 smoking legislation as part of its manifesto which they campaigned with. Not their problem that the MSM were so per-occupied with other issues that they did not cover that fact. In fact, the MSM were too busy trying to derail National and boost Labour that they lost all perspective on what issues really mattered to NZers.

And acting on a promise is what is called 'integrity' - something which obviously escapes you. If you want to know what is no integrity, try Labour introducing the racist & divisive Maorification program with no mandate and by stealth.

https://www.nzfirst.nz/2023_policies

Vaping, smoking and nicotine

NZ First supports age-appropriate access to nicotine, which in adults, is generally as safe as caffeine is. NZ First fully supports a Smokefree New Zealand but we must split nicotine away from harmful smoking. That’s what vaping has done. Vaping has us seriously on track to become smoke free far quicker than punitive taxes ever achieved.

NZ First will repeal the and replace 2022 ‘Smoked Tobacco’ Amendment and 2023 Regulations put in place by Labour to achieve an illusory Smokefree 2025. Labour's target already admits that 5% tobacco users will nevertheless mean that New Zealand will be smoke free.

[Daytr]

What a pathetic pathetic attempt to hide the truth and fact that NZF had repealing the 2022 smoking legislation as part of its manifesto which they campaigned with. Not their problem that the MSM were so per-occupied with other issues that they did not cover that fact. In fact, the MSM were too busy trying to derail National and boost Labour that they lost all perspective on what issues really mattered to NZers.

And acting on a promise is what is called 'integrity' - something which obviously escapes you. If you want to know what is no integrity, try Labour introducing the racist & divisive Maorification program with no mandate and by stealth.

https://www.nzfirst.nz/2023_policies

Vaping, smoking and nicotine

NZ First supports age-appropriate access to nicotine, which in adults, is generally as safe as caffeine is. NZ First fully supports a Smokefree New Zealand but we must split nicotine away from harmful smoking. That’s what vaping has done. Vaping has us seriously on track to become smoke free far quicker than punitive taxes ever achieved.

NZ First will repeal the and replace 2022 ‘Smoked Tobacco’ Amendment and 2023 Regulations put in place by Labour to achieve an illusory Smokefree 2025. Labour's target already admits that 5% tobacco users will nevertheless mean that New Zealand will be smoke free.

Keep spinning your BS.
If they campaigned on it why was the medical fraternity saying otherwise, the electorate saying otherwise.
Just because you repeat a lie it doesn't make it true.
Caffeine doesn't cause most lung cancers
Caffeine doesn't cause emphysema.

Smoking kills 4500 - 5000 people each year in NZ and Maori are over represented.

How can you say such rubbish and be taken seriously.

[Balance]

Keep spinning your BS.
If they campaigned on it why was the medical fraternity saying otherwise, the electorate saying otherwise.
Just because you repeat a lie it doesn't make it true.
Caffeine doesn't cause most lung cancers buddy. How can you say such rubbish and be taken seriously.

It’s in their 2923 election manifesto, black and white.

Can’t help it if the msm and interest groups get all worked up and frothing after the fact.

They, like you, must be so used to Labour honouring nothing in their manifesto - either due to no integrity or incompetence. Does not matter - failure to deliver what they promised but delivering to the Maori elites, that’s Labpur.

What’s the word again? Integrity - delivering on a promise, that’s it.

Where were they when Labour introduced its Maorification program?

[Baa_Baa]

Keep spinning your BS.
If they campaigned on it why was the medical fraternity saying otherwise, the electorate saying otherwise.
Just because you repeat a lie it doesn't make it true.
Caffeine doesn't cause most lung cancers buddy. How can you say such rubbish and be taken seriously.

Did you realise Balance quoted the NZF manifesto, he didn't just make those words up himself? Click on the link, it was all there in plain sight during the lead up to the election. Just because MSM or the Health profession didn't make a big deal of it, doesn't mean it wasn't there. It was, and is there.

If it's rubbish, which you say it is, it's not Balance who is saying it, it is NZF.

[Daytr]

It’s in the manifesto, black and white.

Can’t help it if the msm and interest groups get all worked up and frothing after the fact.

Where were they when Labour introduced its Maorification program?

It was covert and you know it.
You guys love resorting to jabs at Labour as some sort of defence. It's not.
There is no defending the repeal of smoke free NZ.

FYI I was no fan of the Maori Labour caucus or race based legislation. So I was right here, but nice try.

[Baa_Baa]

It was covert and you know it.

No it was not covert, never was, it was right there in the NZF manifesto, in plain sight for anyone who bothered to read it. Which one would think anyone interested in politics would do when the coalition agreement was announced.

[Baa_Baa]

Here it is in the NZF / National Coalition Agreement, did you read it?

- Repeal amendments to the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act 1990 and regulations before March 2024, removing requirements for denicotisation, removing the reduction in retail outlets and the generation ban, while also amending vaping product requirements and taxing smoked products only.

- Reform the regulation of vaping, smokeless tobacco and oral nicotine products while banning disposable vaping products and increasing penalties for illegal sales to those under 18.

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nationalparty/pages/18466/attachments/original/1700778597/NZFirst_Agreement_2.pdf?1700778597 (https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nationalparty/pages/18466/attachments/original/1700778597/NZFirst_Agreement_2.pdf?1700778597)

Nothing about this was "covert". Unless you rely on MSM to keep you informed.

[blackcap]

Here it is in the NZF / National Coalition Agreement, did you read it?

- Repeal amendments to the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act 1990 and regulations before March 2024, removing requirements for denicotisation, removing the reduction in retail outlets and the generation ban, while also amending vaping product requirements and taxing smoked products only.

- Reform the regulation of vaping, smokeless tobacco and oral nicotine products while banning disposable vaping products and increasing penalties for illegal sales to those under 18.

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nationalparty/pages/18466/attachments/original/1700778597/NZFirst_Agreement_2.pdf?1700778597 (https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nationalparty/pages/18466/attachments/original/1700778597/NZFirst_Agreement_2.pdf?1700778597)

Nothing about this was "covert". Unless you rely on MSM to keep you informed.

That's the problem. Too many of the 50+ generation still rely on the totally fake MSM. Not fake in that they report lies (well they do) but more in what they don't report. Lies of omission as it were.

[Baa_Baa]

That's the problem. Too many of the 50+ generation still rely on the totally fake MSM. Not fake in that they report lies (well they do) but more in what they don't report. Lies of omission as it were.

I don't blame the MSM per se, they're only interested in topical news soundbites, click throughs to advertising, opinions and blatant advertising, so naturally they only skim the surface and cherry pick what they think will drive the largest connection to their revenues. Once we understand that, we can put MSM into perspective and stop relying on them to inform us about 'everything' in minute details. Or blaming them for not doing so.

What I do blame is peoples gullibility and lack of willingness to search out the facts for themselves, on the things that do interest them. We hear passionate pleas about various subjects but when push comes to shove, the proponents don't often seem to have any understanding of the details behind what they're saying, and often as well, undermine their own arguments because they are ill-informed.

Then they come onto social media and profoundly state utter BS as if it was facts, which it isn't, and back up their nonsense with diversionary emotive arguments. This is Logical Fallacy in it's purest form, something quite a few posters here seem unable or unwilling to understand.

[Balance]

I don't blame the MSM per se, they're only interested in topical news soundbites, click throughs to advertising, opinions and blatant advertising, so naturally they only skim the surface and cherry pick what they think will drive the largest connection to their revenues. Once we understand that, we can put MSM into perspective and stop relying on them to inform us about 'everything' in minute details. Or blaming them for not doing so.

What I do blame is peoples gullibility and lack of willingness to search out the facts for themselves, on the things that do interest them. We hear passionate pleas about various subjects but when push comes to shove, the proponents don't often seem to have any understanding of the details behind what they're saying, and often as well, undermine their own arguments because they are ill-informed.

Then they come onto social media and profoundly state utter BS as if it was facts, which it isn't, and back up their nonsense with diversionary emotive arguments. This is Logical Fallacy in it's purest form, something quite a few posters here seem unable or unwilling to understand.

All too true unfortunately.

I am sure we all have our own chat groups with families and friends where we read posts with clearly fake or inaccurate contents, usually forwarded from others. I used to get annoyed but take the attitude now that it’s better to know what is happening out there, fake, false, inaccurate, true or otherwise. That way, I can put what’s happening out there in perspective.

[Daytr]

Here it is in the NZF / National Coalition Agreement, did you read it?

- Repeal amendments to the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act 1990 and regulations before March 2024, removing requirements for denicotisation, removing the reduction in retail outlets and the generation ban, while also amending vaping product requirements and taxing smoked products only.

- Reform the regulation of vaping, smokeless tobacco and oral nicotine products while banning disposable vaping products and increasing penalties for illegal sales to those under 18.

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nationalparty/pages/18466/attachments/original/1700778597/NZFirst_Agreement_2.pdf?1700778597 (https://assets.nationbuilder.com/nationalparty/pages/18466/attachments/original/1700778597/NZFirst_Agreement_2.pdf?1700778597)

Nothing about this was "covert". Unless you rely on MSM to keep you informed.

The coalition agreement was after the election... duh!

[Daytr]

No it was not covert, never was, it was right there in the NZF manifesto, in plain sight for anyone who bothered to read it. Which one would think anyone interested in politics would do when the coalition agreement was announced.

What bollocks.
The general electorate does not read every party's manifesto, let alone any.
Did you read every party's manifesto?

And I don't care who he's quoting,.to say caffeine is as dangerous as smoking, let alone as addictive, is a joke.

[Balance]

The coalition agreement was after the election... duh!

Transparent for all to see, rather than covert as you wanted to BS.

Covert is Labour’s Maorification program.

You really are getting yourself all tangled up today, aren’t you? Time to put away the alcohol would be my advice!

[Daytr]

Transparent for all to see, rather than covert as you wanted to BS.

Covert is Labour’s Maorification program.

You really are getting yourself all tangled up today, aren’t you? Time to put away the alcohol would be my advice!

Huh! I'm not the one saying caffeine is as bad as smoking! 🤣🤣🤣
You are embarrassing yourself.
And what alcohol? Nice try to undermine someone. Par for the course, you attempting dirty tricks, just like NZF.

It is as covert as Labour's Maori caucus agenda. Both were covert.

But you will say anything, true or untrue.
No wonder you are an NZF supporter.

[Balance]

Huh! I'm not the one saying caffeine is as bad as smoking! ������
You are embarrassing yourself.
And what alcohol? Nice try to undermine someone. Par for the course, you attempting dirty tricks, just like NZF.

It is as covert as Labour's Maori caucus agenda. Both were covert.

But you will say anything, true or untrue.
No wonder you are an NZF supporter.

Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

You are really losing it mate!

Suggest you go for a walk and shake off that fuzzy head of yours. And do lay off the alcohol - it is no good for you.

[Daytr]

Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

You are really losing it mate!

Suggest you go for a walk and shake off that fuzzy head of yours. And do lay off the alcohol - it is no good for you.

Only if your opinion mattered as much as you think it does.
No morals, says it all.
Defending the indefensible so you resort to nasty and untrue accusations.
Sounds like something WhaleOil would do.

Alcohol is no good for you, but smoking is OK. 🤣🤣🤣 Not that I have partaken in either.

[Balance]

Only if your opinion mattered as much as you think it does.
No morals, says it all.
Defending the indefensible so you resort to nasty and untrue accusations.
Sounds like something WhaleOil would do.

I assume your doctor did advise you not to take alcohol after you take your medication?

You are getting delusional and if I can gently put it to you, incoherent.

[Daytr]

I assume your doctor did advise you not to take alcohol after you take your medication?

You are getting delusional and if I can gently put it up you, incoherent.

Keep it up & you will join SailorBoy on the sidelines.

[Balance]

Keep it up & you will join SailorBoy on the sidelines.

Think about it for a minute mate.

You got caught out posting BS when your assertions were fact checked.

You did not like that so you post the BS next that it was covert.

It wasn’t covert so you revert to posting the BS that somehow, fact checking you must mean we are NZF supporters or supporters of smoking!

All signs point to you being under the influence of something.

I am suggesting alcohol but you know best so whatever it is, just lay off it and go for a walk. Come back when you are either sober or coherent.

[Daytr]

Think about it for a minute mate.

You got caught out posting BS when your assertions were fact checked.

You did not like that so you post the BS next that it was covert.

It wasn’t covert so you revert to posting the BS that somehow, fact checking you must mean we are NZF supporters or supporters of smoking!

All signs point to you being under the influence of something.

I am suggesting alcohol but you know best so whatever it is, just lay off it and go for a walk. Come back when you are either sober or coherent.

Burying your first policy move in a lengthy manifesto rather than publicly stating it on the campaign trail, is covert.
You may disagree, that's your prerogative, as it is mine.

Nice attempt at back tracking on the multiple ugly insults, but then you cannot help yourself and go again. Like the scorpion you can't hide your true nature, it's laid bare daily for everyone to see.

But please do keep it up, as the end result will be quite satisfying, self inflicted of course but will ultimately bring some taste and decorum back to these threads.

[Balance]

Burying your first policy move in a lengthy manifesto rather than publicly stating it on the campaign trail, is covert.
You may disagree, that's your prerogative, as it is mine.

Nice attempt at back tracking on the multiple ugly insults, but then you cannot help yourself and go again. Like the scorpion you can't hide your true nature, it's laid bare daily for everyone to see.

But please do keep it up, as the end result will be quite satisfying, self inflicted of course but will ultimately bring some taste and decorum back to these threads.

You stop beating your wife and kids yet?

[Daytr]

From the Cancer Society.
https://www.cancer.org.nz/about-us/cancer-society-media-releases/cancer-society-of-new-zealand-statement-on-smokefree-repeal-legislation/

But there are dozens more like it that I could post it. The Coalition put it through under urgency, such was the priority.
No need to wonder why.

Balance & Baa_Baa defending the indefensible.

My work here is done.
But I'm sure there will be more insults & personal attacks from those keyboard warriors that have no better way of expressing themselves.

[Daytr]

You stop beating your wife and kids yet?

And you accuse me of being drunk?

[Balance]

And you accuse me of being drunk?

The equivalent of you accusing us of being supporters of NZF and smoking because you cannot handle being fact checked.

Now, do you get it?

Your work is indeed done here - making a fool pf yourself.

[Daytr]

The equivalent of you accusing us of being supporters of NZF and smoking because you cannot handle being fact checked.

Now, do you get it?

Your work is indeed done here - making a fool pf yourself.

Yep I would take a suggestion of being a NZF supporter as an accusation as well. Horrid little party to be associated with. If you don't support them you, sure spend a lot of time defending them and their despicable policy.

There is nothing to get, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

They didn't campaign on it.
You know what an election campaign is right?
Getting around the electorate and promoting your policies.
They didn't promote this sneaky & despicable policy.

But I'm wasting my time on someone that will say anything true or untrue who simply has no morals.

[Balance]

Yep I would take a suggestion of being a NZF supporter as an accusation as well. Horrid little party to be associated with. If you don't support them you, sure spend a lot of time defending them and their despicable policy.

There is nothing to get, no matter how often you repeat yourself.

They didn't campaign on it.
You know what an election campaign is right?
Getting around the electorate and promoting your policies.
They didn't promote this sneaky & despicable policy.

But I'm wasting my time on someone that will say anything true or untrue who simply has no morals.

Writes the fool who cannot handle being fact checked. You really are a pathetic loser.

[iceman]

You have obviously not been listening, remember 'goodbye Freddie'. The Fast-track process hasn't been introduced yet so Jones hasn't had the chance to introduce anything.
He only stepped away from support of seabed mining due to his other donors the commercial fishing industry kicking up a stink.
Jones is a big supporter of commercial fishing including the destructive practice of bottom trawling, he also advocated against the use of cameras on boats. Nothing to see here...

Complete nonsense. You have no idea what you are talking about. The cameras on boats has been discussed in detail on here and the reasons for slowdown in installation. You obviously have not been keeping up to date with it.

[Daytr]

Writes the fool who cannot handle being fact checked. You really are a pathetic loser.

As you obviously don't understand what an election campaign is, here is the definition.
And here's a fact for you.
What have I said all along, they didn't campaign on it. A manifesto is not an election campaign.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/election-campaign

It's been laborious, but at least I will sleep well.

[Daytr]

Complete nonsense. You have no idea what you are talking about. The cameras on boats has been discussed in detail on here and the reasons for slowdown in installation. You obviously have not been keeping up to date with it.

I wasn't referring to the slow installation, but that's another issue altogether.
I was referring to Jones being against them being installed at all.

[Balance]

As you obviously don't understand what an election campaign is, here is the definition.
And here's a fact for you.
What have I said all along, they didn't campaign on it. A manifesto is not an election campaign.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/election-campaign

It's been laborious, but at least I will sleep well.

Pathetic.

So pathetic that it is undeserving of a reply except that you cannot handle the truth.

[iceman]

I wasn't referring to the slow installation, but that's another issue altogether.
I was referring to Jones being against them being installed at all.

Wrong again. The implementation as ordered by the previous Government was ill thought out like most of their policies, with no thought about how to collect, store and view the data being recorded. Was going to cost tens of millions of dollars and no plan how it should be done or who should pay for it. The Minister and the industry are NOT against cameras. That is simply not true.

[mistaTea]

Alright chaps, remember it’s the Lord’s Day today so let’s see if we can go a day without fighting 🫣🤪🤭

[davflaws]

our holiday home by one of the most beautiful beaches imo in the tropics - clean, powdery white sandy beach kissed by warm clear ocean waters and the beach township/city is fully serviced with all the amenities anyone could possibly need. It obviously doubles as a proper residence as well but that's another story for another time. Some posters here get all angsy or angsty when I posted that fact a while ago so that tells you more about them than me?


I have no problem about you going - your'e surely not happy here, but you have posted links to two different locations (Whitsundays and Vietnam) where your 'paradise' is allegedly located.

This (along with the fact that you have ignored all invitations to clarify its location) causes me to wonder whether your 'paradise' exists anywhere except in your imagination.

[Bjauck]

Yeah, and so the exodus will continue.

No way do I want my son growing up here. Crime, crap economy, limited prospects for a young man…

No country is perfect, and Ireland has its own challenges … but the opportunities are greater there. And that includes the opportunity to travel and experience much more of the world. Mainland Europe at your doorstep. Can even be in New York in 5 hours.

Just working through whether we keep the house and rent it out. Or sell and buy something there right away.

No rush I guess and the house is mortgage free so if we rent it out initially it will generate good cashflow while we get set up.
Ireland is also ahead of NZ in the compulsory teaching at school of their indigenous language - Gaeilge. Gaeilge/Irish is the first language of approx. 78,000 people. However, as with Te Reo, it is not particularly handy for all that travelling around North America and Europe.

[Daytr]

Pathetic.

So pathetic that it is undeserving of a reply except that you cannot handle the truth.

Morning, what is 'interesting' is that you don't seem to understand what an election campaign is. I made a claim that it was covert because they didn't campaign on repealing smoke free NZ and it's correct despite all your references to their manifesto.

[Daytr]

Wrong again. The implementation as ordered by the previous Government was ill thought out like most of their policies, with no thought about how to collect, store and view the data being recorded. Was going to cost tens of millions of dollars and no plan how it should be done or who should pay for it. The Minister and the industry are NOT against cameras. That is simply not true.

Sorry buddy, the evidence suggests otherwise.
Since cameras havr been installed the under reporting that it has unveiled says the industry has no integrity or credibility.
And it's obvious who should pay for it, the industry.

https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/350242260/caught-out-cameras-boats-reveal-massive-under-reporting-wildlife-deaths

More evidence the commercial fishing industry can't be trusted.

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/12/commercial-fishing-vessel-offences-10-times-higher-after-ministry-for-primary-industries-starts-tracking-location-information.html

[mistaTea]

Ireland is also ahead of NZ in the compulsory teaching at school of their indigenous language - Gaeilge. Gaeilge/Irish is the first language of approx. 78,000 people. However, as with Te Reo, it is not particularly handy for all that travelling around North America and Europe.

Yes they are also fighting a losing battle on the language front.

A good mate of mine who lives in Ireland couldn’t hold a conversation in Gaelic to save his life. Knows a number of words and sayings etc, but not fluent.

Same for most Irish. The language has no utility in everyday life for most since English has taken over.

Same for te reo. And Ireland is a great example…in that case the majority of the population or ‘native Irish’ and even then, the government cannot get the majority to become fluent in their native language.

In NZ, Maori are a minority (a significant minority, but still a minority). The current policies to try to get the non-Maori majority to speak te reo is futile.

And don’t even get me started on the unfair criticisms of people who prefer to use the Anglo pronunciation of Maori origin words.

[Bjauck]

Alright chaps, remember it’s the Lord’s Day today so let’s see if we can go a day without fighting 﫣浪來Christians don’t fight on Sundays?

[mistaTea]

Christians don’t fight?

Name a single time! 🫣🤭😬

[Daytr]

Christians don’t fight on Sundays?

I preferred the shorter version & I know it's early, but it's got to be the comment of the day.

[Bjauck]

Yes they are also fighting a losing battle on the language front.

A good mate of mine who lives in Ireland couldn’t hold a conversation in Gaelic to save his life. Knows a number of words and sayings etc, but not fluent.

Same for most Irish. The language has no utility in everyday life for most since English has taken over.

Same for te reo. And Ireland is a great example…in that case the majority of the population or ‘native Irish’ and even then, the government cannot get the majority to become fluent in their native language.

In NZ, Maori are a minority (a significant minority, but still a minority). The current policies to try to get the non-Maori majority to speak te reo is futile.

And don’t even get me started on the unfair criticisms of people who prefer to use the Anglo pronunciation of Maori origin words. The proportion of the Irish who can use Irish as a second language is supposed to be growing. A monoglot World would be a boring World with less rounded intellectual curiosity, imo. The use of different tongues can lead to a different intellectual approach.

A majority of NZers are not “native English” so for us too the choice of the native language of the English is also utlitarian.

[Bjauck]

Deleted. I missed other posters’ posts.

[Daytr]

The proportion of the Irish who can use Irish as a second language is supposed to be growing. A monoglot World would be a boring World with less rounded intellectual curiosity, imo. The use of different tongues can lead to a different intellectual approach.

A majority of NZers are not “native English” so for us too the choice of the native language of the English is also utlitarian.

Yep I agree there has been a huge resurgence of the teaching and usage of the Irish language. Two of my close Irish mates both went to Uni in the 90s were fluent and many of their friends to and it was really encouraged.

Funny enough my Irish mate when he messages me will greet me in te reo as a sign of respect. Sometimes I have to look up what he has written

[mistaTea]

The proportion of the Irish who can use Irish as a second language is supposed to be growing. A monoglot World would be a boring World with less rounded intellectual curiosity, imo. The use of different tongues can lead to a different intellectual approach.

A majority of NZers are not “native English” so for us too the choice of the native language of the English is also utlitarian.

Yes for sure. And though English is dominating I don’t think we will ever get to the point where English is literally the only language people speak.

Other languages will need to evolve though to keep their place in the world. Hindi is a great example - a lot of people these days speak “Hinglish” where it is 90% Hindi with ‘Indianised’ English words thrown in.

I try to speak shudh Hindi where possible but mostly revert to Hinglish. Don’t get to speak it as much now since my mother in law passed away though.

The linguistic purists will be alarmed, but this ability to adapt is likely to secure the long term future of Hindi.

Versus French, which is more stubborn and less likely to survive.

[blackcap]

Ireland is also ahead of NZ in the compulsory teaching at school of their indigenous language - Gaeilge. Gaeilge/Irish is the first language of approx. 78,000 people. However, as with Te Reo, it is not particularly handy for all that travelling around North America and Europe.

The thing is, Te Reo is not indigenous to NZ. Thats where the difference lies. Maori at best was and is a pidgin language. Te Reo is a colonial construct.

[fungus pudding]

Christians don’t fight on Sundays?

What about the Seventh day Avengers!

[mistaTea]

The thing is, Te Reo is not indigenous to NZ. Thats where the difference lies. Maori at best was and is a pidgin language. Te Reo is a colonial construct.

My bullsh1t detector was going off full blast on this one so I asked ‘Greg’ to take a look.

***

The claim that Te Reo Māori is not indigenous to New Zealand and is merely a pidgin language or a colonial construct is highly controversial and not supported by linguistic or historical evidence.

Here are some key points to consider:

1. **Historical and Cultural Roots**:
- Te Reo Māori is the language of the Māori people, who are the indigenous Polynesian people of New Zealand (Aotearoa).
- The Māori language has been spoken in New Zealand for hundreds of years, long before European colonisation began in the late 18th century.

2. **Linguistic Evidence**:
- Te Reo Māori belongs to the Austronesian language family, which is a large language family widely dispersed across the islands of Southeast Asia and the Pacific.
- It has a rich oral tradition, with its own complex grammar and vocabulary, distinct from pidgin languages, which are simplified languages that develop as a means of communication between speakers of different native languages.

3. **Colonial Impact**:
- The arrival of Europeans and subsequent colonisation had a significant impact on Te Reo Māori, including suppression and marginalisation.
- Efforts to revitalise and standardise the language, such as the development of written forms and educational programmes, have occurred in response to these colonial pressures, but these do not negate the language’s indigenous roots.

4. **Cultural Significance**:
- Te Reo Māori is deeply tied to Māori culture, identity, and worldview. It carries traditional knowledge, values, and history.
- Denying its status as an indigenous language undermines the cultural heritage and identity of the Māori people.

5. **Pidgin vs. Creole Languages**:
- Pidgin languages are simplified means of communication that develop between groups with no common language, often in contexts of trade or colonisation.
- Te Reo Māori does not fit the definition of a pidgin language. It has a well-documented and complex linguistic structure, similar to other fully developed languages.

Given these points, the assertion that Te Reo Māori is not indigenous to New Zealand and is merely a pidgin or colonial construct is not accurate. It is important to recognise and respect the language’s historical and cultural significance to the Māori people.

[Daytr]

The thing is, Te Reo is not indigenous to NZ. Thats where the difference lies. Maori at best was and is a pidgin language. Te Reo is a colonial construct.

Straight out of the NZF handbook who probably based it off Hobson's pledge or similar ilk.

Saying te reo or even Maori aren't indigenous as Peters has repeated, is like saying Aborigines aren't indigenous to Australia.
All of humanity originated in Africa if you want to go back 10s of thousand years.

[mistaTea]

Straight out of the NZF handbook who probably based it off Hobson's pledge or similar ilk.

Saying te reo or even Maori aren't indigenous as Peters has repeated, is like saying Aborigines aren't indigenous to Australia.
All of humanity originated in Africa if you want to go back 10s of thousand years.

If I am not mistaken, those who deny that Maori are indigenous usually say that Moriori were here first and were eaten/enslaved by Maori.

No evidence to support that and it seems Moriori settled in the Chatham’s from the get go.

It is true that a couple of tribes in the lower NI did sail to the Chatham’s on European vessels and decimated the peaceful Moriori people. A shameful chapter in the history of those Maori tribes, but that is another matter. Nothing to do with whether or not Maori are indigenous to NZ or not.

[Daytr]

If I am not mistaken, those who deny that Maori are indigenous usually say that Moriori were here first and were eaten/enslaved by Maori.

No evidence to support that and it seems Moriori settled in the Chatham’s from the get go.

It is true that a couple of tribes in the lower NI did sail to the Chatham’s on European vessels and decimated the peaceful Moriori people. A shameful chapter in the history of those Maori tribes, but that is another matter. Nothing to do with whether or not Maori are indigenous to NZ or not.

Yeah it was taught in schools for a long time that Moriori were here first. TBH I don't know what to believe in that regard, but I think the claim that Maori aren't the indigenous race serves nobody well, but funny enough I also think Maori ceded sovereignty, so I get in trouble on both sides.

[davflaws]

The thing is, Te Reo is not indigenous to NZ. Thats where the difference lies. Maori at best was and is a pidgin language. Te Reo is a colonial construct.

Racist nonsense!

[mistaTea]

Yeah it was taught in schools for a long time that Moriori were here first. TBH I don't know what to believe in that regard, but I think the claim that Maori aren't the indigenous race serves nobody well, but funny enough I also think Maori ceded sovereignty, so I get in trouble on both sides.

I think Michael King’s book on the history of NZ is a must read for all New Zealanders.

My views changed on a number of things after reading that book. I had all sorts of ideas in my head that ‘sounded about right’ but were ultimately misguided.

Michael is well regarded as a reliable source for NZ history.

[Daytr]

I think Michael King’s book on the history of NZ is a must read for all New Zealanders.

My views changed on a number of things after reading that book. I had all sorts of ideas in my head that ‘sounded about right’ but were ultimately misguided.

Michael is well regarded as a reliable source for NZ history.

Agreed, however I think those that believe in myths have their minds up due to other factors.
I know people who think there was a very tall Aryan race here before Maori, just because someone says something or writes something that undermines Maori they cling to it.

As King pointed out, Maori weren't perfect, they killed each other, took land off each other & wiped out species, just as the European has. They are just another race of people like any other, but that doesn't mean wrongs shouldn't be righted.

[blackcap]

I think Michael King’s book on the history of NZ is a must read for all New Zealanders.

My views changed on a number of things after reading that book. I had all sorts of ideas in my head that ‘sounded about right’ but were ultimately misguided.

Michael is well regarded as a reliable source for NZ history.

That is a good book.

I should have been more nuanced with my statement. i mean the Te Reo that is being taught now. This whole nonsense about correct spelling and pronunciation etc. That is the biggest BS there is. Maori as a language has many dialects with many different iwi having different languages. There is no "Maori" language. That is the construct. And then there are all the made up words which far outnumber the original Maori vocabulary. Like changing Wanganui to Whanganui. Ask the locals about pronunciation etc.
But if you want to go down the Te Reo route, then by all means do so.

[blackcap]

Racist nonsense!

Not sure how that is racist? I just hold a certain view on a language that has for all intents and purposes been created.

[mistaTea]

That is a good book.

I should have been more nuanced with my statement. i mean the Te Reo that is being taught now. This whole nonsense about correct spelling and pronunciation etc. That is the biggest BS there is. Maori as a language has many dialects with many different iwi having different languages. There is no "Maori" language. That is the construct. And then there are all the made up words which far outnumber the original Maori vocabulary. Like changing Wanganui to Whanganui. Ask the locals about pronunciation etc.
But if you want to go down the Te Reo route, then by all means do so.

Oh ok! Yes I agree with that.

Hone Heke would find most of modern te reo unintelligible.

[Bjauck]

The thing is, Te Reo is not indigenous to NZ. Thats where the difference lies. Maori at best was and is a pidgin language. Te Reo is a colonial construct. Are you referring to written Māori? English is an amalgam of Anglo-Saxon and Danish Norse with half its lexicon then imported from French. It too was spoken initially and not written. Norman French (the language of the colonising power in England) and Latin remained the prestige written languages in England for some time. The Roman Latin script we use today is certainly not native to England or developed by English speakers. There are few languages that are not influenced by other languages. English is certainly not one of them, nor is Te Reo Māori.

[Bjauck]

Yes for sure. And though English is dominating I don’t think we will ever get to the point where English is literally the only language people speak.

Other languages will need to evolve though to keep their place in the world. Hindi is a great example - a lot of people these days speak “Hinglish” where it is 90% Hindi with ‘Indianised’ English words thrown in.

I try to speak shudh Hindi where possible but mostly revert to Hinglish. Don’t get to speak it as much now since my mother in law passed away though.

The linguistic purists will be alarmed, but this ability to adapt is likely to secure the long term future of Hindi.

Versus French, which is more stubborn and less likely to survive. Adaptability is key. The French Academy js very rigid. However that has not stopped Belgian, Swiss, Quebecois and regional patois from developing.

[Bjauck]

What about the Seventh day Avengers! That would be great Sunday TV show!

[Bjauck]

Oh ok! Yes I agree with that.

Hone Heke would find most of modern te reo unintelligible. Language does change over time as other influences and situations develop. I can read an Eighteenth century English text (e.g. Declaration of Independence) without too many issues even if it does seem stilted. Shakespeare however takes some concentration and a handy glossary to help. A hundred odd years during the Middle Ages development of English would also have seen considerable change.

[mistaTea]

Language does change over time as other influences and situations develop. I can read an Eighteenth century English text (e.g. Declaration of Independence) without too many issues even if it does seem stilted. Shakespeare however takes some concentration and a handy glossary to help. A hundred odd years during the Middle Ages development of English would also have seen considerable change.

Yes for sure. I am not critical of te reo evolving. It has to.

But it is fair to say that most of the words in modern reo have been quickly invented to try to match English.

So modern te reo would be bewildering to Maori who were around at the time of the signing of TOW.

English has had a slower and steadier evolution where we have pinched words from other languages and ‘anglocised’ them. And we continue to do so, and the language continues to adapt and evolve.

[Bjauck]

Yes for sure. I am not critical of te reo evolving. It has to.

But it is fair to say that most of the words in modern reo have been quickly invented to try to match English.

So modern te reo would be bewildering to Maori who were around at the time of the signing of TOW.

English has had a slower and steadier evolution where we have pinched words from other languages and ‘anglocised’ them. And we continue to do so, and the language continues to adapt and evolve. I would think much of what modern NZ English speakers talk about and the expressions used would also be bewildering to an early Victorian Englishman. With respect to the change in spoken English, I am not knowledgeable enough to know whether the change in Māori accents is as great as the change in English accents.

Early English also had periods of more rapid change in its history - for example after the Norman French invaded. However most texts were written in French and Latin for some time post 1066. Spoken English also had the great vowel shift between 1400-1700. Many other languages adopt and adapt the words of a more dominant language.

[mistaTea]

I would think much of what modern NZ English speakers talk about and the expressions used would also be bewildering to an early Victorian Englishman

Early English also had periods of more rapid change in its history - for example after the Norman French invaded. However most texts were written in French and Latin for some time post 1066. Spoken English also had the great vowel shift between 1400-1700. Many other languages adopt and adapt the words of a more dominant language.

To be fair, most modern NZ English speakers would struggle to read Tolkien. But that’s another story! 😅

With regards to te reo…in order to survive the cuzzies need to find a way to generate more utility for the language. Otherwise anything else they do is futile.

Paul Moon spoke about this. He was once at a school where the students did some really awesome debates in te reo. He was impressed with their fluency and proficiency.

Anyway, they had a break between debates and he went outside. The students were chatting amongst themselves…and even though every single one of them was fluent in te reo…they were speaking in English…

That’s when you know you are completely f*cked.

[Bjauck]

That is a good book.

I should have been more nuanced with my statement. i mean the Te Reo that is being taught now. This whole nonsense about correct spelling and pronunciation etc. That is the biggest BS there is. Maori as a language has many dialects with many different iwi having different languages. There is no "Maori" language. That is the construct. And then there are all the made up words which far outnumber the original Maori vocabulary. Like changing Wanganui to Whanganui. Ask the locals about pronunciation etc.
But if you want to go down the Te Reo route, then by all means do so. Most languages have dialects. From what I understand the difference between Māori regions is certainly no greater in pronunciation and vocabulary as between the regional varieties of English. English has been adopting and making up words since the early Nineteenth century too.

Samuel Johnson complied his dictionary with spellings I think that were based in the East Midlands pronunciation as it was in the early Eighteenth Century. Missionaries used the NgāPuhi pronunciation I imagine.

[Balance]

The thing is, Te Reo is not indigenous to NZ. Thats where the difference lies. Maori at best was and is a pidgin language. Te Reo is a colonial construct.

"A pidgin language is a grammatically simplified communication method. It usually develops when two or more groups have to develop a system of communication when a common language doesn't exist."

Seems like a pretty accurate description of te reo as a language.

[Balance]

I have no problem about you going - your'e surely not happy here, but you have posted links to two different locations (Whitsundays and Vietnam) where your 'paradise' is allegedly located.

This (along with the fact that you have ignored all invitations to clarify its location) causes me to wonder whether your 'paradise' exists anywhere except in your imagination.

I posted pictures of beaches to illustrate - you are the busybody who decided to do a reverse image search. For what purpose?

Most of us do not post BS, spin and lies here (or on any forum) but you obviously are so indoctrinated after 6 years of deceit, BS, spin & lies from Ardern, Hipkins and Labour that you are incapable of differentiating the difference any more.

Or is it because of your per-occupation with dealing with the beneficiaries, parasites and losers bred so prolifically by Labour?

Cannot be good for your well being as it must be hell on Earth to live with that kind of mindset.

We are all entitled to post our opinions but we must all draw a line at those who post lies, spin, mis-truths and mis-information.

[jonu]

"A pidgin language is a grammatically simplified communication method. It usually develops when two or more groups have to develop a system of communication when a common language doesn't exist."

Seems like a pretty accurate description of te reo as a language.

Have to disagree. Older Maori speakers are far more poetic and metaphorical in their delivery than those who have been through the kura system. There is also an ability to be extraordinarily vague, or have multiple possibilities of translation...a la the Treaty. Parekura Horomia famously took advantage of this to get himself out of trouble in the house. The lack of a written language pre-European presumably made oratory all the more important.

[Balance]

Yes they are also fighting a losing battle on the language front.

A good mate of mine who lives in Ireland couldn’t hold a conversation in Gaelic to save his life. Knows a number of words and sayings etc, but not fluent.

Same for most Irish. The language has no utility in everyday life for most since English has taken over.

Same for te reo. And Ireland is a great example…in that case the majority of the population or ‘native Irish’ and even then, the government cannot get the majority to become fluent in their native language.

In NZ, Maori are a minority (a significant minority, but still a minority). The current policies to try to get the non-Maori majority to speak te reo is futile.

And don’t even get me started on the unfair criticisms of people who prefer to use the Anglo pronunciation of Maori origin words.

The Irish are a homogeneous group of people and yet, it can be seen that the various measures to encourage the use of Gaeilge have not achieved much, especially in usage.

But at least the Irish reached consensus and passed legislation to try and revitalize their language. Contrast that with the sneaky way that Ardern & the Maori Cabal attempted to ramp te reo down the throats of NZers, along with all the other Maorification moves.

The infant killings, courtesy of Ardern & Kelvin Davis in empowering Oranga Tamariki to place Maori culture above infant lives and safety, are the best examples of just how misguided and indoctrinated the Labour hypocrites really are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_language

"20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language 2010–2030 - The Strategy was produced on 21 December 2010 and will stay in action until 2030; it aims to target language vitality and revitalization of the Irish language. The general goal for this strategy was to increase the amount of daily speakers from 83,000 to 250,000 by the end of its run.[68] By 2022, the number of such speakers had fallen to 71,968."


https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/52aca146e4b06d986ca82df3/1655853585228-3D57VWUJ2OB7UZOQCN4L/Optics.jpg?format=500w

[mistaTea]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/christopher-luxon-to-wave-open-for-business-flag-in-japan-with-31-strong-business-delegation/YHAYKRFRWNEH5PCY6RMKX7MYP4/

Broken planes representative of the country as a whole.

This is just getting embarrassing now. Our “DF” planes can’t even get our PM to Melbourne let alone Japan.

[Bjauck]

"A pidgin language is a grammatically simplified communication method. It usually develops when two or more groups have to develop a system of communication when a common language doesn't exist."

Seems like a pretty accurate description of te reo as a language.
Pidgin seems slightly more applicable to English. Early English lost many of its Anglo-Saxon inflections and grammatical complexity when Anglo-saxons and Danes met up with each other in England. Around that time the nominal inflection agreement with its article also disappeared.

The English lexicon also expanded so that both Norse and French origin words could aid communication between groups from different linguistic traditions. Contact with Norman French resulted in Plurals that were standardised to mostly -S plurals, and away from the complex Germanic irregulars, apart from a few exceptions.

[Baa_Baa]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/christopher-luxon-to-wave-open-for-business-flag-in-japan-with-31-strong-business-delegation/YHAYKRFRWNEH5PCY6RMKX7MYP4/

Broken planes representative of the country as a whole.

This is just getting embarrassing now. Our “DF” planes can’t even get our PM to Melbourne let alone Japan.

The really funny part is the NZDF actually do have four brand new Poseidon P-8A's (militarised Boeing 737's), but they don't take passengers. LOL. NZ should get an 'Air Force One' if they want to ferry politicians around the world. The two NZDF Boeing 757-K2's were acquired in 2003, originally rolled out in 1992 and first flight Jan 1993. They're looked after and piloted by No.40 Squadron, with 2 pilots and up to 6 crew, when they're working.

[Bjauck]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/christopher-luxon-to-wave-open-for-business-flag-in-japan-with-31-strong-business-delegation/YHAYKRFRWNEH5PCY6RMKX7MYP4/

Broken planes representative of the country as a whole.

This is just getting embarrassing now. Our “DF” planes can’t even get our PM to Melbourne let alone Japan.It happens so often. They should get Richard Branson to run the RNZAF passenger planes.

[Balance]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/christopher-luxon-to-wave-open-for-business-flag-in-japan-with-31-strong-business-delegation/YHAYKRFRWNEH5PCY6RMKX7MYP4/

Broken planes representative of the country as a whole.

This is just getting embarrassing now. Our “DF” planes can’t even get our PM to Melbourne let alone Japan.

No money for new planes ( hundreds of millions of dollars) but Grant Robertson and Ardern were happy to write a blank check (billions of dollars) for KiwiRail to buy new ferries - how fxxked up can a government be?

“An updated briefing to media confirmed there was an issue with a fuse on the spoiler of the plane. It was replaced but it blew again.”

[mistaTea]

No money for new planes ( hundreds of millions of dollars) but Grant Robertson and Ardern were happy to write a blank check (billions of dollars) for KiwiRail to buy new ferries - how fxxked up can a government be?

“An updated briefing to media confirmed there was an issue with a fuse on the spoiler of the plane. It was replaced but it blew again.”

Maybe we should lobby Albanese to become a state of Australia. Perhaps they can save us from ourselves 😅

[Balance]

Maybe we should lobby Albanese to become a state of Australia. Perhaps they can save us from ourselves ��

Now why would Australia want NZ?

The current CER arrangements work just so well for Australia - they get the best brains and hard workers from NZ (after NZ has paid billions of dollars to bring them up and educate them) and their banks and investment banking firms control NZ's financial system.

NZ can bloody well keep the multitude of parasites, beneficiaries, losers and criminals which get bred by the hundreds of thousands every so often when Labour gets into power.

[Panda-NZ-]

Now why would Australia want NZ?


More territory.
Cheap renewable energy and expertise in large scale agriculture.
Lower AUD = Rest of aussie gets even richer (alongside NZ).

800k of us live over there anyway.

[mistaTea]

Now why would Australia want NZ?

The current CER arrangements work just so well for Australia - they get the best brains and hard workers from NZ (after NZ has paid billions of dollars to bring them up and educate them) and their banks and investment banking firms control NZ's financial system.

NZ can bloody well keep the multitude of parasites, beneficiaries, losers and criminals which get bred by the hundreds of thousands every so often when Labour gets into power.

Yes, territory and NZ still has a lot of potential.

And provided the Waitangi tribunal is disbanded after the last settlement, there should be nothing for them to fear there.

Maybe some hard nosed Aussie politicians is what this country needs.

We would still keep our own parliament and run the operations of NZ…

“Greg” had this to say:

Individual Australian states have significant powers and responsibilities within the federal system established by the Australian Constitution. Here's an overview of the key powers and responsibilities of the Australian states:

1. **Legislative Power:**
- Each state has its own parliament, which can pass laws on various matters. These parliaments operate independently of the federal parliament and have the authority to legislate on areas not explicitly covered by the federal government.

2. **Executive Power:**
- State governments are responsible for implementing and enforcing state laws. They manage public services, such as health, education, transportation, and law enforcement within their jurisdictions.

3. **Judicial Power:**
- Each state has its own judicial system, including courts that handle matters under state law. These courts operate independently but can interact with the federal judicial system when necessary.

4. **Education:**
- States are primarily responsible for primary and secondary education, including the establishment, funding, and regulation of public schools. They also regulate non-government schools within their jurisdictions.

5. **Health:**
- State governments manage and fund public hospitals, health services, and public health initiatives. They regulate health professionals and facilities within their states.

6. **Transport and Infrastructure:**
- States oversee the planning, construction, and maintenance of roads, public transport systems, and other infrastructure projects. They also regulate traffic laws and vehicle registration.

7. **Law and Order:**
- States have their own police forces, responsible for enforcing state laws and maintaining public order. They also manage prisons and corrective services.

8. **Environmental Regulation:**
- States regulate land use, environmental protection, and natural resource management. They have authority over areas such as water resources, forestry, and fisheries.

9. **Local Government:**
- State governments establish and oversee local councils and municipalities. They determine the powers and functions of local governments within their jurisdictions.

10. **Business and Industry Regulation:**
- States regulate various industries, including licensing, business registration, and consumer protection. They also have authority over occupational health and safety regulations.

11. **Housing and Urban Development:**
- States manage public housing programs, urban planning, and development controls. They are responsible for zoning laws and building regulations.

12. **Public Utilities:**
- States regulate essential services such as water supply, electricity, and gas distribution. They manage public utilities and set standards for service delivery.

While states have considerable autonomy, their powers are subject to the Australian Constitution, which delineates the division of powers between the federal and state governments. In cases of conflict between federal and state laws, federal law prevails. Additionally, some areas, such as defence, foreign affairs, and immigration, are exclusively within the jurisdiction of the federal government.

[mistaTea]

The idea of New Zealand joining Australia as a state has been discussed occasionally, but it remains a highly speculative and unlikely scenario. Here are some considerations and potential implications if such a union were to occur:

### Historical Context and Current Sentiment
- **Historical Ties**: New Zealand was once part of the discussions leading to the federation of Australia in 1901 but chose not to join. The countries share close historical, cultural, and economic ties, but New Zealand has maintained its sovereignty.
- **Public Opinion**: Current public sentiment in both countries is generally against such a merger. New Zealanders value their independence and distinct identity, and there is no significant political movement pushing for unification in either country.

### Legal and Political Implications
- **Constitutional Changes**: Both countries would need to undergo significant constitutional changes. Australia would have to amend its constitution to accommodate New Zealand as a state, which would require a national referendum. New Zealand would need to amend its legal framework to relinquish sovereignty.
- **Representation**: New Zealand would need representation in the Australian Parliament, including seats in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. This could lead to complex negotiations over the number of seats and electoral boundaries.

### Economic and Social Considerations
- **Economic Integration**: While both economies are closely linked, full integration would require harmonising tax systems, welfare policies, and regulatory frameworks. There could be significant economic benefits, but also challenges in aligning policies.
- **Social Services**: Health, education, and social services would need to be integrated. Both countries have different systems and standards, which would need to be reconciled.

### Identity and Cultural Impact
- **National Identity**: New Zealanders might be concerned about losing their national identity and cultural uniqueness. This could be a major obstacle to any unification efforts.
- **Cultural Exchange**: On the positive side, cultural exchange and collaboration could be enhanced, strengthening the already close ties between the two nations.

### Defence and International Relations
- **Defence Policies**: Both countries would need to align their defence policies and military structures. This could strengthen regional security but would require significant adjustments.
- **International Standing**: New Zealand’s international standing and membership in organisations like the United Nations and Commonwealth would be impacted. Decisions would need to be made about representation and participation in these bodies.

### Possible Pathways
- **Federation Model**: New Zealand could join as a state within a federated Australia, maintaining a degree of autonomy similar to Australian states.
- **Special Status**: Alternatively, New Zealand could negotiate a special status that grants it more autonomy than a typical state, acknowledging its unique position and history.

In summary, while the theoretical idea of New Zealand joining Australia raises interesting discussions, practical, political, and cultural challenges make it an improbable scenario in the foreseeable future. The strong sense of national identity and independence in New Zealand, coupled with the complexity of such a union, suggests that both countries will continue to cooperate closely as separate sovereign nations.

[Bjauck]

The Irish are a homogeneous group of people and yet, it can be seen that the various measures to encourage the use of Gaeilge have not achieved much, especially in usage.

But at least the Irish reached consensus and passed legislation to try and revitalize their language. Contrast that with the sneaky way that Ardern & the Maori Cabal attempted to ramp te reo down the throats of NZers, along with all the other Maorification moves.

The infant killings, courtesy of Ardern & Kelvin Davis in empowering Oranga Tamariki to place Maori culture above infant lives and safety, are the best examples of just how misguided and indoctrinated the Labour hypocrites really are.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_language

"20-Year Strategy for the Irish Language 2010–2030 - The Strategy was produced on 21 December 2010 and will stay in action until 2030; it aims to target language vitality and revitalization of the Irish language. The general goal for this strategy was to increase the amount of daily speakers from 83,000 to 250,000 by the end of its run.[68] By 2022, the number of such speakers had fallen to 71,968."


https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/52aca146e4b06d986ca82df3/1655853585228-3D57VWUJ2OB7UZOQCN4L/Optics.jpg?format=500w
I don’t think the overall intention is to replace English, but a major aim is for awareness and bilingualism to develop. As the growth in ability to use Irish as a second language attests, that policy is succeeding in that respect.

From the Irish government itself: https://assets.gov.ie/76856/862409dd-a7bd-416d-a282-ac86501e4453.pdf

The objective of Government policy in relation to Irish is to increase on an incremental basis the use and knowledge of Irish as a community language. Specifically, the Government’s aim is to ensure that as many citizens as possible are bilingual in both Irish and English. It is an integral component of the Government’s Irish language policy that close attention be given to its place in the Gaeltacht, particularly in light of research which indicates that the language’s viability as a household and community language in the Gaeltacht is under threat.

As for the Irish being homogenous, the large population of Unionists in the North are more likely have attitudes at variance to The Republic of Ireland policy.

[mistaTea]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/david-seymours-stance-on-school-lunches-ridiculously-divisive-sir-ian-taylor/Y4HJCDSLINGMDP4W7GLEKPPUDM/

I think this whole school lunch thing, and this opinion piece by Sir Ian Taylor is reeally interesting.

Sir Ian is absolutely right about a lot of the things he writes. It is true that a balanced and nutritious diet is integral to the development and well being of people (kids and adults). Anybody who has read the late Dr Mosley's 'Clever Guts Diet' will be well versed in the importance of a diversified and balanced diet to enhance the gut microbiome (the 'second brain').

Eating a sh1te diet, of only a few basic food groups, along with processed junk food and drinks high in sugar wreaks havoc on the good gut bacteria, which not only impacts you cognitively...but also can lead to allergies, skin conditions and obesity (we used to think losing weigh was just 'Calories in, Calories out (CICO) but new research shows that is not quite the full picture, and gut bacteria play a key role).

So anyway, I read his article... and I take his points. Hell, I would be stoked with hummus and salmon/avocado sushi myself!

But this is where these guys do not loop back to the reality of the situation on the ground. They get stuck in the ideology of the matter.

Because, according to a number of articles written about the school lunches, a great many kids turned their noses up at the Quinoa salads and sushi platters etc that were being served up. So a lot of the food was going to waste... the food banks etc were happy because they would get the leftovers, but it is not for Education to fund our food banks.

The reality is meals like that are also expensive. And, yes, we could just be philosophical about it and say it is a 'good investment' because some of the kids do eat it... but our Government aint Rockefella either, and we do need to make sure we live within our means.

The reality is that for the kids who truly do not get fed at home (most of the time because their sh1t arse parents would rather spend the money they do have on booze and pokies) a humble ham and cheese sandwich will be very welcome. Before we get into the whys and wherefores about maximising gut bacteria diversity...we first focus on getting these kids in genuine need fed. Fed first, we can always look to iterate the scheme over time to include more food types in the future.

I often find this with people on one side or the other of the political spectrum. They get so bogged down in idelogy etc that they soon lose sight of the forest for the trees.

[Daytr]

I posted pictures of beaches to illustrate - you are the busybody who decided to do a reverse image search. For what purpose?

Most of us do not post BS, spin and lies here (or on any forum) but you obviously are so indoctrinated after 6 years of deceit, BS, spin & lies from Ardern, Hipkins and Labour that you are incapable of differentiating the difference any more.

Or is it because of your per-occupation with dealing with the beneficiaries, parasites and losers bred so prolifically by Labour?

Cannot be good for your well being as it must be hell on Earth to live with that kind of mindset.

We are all entitled to post our opinions but we must all draw a line at those who post lies, spin, mis-truths and mis-information.

But you don't just post opinions do you?
You disparage people with wild hideous accusations.
You insult people constantly.
I find it ironic that you are preaching about lies, spin & mistrust after quoting NZFs manifesto and suggesting that smoking is no more dangerous than caffeine.

The constant references to your backside are ugly and tedious.

You really are one of the least self aware posters on here.

I am waiting for an apology for the string of ugly accusations you made the other night.
There are times when we can all say something we regret, but you were completely out of order and I expect a public apology.
Let's see what sort of man you are.

[davflaws]

I am waiting for an apology for the string of ugly accusations you made the other night.
There are times when we can all say something we regret, but you were completely out of order and I expect a public apology.
Let's see what sort of man you are.

I wouldn't hold my breath - either for an apology, or for any clarification of the location of Balance's (probably imaginary) tropical paradise.

[Daytr]

I wouldn't hold my breath - either for an apology, or for any clarification of the location of Balance's (probably imaginary) tropical paradise.

Well he has an opportunity to prove us all wrong.

[davflaws]

They get stuck in the ideology of the matter...............snip
.......... for the kids who truly do not get fed at home (most of the time because their sh1t arse parents would rather spend the money they do have on booze and pokies)

I suspect your ideology is showing

[Balance]

But you don't just post opinions do you?
You disparage people with wild hideous accusations.
You insult people constantly.
I find it ironic that you are preaching about lies, spin & mistrust after quoting NZFs manifesto and suggesting that smoking is no more dangerous than caffeine.

The constant references to your backside are ugly and tedious.

You really are one of the least self aware posters on here.

I am waiting for an apology for the string of ugly accusations you made the other night.
There are times when we can all say something we regret, but you were completely out of order and I expect a public apology.
Let's see what sort of man you are.

Kiss my arse.

You tried to spin and BS your way out of being fact checked on your inaccurate and exaggerated assertions about NZF.

Then, attempted (the usual diversion trick) to insult us as supporters of NZF and being pro-smoking to hide your embarrassment.

May work with others but not with us, and certainly not me.

So, kiss my arse as I do not suffer fools.

Good enough?

[blackcap]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/david-seymours-stance-on-school-lunches-ridiculously-divisive-sir-ian-taylor/Y4HJCDSLINGMDP4W7GLEKPPUDM/

I think this whole school lunch thing, and this opinion piece by Sir Ian Taylor is reeally interesting.

Sir Ian is absolutely right about a lot of the things he writes. It is true that a balanced and nutritious diet is integral to the development and well being of people (kids and adults). Anybody who has read the late Dr Mosley's 'Clever Guts Diet' will be well versed in the importance of a diversified and balanced diet to enhance the gut microbiome (the 'second brain').

Eating a sh1te diet, of only a few basic food groups, along with processed junk food and drinks high in sugar wreaks havoc on the good gut bacteria, which not only impacts you cognitively...but also can lead to allergies, skin conditions and obesity (we used to think losing weigh was just 'Calories in, Calories out (CICO) but new research shows that is not quite the full picture, and gut bacteria play a key role).

So anyway, I read his article... and I take his points. Hell, I would be stoked with hummus and salmon/avocado sushi myself!

But this is where these guys do not loop back to the reality of the situation on the ground. They get stuck in the ideology of the matter.

Because, according to a number of articles written about the school lunches, a great many kids turned their noses up at the Quinoa salads and sushi platters etc that were being served up. So a lot of the food was going to waste... the food banks etc were happy because they would get the leftovers, but it is not for Education to fund our food banks.

The reality is meals like that are also expensive. And, yes, we could just be philosophical about it and say it is a 'good investment' because some of the kids do eat it... but our Government aint Rockerfella either, and we do need to make sure we live within our means.

The reality is that for the kids who truly do not get fed at home (most of the time because their sh1t arse parents would rather spend the money they do have on booze and pokies) a humble ham and cheese sandwich will be very welcome. Before we get into the whys and wherefores about maximising gut bacteria diversity...we first focus on getting these kids in genuine need fed. Fed first, we can always look to iterate the scheme over time to include more food types in the future.

I often find this with people on one side or the other of the political spectrum. They get so bogged down in idelogy etc that they soon lose sight of the forest for the trees.

Really well said. A ham and cheese sandwich would be like manna from heaven for some of these kids.

Bugger thie idealogical nonsense that is holding us back. First get some calories into these kids, not the quinoa rubbish, and then look at improving other skills and nutrition.

[Balance]

Really well said. A ham and cheese sandwich would be like manna from heaven for some of these kids.

Bugger thie idealogical nonsense that is holding us back. First get some calories into these kids, not the quinoa rubbish, and then look at improving other skills and nutrition.

NZ - supposedly a first world country with a generous social welfare safety net - becoming Aotearoa, sliding to 2nd world status where irresponsible parents can breed as many dependent children as they want and expect the state to provide everything. What a fxxking joke.

[mistaTea]

I suspect your ideology is showing

I am not wrong davflaws, in that MOST of kids that are not being fed are the result of their parents/guardians diverting the resources they do have to other pursuits.

The situation where families literally have no money for food is pretty rare in NZ.

It is the left wing ideology that tries to deny this. It is the left wing ideology that tries to say all of these families are just victims of the system, nothing they are doing to contribute to their own mysery (and, in this case, the mysery of their kids).

And you have allegedly spent a life working with the filth and degenerates of society (didn't one guy have a fist or something tattood on his forehead?)... so you will have seen plenty of examples of so-called parents prioritising their kids welfare last, if at all. I am surprised that this was your takeaway of what (I thought) was a fairly balanced observation of the school lunch saga.

[Daytr]

Kiss my arse.

You tried to spin and BS your way out of being fact checked on your inaccurate and exaggerated assertions about NZF.

Then, attempted (the usual diversion trick) to insult us as supporters of NZF and being pro-smoking to hide your embarrassment.

May work with others but not with us, and certainly not me.

So, kiss my arse as I do not suffer fools.

Good enough?

Full of BS as usual and no decency.
Let's see you accused me of being drunk, on meds and being a wife & child beater.
Is there anything reasonable in any of that?

Never mind, I gave you an opportunity.

[davflaws]

I am not wrong davflaws, in that MOST of kids that are not being fed are the result of their parents/guardians divert the resources they do have to other pursuits.

I'm sure you believe that, and I would be interested in any figures you have, but it doesn't fit the pattern of poverty and deprivation fading into neglect that I have seen over the period 1987 - 2019, and what colleagues in my network continue to see.


The situation where families literally have no money for food is pretty rare in NZ.

It's not like that - at least in the context of school lunches - lots and lots and lots of families scrape by week to week, but continue to face a series of choices about power, rent, food, gas in the car, kids clothes - and booze and pokies doesn't come into it. Sometimes, its mum or dad who misses out when something tips the situation over the edge, sometimes its the kids.



It is the left wing ideology that tries to deny this. It is the left wing ideology that tries to say all of these families are just victims of the system, nothing they are doing to contribute to their own mysery (and, in this case, the mysery of their kids).

I don't know anyone who claims all these families are just victims of the system. Everyone I have ever worked with as a colleague has acknowleged that almost everyone can do better and some of our clients/patients/inmates/supervisees and their families/whanau could do a hell of a lot better.

Some small proportion do spend money that should go to their kids welfare. The key word in that sentence is small.


And you have allegedly spent a life working with the filth and degenerates of society (didn't one guy have a fist or something tattood on his forehead?)... so you will have seen plenty of examples of so-called parents prioritising their kids welfare last, if at all.

All sorts - but filth and degenerates? Nah. Some bad people, some sad people, some mad people, not too many glad people. Of course that biases my samp[le - but it biases it in the direction of expecting to see more neglect by wanton spending.

And I didn't. And neither did my colleagues.

To be very clear - We didn't see very many instances where kids were abused or neglected because the parents were spending money on booze, gambling, or riotous living.


I am surprised that this was your takeaway of what (I thought) was a fairly balanced observation of the school lunch saga.

I agree that you provided a 'fairly balanced view of the school lunch saga, and while I might disagree with your politics, here I disagree with your claim that most poverty/neglect is caused by spending on indulgences.

If you hadn't made reference to s*** arsed parents preferring to spend on booze and pokies, I wouldn't have called it.

[mistaTea]

I'm sure you believe that, and I would be interested in any figures you have, but it doesn't fit the pattern of poverty and deprivation fading into neglect that I have seen over the period 1987 - 2019, and what colleagues in my network continue to see.



It's not like that - at least in the context of school lunches - lots and lots and lots of families scrape by week to week, but continue to face a series of choices about power, rent, food, gas in the car, kids clothes - and booze and pokies doesn't come into it. Sometimes, its mum or dad who misses out when something tips the situation over the edge, sometimes its the kids.




I don't know anyone who claims all these families are just victims of the system. Everyone I have ever worked with as a colleague has acknowleged that almost everyone can do better and some of our clients/patients/inmates/supervisees and their families/whanau could do a hell of a lot better.

Some small proportion do spend money that should go to their kids welfare. The key word in that sentence is small.



All sorts - but filth and degenerates? Nah. Some bad people, some sad people, some mad people, not too many glad people. Of course that biases my samp[le - but it biases it in the direction of expecting to see more neglect by wanton spending.

And I didn't. And neither did my colleagues.

To be very clear - We didn't see very many instances where kids were abused or neglected because the parents were spending money on booze, gambling, or riotous living.



I agree that you provided a 'fairly balanced view of the school lunch saga, and while I might disagree with your politics, here I disagree with your claim that most poverty/neglect is caused by spending on indulgences.

If you hadn't made reference to s*** arsed parents preferring to spend on booze and pokies, I wouldn't have called it.

Ok, will reflect on your comments.

[Daytr]

I am not wrong davflaws, in that MOST of kids that are not being fed are the result of their parents/guardians diverting the resources they do have to other pursuits.

The situation where families literally have no money for food is pretty rare in NZ.

It is the left wing ideology that tries to deny this. It is the left wing ideology that tries to say all of these families are just victims of the system, nothing they are doing to contribute to their own mysery (and, in this case, the mysery of their kids).

And you have allegedly spent a life working with the filth and degenerates of society (didn't one guy have a fist or something tattood on his forehead?)... so you will have seen plenty of examples of so-called parents prioritising their kids welfare last, if at all. I am surprised that this was your takeaway of what (I thought) was a fairly balanced observation of the school lunch saga.

I think if you look at what rents have done in the last few years there is very little left for even working people. No doubt some bad decisions are made on where money is spent, however when people are under extreme pressure people quite often do make poor decisions.
Self medication of metal stress also can come into it. It's easy for people that aren't under the same stresses to be judgemental, bit as the saying goes, until you have walked in their shoes... which I certainly haven't.

[mistaTea]

I think if you look at what rents have done in the last few years there is very little left for even working people. No doubt some bad decisions are made on where money is spent, however when people are under extreme pressure people quite often do make poor decisions.
Self medication of metal stress also can come into it. It's easy for people that aren't under the same stresses to be judgemental, bit as the saying goes, until you have walked in their shoes... which I certainly haven't.

I have walked in their shoes to some extent. Never to the point where my parents did not feed us.

But to the point where I had to give up my paper run money to buy groceries... yet dad still always somehow had money for cigarettes. Not great is it.

Perhaps that experience jades me somewhat, but I do not think my parents are unique in this area.

[Balance]

I have walked in their shoes to some extent. Never to the point where my parents did not feed us.

But to the point where I had to give up my paper run money to buy groceries... yet dad still always somehow had money for cigarettes. Not great is it.

Perhaps that experience jades me somewhat, but I do not think my parents are unique in this area.

People who are heavily addicted to any substance or activity, be it alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, gambling, sex or shopping will do anything including depriving their families of the basic necessities of life to feed their addiction.

Children’s breakfast? That’s nothing!!!

[mistaTea]

People who are heavily addicted to any substance or activity, be it alcohol, cigarettes, drugs, gambling, sex or shopping will do anything including depriving their families of the basic necessities of life to feed their addiction.

Children’s breakfast? That’s nothing!!!

Yes, and people will have various reasons for medicating with their addictions. Be it booze, drugs, sex or a combo of all.

Then we learn our behaviour from those closest to us, often our parents when growing up.

Just last week, my younger brother (big booze, tobacco and drug dependency) could not come up with petrol money to drive his daughter to a town 2 hours away to drop her back off to her mother. Yet the previous weekend I was visiting where he lives, and he had plenty of money for ciggies, takeaways and alcohol.

Fast forward to the weekend just gone by... a couple of days after his daughters mother had to drive down to collect her, my bro got paid... and so when the weekend rolled around he was straight down the pub to watch the rugger and booze it up with his yobo mates.

Now, I do not consider my brother to be evil. But he is an absolute sh1t bag as a father. His daughter only visits every so often, and he does the bare minimum in terms of planning ahead to have money to do things with her. He can never bring himself to sacrifice the smokes or the booze 'now' in order to have more cash later.

And though I cannot produce any stats on this issue as davflaws has asked for (because I don't think anyone has collected such stats, or even could reliably do so)... I do not think that my brother is the only f*ck stick, no-hoper dad around.

Now, his daughter does not miss any meals or anything like that. But I know there will be other parents who are even worse with their addictions etc, and that kids missing meals and going without is not such a big stretch to my imagination.

[blackcap]

Yes, and people will have various reasons for medicating with their addictions. Be it booze, drugs, sex or a combo of all.

Then we learn our behaviour from those closest to us, often our parents when growing up.

Just last week, my younger brother (big booze, tobacco and drug dependency) could not come up with petrol money to drive his daughter to a town 2 hours away to drop her back off to her mother. Yet the previous weekend I was visiting where he lives, and he had plenty of money for ciggies, takeaways and alcohol.

Fast forward to the weekend just gone by... a couple of days after his daughters mother had to drive down to collect her, my bro got paid... and so when the weekend rolled around he was straight down the pub to watch the rugger and booze it up with his yobo mates.

Now, I do not consider my brother to be evil. But he is an absolute sh1t bag as a father. His daughter only visits every so often, and he does the bare minimum in terms of planning ahead to have money to do things with her. He can never bring himself to sacrifice the smokes or the booze 'now' in order to have more cash later.

And though I cannot produce any stats on this issue as davflaws has asked for (because I don't think anyone has collected such stats, or even could reliably do so)... I do not think that my brother is the only f*ck stick, no-hoper dad around.

Now, his daughter does not miss any meals or anything like that. But I know there will be other parents who are even worse with their addictions etc, and that kids missing meals and going without is not such a big stretch to my imagination.

You are totally right. Dav Flaws is ideaologically driven. He does not blame the **** parents because its no fault of their own. Thats the crux of his argument. There is no need whatsoever for people in NZ not to be able to provide for their kids. None whatsoever. Even on a benefit, because the benefit is enough to live on if you want to be responsible and live on it.

My parents lived on a benefit when I was growing up, but there was always food on the table. Not the best quality, we also never went on holidays because we could not afford it initially. But they made do. They sacrificed (my mother especially) a lot of things to be able to be the good parents they are. They did not booze, or gamble or do other crap ****.

Because they knew their responsibilities.
There were plenty of kids with parents who had more money, that had a more **** existence.

Even now, if as parents you cannot provide for your kids, you are doing something wrong. If its rent thats the problem, they you are probably living in too affluent an area. But I suspect the real reason is that its down to choices. **** choices. Impulse choices.

[nztx]

You are totally right. Dav Flaws is ideaologically driven. He does not blame the **** parents because its no fault of their own. Thats the crux of his argument. There is no need whatsoever for people in NZ not to be able to provide for their kids. None whatsoever. Even on a benefit, because the benefit is enough to live on if you want to be responsible and live on it.

My parents lived on a benefit when I was growing up, but there was always food on the table. Not the best quality, we also never went on holidays because we could not afford it initially. But they made do. They sacrificed (my mother especially) a lot of things to be able to be the good parents they are. They did not booze, or gamble or do other crap ****.

Because they knew their responsibilities.
There were plenty of kids with parents who had more money, that had a more **** existence.

Even now, if as parents you cannot provide for your kids, you are doing something wrong. If its rent thats the problem, they you are probably living in too affluent an area. But I suspect the real reason is that its down to choices. **** choices. Impulse choices.


This says it all - Because they knew their responsibilities.


Responsibility , not excuses as why some should evade their RESPONSIBILITY - in many parts because the Socialist faction have told some that it's okay to not be responsible, and someone else will pick up for their responsibility that they have walked away from

Extend the same to Respect for other,s Respect for the Society that gets lumbered with picking up the tab

The Right to not be & exercise Responsibility is frequently seen waved around, usually by those who point to extreme examples to try and justify their own Socialistic Goals & Views on things too ;)

And what do we in many cases see hitting the Courts waving what sort of ideals of their Rights ?

A certain section of the Political Bumpkins in the land are among the worst offenders in the narrow vision - pandering to such views because they think they might win a bit of airspace & support out it .. usually only temporary when the blind then find they have been conned .. yet again ;)

[mistaTea]

You are totally right. Dav Flaws is ideaologically driven. He does not blame the **** parents because its no fault of their own. Thats the crux of his argument. There is no need whatsoever for people in NZ not to be able to provide for their kids. None whatsoever. Even on a benefit, because the benefit is enough to live on if you want to be responsible and live on it.

My parents lived on a benefit when I was growing up, but there was always food on the table. Not the best quality, we also never went on holidays because we could not afford it initially. But they made do. They sacrificed (my mother especially) a lot of things to be able to be the good parents they are. They did not booze, or gamble or do other crap ****.

Because they knew their responsibilities.
There were plenty of kids with parents who had more money, that had a more **** existence.

Even now, if as parents you cannot provide for your kids, you are doing something wrong. If its rent thats the problem, they you are probably living in too affluent an area. But I suspect the real reason is that its down to choices. **** choices. Impulse choices.

Yeah bang on mate.

From what I can tell, davflaws is saying that the vast majority of these kids turning up to school with nothing to eat... are the result of society letting them down. According to davflaws then, it follows that all of these parents are sacrificing eveything they possibly can... even their own meals... and even then despite all of the WFF tax credits, accomodation supplements or additional benefit grants available... it is not possible to come up with even a peanut butter sandwich for the kids.

I just do not believe that for one minute.

I accept that these people won't change, and we are now stuck with a school lunch programme. All we can do is make it as cost effective as we can.

At the same time, I don't think we should get sucked into all of the 'victim' stories either. I guarantee you most of the parents have money for KFC, lotto etc etc.

[nztx]

Yeah bang on mate.

From what I can tell, davflaws is saying that the vast majority of these kids turning up to school with nothing to eat... are the result of society letting them down. According to davflaws then, it follows that all of these parents are sacrificing eveything they possibly can... even their own meals... and even then despite all of the WFF tax credits, accomodation supplements or additional benefit grants available... it is not possible to come up with even a peanut butter sandwich for the kids.

I just do not believe that for one minute.

I accept that these people won't change, and we are now stuck with a school lunch programme. All we can do is make it as cost effective as we can.

At the same time, I don't think we should get sucked into all of the 'victim' stories either. I guarantee you most of the parents have money for KFC, lotto etc etc.


I don't believe it either .. many of these parents are riding the gravy train pulling in more than other families with two working parents making an "honest" and "responsible" go of things ..

All too easy to kick the kids out the door off to school without breakfast lunches etc knowing full well the State will pick up the pieces - where do these parents then hang out during the day after shirking their responsibilities ? ;)

[Bjauck]

You are totally right. Dav Flaws is ideaologically driven. He does not blame the **** parents because its no fault of their own. Thats the crux of his argument. There is no need whatsoever for people in NZ not to be able to provide for their kids. None whatsoever. Even on a benefit, because the benefit is enough to live on if you want to be responsible and live on it.

My parents lived on a benefit when I was growing up, but there was always food on the table. Not the best quality, we also never went on holidays because we could not afford it initially. But they made do. They sacrificed (my mother especially) a lot of things to be able to be the good parents they are. They did not booze, or gamble or do other crap ****.

Because they knew their responsibilities.
There were plenty of kids with parents who had more money, that had a more **** existence.

Even now, if as parents you cannot provide for your kids, you are doing something wrong. If its rent thats the problem, they you are probably living in too affluent an area. But I suspect the real reason is that its down to choices. **** choices. Impulse choices.Your family must have had good organisational skills, determination snd self-control. In the modern quest for self-expression these qualities can be relegated. The concept of plain yet nutritious food has changed over the years with clever marketing as to what should be standard fare. That is all very well if money is no object…

You probably don’t know, but it would be interesting to know what percentage of their after tax income went on rent, compared to what happens today. Accommodation is one area where costs have inflated by far more than incomes or the CPI. Today if poor tenants are in social housing their rent is capped at 25% of income. However the same is not true for those who have private landlords, and who get WFF or accommodation supplement.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/pou-tiaki/our-truth/125681860/there-is-a-littleknown-twotier-system-within-social-housing-thousands-of-tenants-are-paying-the-price

[Getty]

In between plane changes, Lux shook hands with the Papua New Guinea PM to add another 19000 RSE workers in from the Pacific Islands on top of the 19500 existing limit.

Hmm, if there is that much work going undone, then it's imperative 19000 dole bludgers have their benefit canceled?

[Getty]

...the vast majority of these kids turning up to school with nothing to eat... are the result of society letting them down. ... it follows that all of these parents are sacrificing eveything they possibly can... even their own meals... and even then despite all of the WFF tax credits, accomodation supplements or additional benefit grants available... it is not possible to come up with even a peanut butter sandwich for the kids.

I just do not believe that for one minute.


At the same time, I don't think we should get sucked into all of the 'victim' stories either. I guarantee you most of the parents have money for KFC, lotto etc etc.

I was going to post a comment on peanut butter sandwiches, but you beat me to it.

Which parent out there lacks the skills to simply knife or spoon spread a bit of peanut butter between 2 pieces of bread?
If it's good enough for me, it's good enough for the kids.
You don't even need a fridge to store it in, and it's always in season.

Ah, but we love our kids.

Yeah right mate!

[mistaTea]

I was going to post a comment on peanut butter sandwiches, but you beat me to it.

Which parent out there lacks the skills to simply knife or spoon spread a bit of peanut butter between 2 pieces of bread?
If it's good enough for me, it's good enough for the kids.
You don't even need a fridge to store it in, and it's always in season.

Ah, but we love our kids.

Yeah right mate!

Yeah, doesn’t pass the sniff test that’s for sure.

[Baa_Baa]

Why is it a State (taxpayer) responsibility, to pay for school kids lunches? This was abandoned in the 1960's when the state stopped supplying milk bottles to schools every day. They never provided lunches as far as I recall.

And not all schools either, just the selected schools (with opaque selection criteria), less than half of them at 1013 schools vs about 2500 schools in NZ. Have a read of the Ka Ora, Ka Ako website https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/overall-strategies-and-policies/wellbeing-in-education/free-and-healthy-school-lunches/, it's like only these selected schools, apparently deserve taxpayer funded lunches, whereas all the other schools which will certainly have some deprived families with kids attending them don't.

So it's our taxpayer responsibility to feed these kids only in the selected schools, less than half of all schools, but not the rest. Why are we taxpayers funding any of it, let alone it being discriminatory of only some schools?

[davflaws]

Ok, will reflect on your comments.

I really appreciate your willingness to engage and investigate.

[davflaws]

Why is it a State (taxpayer) responsibility, to pay for school kids lunches?


I don't know that I'd call it a responsibility, but it's certainly a rational response to a situation that the state can ameliorate by targeted expenditure. Hungry kids don't learn well. They start disadvantaged and are less likely to escape the underclass, and more likely to trouble the Health and Justice systems in the course of their lives.

[Baa_Baa]

I don't know that I'd call it a responsibility, but it's certainly a rational response to a situation that the state can ameliorate by targeted expenditure. Hungry kids don't learn well. They start disadvantaged and are less likely to escape the underclass, and more likely to trouble the Health and Justice systems in the course of their lives.

And that’s the reason why taxpayers should fund it? You assume the targeting is accurate and that taxpayers should fund it, is the right thing to do?

[Panda-NZ-]

We hardly spend anything on the young - supposedly our future.

Have six investment properties, and claim super at the magic age, all fine and dandy.

[mistaTea]

And that’s the reason why taxpayers should fund it? You assume the targeting is accurate and that taxpayers should fund it, is the right thing to do?

Pete is in full agreement.

https://peterallanwilliams.substack.com/p/school-lunches-are-not-the-governments

[Getty]

We hardly spend anything on the young - supposedly our future.

Have six investment properties, and claim super at the magic age, all fine and dandy.

OK.
Let's outlaw all the private landlords.


Then who is going to provide the rental homes so desperately needed by so many?

[Bjauck]

OK.
Let's outlaw all the private landlords.


Then who is going to provide the rental homes so desperately needed by so many? Panda is just observing current practice.

It is also often the retired or empty-nesters who live in and own multiple family sized homes while many families struggle to own or rent any home. Our society has a disconnect in that regard. It would be ideal if the older folk’s funds ended up invested more in companies and business employing high paid staff.

[Daytr]

This says it all - Because they knew their responsibilities.


Responsibility , not excuses as why some should evade their RESPONSIBILITY - in many parts because the Socialist faction have told some that it's okay to not be responsible, and someone else will pick up for their responsibility that they have walked away from

Extend the same to Respect for other,s Respect for the Society that gets lumbered with picking up the tab

The Right to not be & exercise Responsibility is frequently seen waved around, usually by those who point to extreme examples to try and justify their own Socialistic Goals & Views on things too ;)

And what do we in many cases see hitting the Courts waving what sort of ideals of their Rights ?

A certain section of the Political Bumpkins in the land are among the worst offenders in the narrow vision - pandering to such views because they think they might win a bit of airspace & support out it .. usually only temporary when the blind then find they have been conned .. yet again ;)

I have never seen the left side of politics say its not the parents fault. They don't go bashing them though either.
All of you that are talking about their childhood, they were different times and incomparable.
For starters the State guaranteed you a house.
That's what pissed me off about the likes of Paula Bennett & John Key who both had State housing support growing up, but when they had the chance to do something about it, they did the opposite and reduced the amount of State Housing.

Now people are lucky if they have much money left after paying for rent. The proportion of income spent on rent has roughly doubled in recent years. This is a real problem.
And one could argue caused by Labour, but I think the issue started around 20 years ago.

What I have heard over & over again from Labour & the like, is that, it's not the kids fault & no matter what a Government does to penalize the parents, it's the children that will suffer.
So direct intervention to ensure the kids get food, school lunches etc is a way to ensure kids have a full belly and can concentrate at school and have energy is critical.

Could the school lunch program be run better? Sure. But even David Seymour backed down quickly on his original aggressive rhetoric re school lunches.

No matter how much finger wagging or judgement is done on here, let alone in Wellington, that isn't going to change anything, and punative action will only be felt by the kids.

[mistaTea]

I have never seen the left side of politics say its not the parents fault. .

Ok, fair enough. But can you show me any examples where the left have called our parents for failing in their basic duty to feed their kids? Even if just a humble jam sandwich and an apple?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/115375000/free-lunches-for-school-kids-government-announces

This was Cindy launching the programme.


"Many families in New Zealand struggle to provide enough food for their children. A healthy lunch every day will help to alleviate one of the worst aspects of deprivation for kids hunger."


Just talks about poverty etc... the victims of the system. At no point did Cindy say "Look, it is utter bs that the State has to pay for kids lunch... but the reality is, a lot of low socioeconomic families prioritise other spending over their kids lunches. It is a real shame, but we still think that this programme is needed because, at the end of the day, the kids are innocent in all of this".

I could actually respect that, and go along with it to some extent.

What I do not like is the stealthy way they bring these programmes in, which... if allowed to grow and develop must lead to higher taxes (like the beloved Finland).

The honest thing to do would be to front up to NZers and say, Lookit, we want to lift the average worker effective tax rate from 21% to 31% like we see in Finland. Then we can make doctor visits, school lunches, public transport etc etc etc all "free". Look how happy they are in Finland! We could be 'New Finland' if you just agree to a 50% personal income tax increase.

Then we could have the debate, and an election and go from there.

But we can't have low taxes (relative to the likes of Finland) AND want to fund everything, including school lunches.

[Baa_Baa]

I don't know that I'd call it a responsibility, but it's certainly a rational response to a situation that the state can ameliorate by targeted expenditure. Hungry kids don't learn well. They start disadvantaged and are less likely to escape the underclass, and more likely to trouble the Health and Justice systems in the course of their lives.

So it's a rational response, spending $478 million of taxpayers money on school lunches for less than half of the schools in NZ and not the deprived kids in the other schools that are not funded. It's ok to trade off the $478m against other rational responses targeted expenditure, like cancer drugs for example not being funded.

It should not be a State responsibility imo to spend taxpayers money on kids lunches in schools, especially at the expense of the trade-offs that are not funded.

[Panda-NZ-]

The greatest good for the greatest number of people should enter into considerations for "value for money" somewhere.

If you only care about numbers.. how many benefit from school lunches vs those who benefit from the very latest cancer drugs.

[Daytr]

Ok, fair enough. But can you show me any examples where the left have called our parents for failing in their basic duty to feed their kids? Even if just a humble jam sandwich and an apple?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/115375000/free-lunches-for-school-kids-government-announces

This was Cindy launching the programme.



Just talks about poverty etc... the victims of the system. At no point did Cindy say "Look, it is utter bs that the State has to pay for kids lunch... but the reality is, a lot of low socioeconomic families prioritise other spending over their kids lunches. It is a real shame, but we still think that this programme is needed because, at the end of the day, the kids are innocent in all of this".

I could actually respect that, and go along with it to some extent.

What I do not like is the stealthy way they bring these programmes in, which... if allowed to grow and develop must lead to higher taxes (like the beloved Finland).

The honest thing to do would be to front up to NZers and say, Lookit, we want to lift the average worker effective tax rate from 21% to 31% like we see in Finland. Then we can make doctor visits, school lunches, public transport etc etc etc all "free". Look how happy they are in Finland! We could be 'New Finland' if you just agree to a 50% personal income tax increase.

Then we could have the debate, and an election and go from there.

But we can't have low taxes (relative to the likes of Finland) AND want to fund everything, including school lunches.

So let me get this straight.
As long as Ardern had wagged her finger and told people off it would have been OK?
What good would that actually do?

So you want to raise taxes. Good oh.
There are many things we don't fund that Scandinavian countries do.

Despite Labour's excessive spending & funding school lunches wasn't excessive but necessary, NZ still has very low Government debt levels when looking at our peers.

The Coalition is cutting taxes and the biggest beneficiaries are families with up to an additional $6K available for childcare etc.
Are you OK with that? But would rather see kids go hungry?

[Daytr]

So it's a rational response, spending $478 million of taxpayers money on school lunches for less than half of the schools in NZ and not the deprived kids in the other schools that are not funded. It's ok to trade off the $478m against other rational responses targeted expenditure, like cancer drugs for example not being funded.

It should not be a State responsibility imo to spend taxpayers money on kids lunches in schools, especially at the expense of the trade-offs that are not funded.

Perhaps the Government should cut subsidies to the retirement sector so at least our future doesn't go hungry, rather than the elderly getting luxury retirement accommodation.

You say the Government shouldn't do it, the parents in some of these cases aren't doing it, how are you going to make sure the parents suddenly change behaviors?

Or should we just ignore the issue, let the kids go hungry, have more behavioral issues, have a lesser education due to not being able to concentrate and be on the road to more welfare in their future.

[davflaws]

I posted pictures of beaches to illustrate - you are the busybody who decided to do a reverse image search. For what purpose?


Nah - as Baa Baa will confirm, I'm too old to master that level of technology. I just looked at the url for the Whitsundays and read youir post about international schools in Vietnam.

So you draw an erroneous inference, and then go on to bleat about BS for three more paragraphs -

But you still haven't told us the location of your (imaginary?) paradise.

[Baa_Baa]

Perhaps the Government should cut subsidies to the retirement sector so at least our future doesn't go hungry, rather than the elderly getting luxury retirement accommodation.

Incomparable, the government (DHB's) payments are inadequate and in no circumstance do they fund "luxury retirement accommodation", they pay for a very basic room and board, for only those who cannot afford to pay for it themselves.


You say the Government shouldn't do it, the parents in some of these cases aren't doing it, how are you going to make sure the parents suddenly change behaviors?

It should not be a Governments' responsibility to change parents behaviours towards feeding their children. Next thing you'll be suggesting is the government pay for the children's breakfasts and dinners as well.


Or should we just ignore the issue, let the kids go hungry, have more behavioral issues, have a lesser education due to not being able to concentrate and be on the road to more welfare in their future.

Who is "we"? I'm talking about the Government and my view that it should not their responsibility to pay taxpayers' money for feeding children lunches in schools.

Of the 2500 schools in NZ, 1013 of them receive funding for lunches, so by your reckoning, the Government is already ignoring the deprived children in the other 1487 schools?

[Baa_Baa]

Nah - as Baa Baa will confirm, I'm too old to master that level of technology.

Why bring me into it? I have no idea, and why would I, about your technology skills. You can wage this obsessive futile argument you have with Balance without me, thank you very much.

[mistaTea]

So let me get this straight.
As long as Ardern had wagged her finger and told people off it would have been OK?
What good would that actually do?

Well I certainly don't think it would help if Cindy (or any other MP) used the colourful language I use to describe some of these parents. I was just responding to your earlier comment to demonstrate that Labour et al do not even acknowledge that a big part of the problem comes down to bad parenting, spending resources on foolish and often selfish pursuits. They just give the impression that there is this massive underclass in NZ and despite parents 'trying their best' they are so systemically poor that they can't even send their kids to school with a vegemite sambo. I think it is dishonest


So you want to raise taxes. Good oh.

I never said I want to raise taxes. If we are to raise taxes to be more aligned to Scandinavia then we need to have that debate and election as this would be a huge shift from status quo. Arguably a good shift, but a shift nonetheless.


There are many things we don't fund that Scandinavian countries do.

Yes, their high taxes allow them to fund more things. They have a different model.


Despite Labour's excessive spending & funding school lunches wasn't excessive but necessary, NZ still has very low Government debt levels when looking at our peers.
That thinking is the road to Hell imo. Govt debt is low relative to some other countries therefore we should borrow and spend more.


The Coalition is cutting taxes and the biggest beneficiaries are families with up to an additional $6K available for childcare etc.
Are you OK with that? But would rather see kids go hungry?

I am critical of this govt borrowing to fund tax cuts etc. I think I have been clear on that in earlier posts.

Suggesting that I would "rather see kids go hungry" is Dandelo territory. A real shame because I have felt that over the last couple of weeks or so you have made some effort to rise above that.

I have also said many times that I do feel for these kids because it is ultimately not their fault. So I can be critical of the parents, and also accept that we probably do need to fund some lunches. This seems to be the conclusion Seymour has come to also. Now it is more a question about how to make it as cost effective as possible and also targeted (harder to do).

The idea of any kids going hungry (whether it is from genuine poverty or sh1t head parents) is very upsetting.

***

A final point to end my ramble. I find that both 'sides' of the argument bring up some really good points. But it just becomes another example (like the OCA thread) where nobody really listens to the other side of the argument, but just intrenches their world view and fight with the opposing viewpoints.

It is strange that we do this.

[davflaws]

So it's a rational response, spending $478 million of taxpayers money on school lunches for less than half of the schools in NZ and not the deprived kids in the other schools that are not funded. It's ok to trade off the $478m against other rational responses targeted expenditure, like cancer drugs for example not being funded.

It should not be a State responsibility imo to spend taxpayers money on kids lunches in schools, especially at the expense of the trade-offs that are not funded.

Yup - you can argue that it could be better targeted, you can argue that it should be provided more widely, you can argue that the money would be better spent elsewhere, but as I understand the main thrust of your posts, you side with Peter Williams in believing that the state should not be providing school lunches.

I disagree. In principle, I support any measure (and school lunches is one) which increases social mobility and reduces the size and deprivation of our underclass.

You may argue that the poor are always with us, but I am convinced on the basis of my own life experience as well as what I regard as good research evidence that everyone is better off in terms of health and happiness if weadopt policies that reduce poverty generally, andin particular adopt policies to reduce the size of the gap between the haves and the have nots. School lunches is one such policy.

[davflaws]

Why bring me into it? I have no idea, and why would I, about your technology skills. You can wage this obsessive futile argument you have with Balance without me, thank you very much.

Because in the course of a fulminating earlier post (since deleted), you made a number of disparaging remarks about old people's lack of technological sophistication and awareness and referenced mine in particular.

And yes - my reference to you was a (very gentle) poke, and yes, I am old enough to know better. I apologise.

[Daytr]

Nah - as Baa Baa will confirm, I'm too old to master that level of technology. I just looked at the url for the Whitsundays and read youir post about international schools in Vietnam.

So you draw an erroneous inference, and then go on to bleat about BS for three more paragraphs -

But you still haven't told us the location of your (imaginary?) paradise.

Yeah I call BS as well.
Why would anyone post pictures at all if it wasn't the actual beach house. :confused::confused:
As if people don't know what a beach house is and they need some fake imagery just to get the, well .... picture.
Just doesn't pass the sniff test.
Then again he doesn't know the difference between a manifesto and a campaign.
The campaign where you promote what's in your manifesto, except if you are NZF of course, you bury that Sh1t and never mention it until after the election

[mistaTea]

Yeah I call BS as well.
Why would anyone post pictures at all if it wasn't the actual beach house. :confused::confused:
As if people don't know what a beach house is and they need some fake imagery just to get the, well .... picture.
Just doesn't ass the sniff test.
Then again he doesn't know the difference between a manifesto and a campaign.
The campaign where you promote what's in your manifesto, except if you are NZF of course, you bury that Sh1t and never mention it until after the election

I think 'ass the sniff test' just became a new term :D

[Daytr]

Well I certainly don't think it would help if Cindy (or any other MP) used the colourful language I use to describe some of these parents. I was just responding to your earlier comment to demonstrate that Labour et al do not even acknowledge that a big part of the problem comes down to bad parenting, spending resources on foolish and often selfish pursuits. They just give the impression that there is this massive underclass in NZ despite and parents 'trying their best' they are so systemically poor that they can't even send their kids to school with a vegemite sambo. I think it is dishonest



I never said I want to raise taxes. If we are to raise taxes to be more aligned to Scandinavia then we need to have that debate and election as this would be a huge shift from status quo. Arguably a good shift, but a shift nonetheless.



Yes, their high taxes allow them to fund more things. They have a different model.


That thinking is the road to Hell imo. Govt debt is low relative to some other countries therefore we should borrow and spend more.



I am critical of this govt borrowing to fund tax cuts etc. I think I have been clear on that in earlier posts.

Suggesting that I would "rather see kids go hungry" is Dandelo territory. A real shame because I have felt that over the last couple of weeks or so you have made some effort to rise above that.

I have also said many times that I do feel for these kids because it is ultimately not their fault. So I can be critical of the parents, and also accept that we probably do need to fund some lunches. This seems to be the conclusion Seymour has come to also. Now it is more a question about how to make it as cost effective as possible and also targeted (harder to do).

The idea of any kids going hungry (whether it is from genuine poverty or sh1t head parents) is very upsetting.

***

A final point to end my ramble. I find that both 'sides' of the argument bring up some really good points. But it just becomes another example (like the OCA thread) where nobody really listens to the other side of the argument, but just intrenches their world view and fight with the opposing viewpoints.

It is strange that we do this.

Repeating back to you what you convey isn't not listening, perhaps you aren't conveying what you want as well as you could.
Seriously? You sure can be patronizing. I have made some effort... oh ain't that sweet.

I find it very odd you debate an issue that you then conclude that the funding of school lunches is necessary.
It's easy for Seymour to say one thing to act all tough before the election and then the reality hits and he backflips afterward.

Bill English, Luxon, Willis & even Seymour I think have spoken about social investment.
School lunches is probably one of the better social investments a government can make.
As for debt, I was trying to convey we can afford to fund school lunches, nothing more nothing less.
Anyway, we are on the same page, even if your token acceptance is that "we are stuck with it".

[mistaTea]

I find it very odd you debate an issue that you then conclude that the funding of school lunches is necessary.


I have not really considered myself to be 'debating' the issue as such, but definitely discussing it.

As part of that discussion I am trying to take the various viewpoints and reconcile them.

Because those that are against the taxpayer lunches have some very strong points.

Because those who are supportive of school lunches and see it as a good social investment, remembering that the kids are innocent in all of this have some very strong points.

Ultimately I conclude that we probably do need some sort of programme. It is funded until the next election, we can see how it goes and then the various political parties can campaign one way or the other on it and we see what happens.

Should it only be that we can discuss this issue so long as each of us pick a clearly defined 'side' and then slug it out?

[Daytr]

I have not really considered myself to be 'debating' the issue as such, but definitely discussing it.

As part of that discussion I am trying to take the various viewpoints and reconcile them.

Because those that are against the taxpayer lunches have some very strong points.

Because those who are supportive of school lunches and see it as a good social investment, remembering that the kids are innocent in all of this have some very strong points.

Ultimately I conclude that we probably do need some sort of programme. It is funded until the next election, we can see how it goes and then the various political parties can campaign one way or the other on it and we see what happens.

Should it only be that we can discuss this issue so long as each of us pick a clearly defined 'side' and then slug it out?

I didn't see one good point from those opposed.
It's the parent's fault, is not a good point, its obvious, but it doesn't resolve anything and as you rightly point out it's not the kids fault and it ignores the fundamental issue of kids going hungry.

Anyway, all the best.

[mistaTea]

I didn't see one good point from those opposed.
It's the parent's fault, is not a good point, its obvious, but it doesn't resolve anything and as you rightly point out it's not the kids fault and it ignores the fundamental issue of kids going hungry.

Anyway, all the best.

I think they raise valid points about whether or not the state should fund school lunches - the context being that 99% of parents are able to feed their kids, but end up making poor financial decisions (be it wasting money on booze, smokes, lotto... ticking up thing they don't really need etc).

Even if, like me, you ultimately conclude that the State can have a role to play - it is still possible to accept that those who do not support it have some valid points.

Concluding that there should not be any taxpayer funder lunches is also a reasonable stance.

[Daytr]

I think they raise valid points about whether or not the state should fund school lunches - the context being that 99% of parents are able to feed their kids, but end up making poor financial decisions (be it wasting money on booze, smokes, lotto... ticking up thing they don't really need etc).

Even if, like me, you ultimately conclude that the State can have a role to play - it is still possible to accept that those who do not support it have some valid points.

Concluding that there should not be any taxpayer funder lunches is also a reasonable stance.

And we are back to what you call Dandelo...
If the State doesn't fund, kids go hungry.
It's that simple, black & white, no debate is required to know there are only two outcomes.
And wagging of fingers isn't going to make a jot of difference.

[nztx]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/dame-jacinda-ardern-to-lead-new-programme-designed-to-challenge-and-change-the-status-quo-of-politics/EBSYGUXIXVHYBIP3GGTZRZMEUE/

Dame Jacinda Ardern to lead new programme designed to ‘challenge and change’ the status quo of politics


More funding cuts needed ;)

Are lessons on how to quickly dive overboard from a shaky plank included or are they going to be perfected along the way ? ;)

[mistaTea]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/dame-jacinda-ardern-to-lead-new-programme-designed-to-challenge-and-change-the-status-quo-of-politics/EBSYGUXIXVHYBIP3GGTZRZMEUE/

Dame Jacinda Ardern to lead new programme designed to ‘challenge and change’ the status quo of politics


More funding cuts needed ;)

Oh boy, yes when I read that it certainly raised my eyebrows.

Balance is going to have a field day with this.

[Panda-NZ-]

When's her TED talk that's what I want to know. :cool:

[Daytr]

I think 'ass the sniff test' just became a new term :D

Yeah just saw that. 🤣
Mind you when referring to Balance it's most appropriate even if not deliberate.

[iceman]

I didn't see one good point from those opposed.
It's the parent's fault, is not a good point, its obvious, but it doesn't resolve anything and as you rightly point out it's not the kids fault and it ignores the fundamental issue of kids going hungry.

Anyway, all the best.

While I don't think the Government should be funding school lunches per se, I do accept that this may be helpful for some and probably inevitable that a lunch in school program is here to stay in some form.
What I have a problem with is the way providers have been selected for this program, where maori organisations get a preference. I also have a problem with the type of food being delivered, much of which ends up in the bin, even in low decile schools. I should note that there is a big difference in quality and suitability between providers and schools. I should also note that I am by no means saying maori organisations are doing a worse job. I am only saying race of providers shouldn't have any bearing on the selection of providers
I am not basing that on any hearsay, rather it is fact based on evidence such as photos and comments from my wife who teaches in low decile primary schools. It is very sad to see all this food being scrapped or ending up in places they were not intended for.

Another thing seldom discussed is the fact that when this was introduced, no funding for administering it was provided. The teachers and teacher aids were just expected to spend time on this and can you imagine the time it takes to feed 30-35 kids per class room and then clean up and sort all the rubbish left over and dispose of it ? The enormous time this takes, reduces the time the teachers actually have to teach these kids in the class room, which believe you me, is much needed. For many of them the school is the only learning environment and life guidance they ever experience.

I am 100% in favour of the program being reviewed to seek more efficiency and better results.

[nztx]

Cooking Lessons for Parents at School, followed by a term of doing lunches at School for them to be certified as able to make their kids School lunches would be a good scheme ..

Any guesses on how the enrollments & attendances on this scheme would likely go ? :)

Who knows they might learn something new .. that is those who show up, or aren't too busy with other things like trying to extend the free State meal ticket by another decade or so ;)

[Daytr]

While I don't think the Government should be funding school lunches per se, I do accept that this may be helpful for some and probably inevitable that a lunch in school program is here to stay in some form.
What I have a problem with is the way providers have been selected for this program, where maori organisations get a preference. I also have a problem with the type of food being delivered, much of which ends up in the bin, even in low decile schools. I should note that there is a big difference in quality and suitability between providers and schools. I should also note that I am by no means saying maori organisations are doing a worse job. I am only saying race of providers shouldn't have any bearing on the selection of providers
I am not basing that on any hearsay, rather it is fact based on evidence such as photos and comments from my wife who teaches in low decile primary schools. It is very sad to see all this food being scrapped or ending up in places they were not intended for.

Another thing seldom discussed is the fact that when this was introduced, no funding for administering it was provided. The teachers and teacher aids were just expected to spend time on this and can you imagine the time it takes to feed 30-35 kids per class room and then clean up and sort all the rubbish left over and dispose of it ? The enormous time this takes, reduces the time the teachers actually have to teach these kids in the class room, which believe you me, is much needed. For many of them the school is the only learning environment and life guidance they ever experience.

I am 100% in favour of the program being reviewed to seek more efficiency and better results.

There's not much I would disagree with there. One of my friends is a teacher at a school that has the lunches and we have spoken about it may times. Never a mention of preferred Māori providers and this school roll is majority Māori. There is a lot of waste though.
Anyway, I am sure efficiencies can be made as you say.

[Daytr]

This sounds like a budget stuff up of the highest order.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/how-some-lower-income-households-could-end-up-with-a-128-per-cent-tax-rate/2YTQOJAKQ5E37ASVEFS5R3HX6M/

[mistaTea]

This sounds like a budget stuff up of the highest order.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/how-some-lower-income-households-could-end-up-with-a-128-per-cent-tax-rate/2YTQOJAKQ5E37ASVEFS5R3HX6M/

Yea for a long time I have thought that the clawbacks of WFF are too savage and end up being a disincentive to do more work or go for take on more responsibility with promotions that will put you over the threshold.

The abatements should be smoother so people are always still much better off by working/earning more.

[Getty]

If the State doesn't fund, kids go hungry.
It's that simple, black & white, no debate is required to know there are only two outcomes.
And wagging of fingers isn't going to make a jot of difference.

I see.
So the big stick of the state will be used to extort tax from the good parents who feed their children, to hand over to those that don't.

What a cop out.

What say the big stick is used to decrease the benefits of parents who are on one, by the value of the school lunches consumed by their children, and increase tax on working parents who don't feed their kids by the same amount.

Anyone think this would send a better signal to parents to care for their family first, rather than squander on selfish bad choices?

It's like food banks.

They give away free food and suddenly there is more demand for them.

What a surprise.
Who would of thought?

No doubt the socialists will opt for anything that increases state dependence, with the likes of school lunches.

[Getty]

Time for a new set of TV ads.

Instead of that anal ad;
You can poo it!
It's time for;
You can screw it, but you pay for the result, not the state!

[Panda-NZ-]

I see.
So the big stick of the state will be used to extort tax from the good parents who feed their children, to hand over to those that don't.

So divisive.. we're all in this together, friend.

The meals are being given to the kids not the parents.

[Getty]

So divisive.. we're all in this together, friend.


The meals are being given to the kids not the parents.

No very cohesive actually.
To get All parents to feed their own kids.

Remember mankind's 2 most basic needs are food and shelter, not booze and drugs.

Otherwise prepare for NZs introduction at the Olympics.
Here comes NZ, the nation where parents don't even feed their own children.

Shame!!!

[Bjauck]

So divisive.. we're all in this together, friend.

The meals are being given to the kids not the parents.
I really cannot understand the objection that some have over provided school lunches. It is a way to ensure a state benefit actually is received by the child.

It is a small way to make sure NZ’s children are given a reasonable start, no matter the environment they find themselves in. Just as it is important make sure our old folk are cared for too.

The state used to provide school milk. How about a ready to drink carton of ensure or another meal replacement. It would be a cheap alternative providing nutrition for children. No heating or refrigeration needed.

[ynot]

I really cannot understand the conniptions that some have over provided school lunches. It is a way to ensure a state benefit actually is received by the child.

It is a small way to make sure NZ’s children are given a reasonable start, no matter the environment they find themselves in. Just as it is important make sure our old folk are cared for too.

The state used to provide school milk. How about a a ready to drink carton of ensure or another meal replacement. It would be a cheap alternative providing nutrition for children. No heating or refrigeration needed.
I see it as a reflection of what this country has become that it is deemed a necessity. If you can't feed them don't breed them.

[Bjauck]

I see it as a reflection of what this country has become that it is deemed a necessity. If you can't feed them don't breed them.
That’s fine as far as the parents are concerned. So why not provide some direct help for the kids.

[Bjauck]

I see it as a reflection of what this country has become that it is deemed a necessity. If you can't feed them don't breed them.

NZ is a broken society with a broken economic system then. So many families need state help to support their families whether it is free medical and dental appointments, wff, accomodation supplements or help etc. Yet it is school lunches that is a step too far.

With so many families needing state support to keep their heads above water. Perhaps we should rely on third world immigrants rather than NZ’s own children?

[jonu]

NZ is a broken society with a broken economic system then. So many families need state help to support their families whether it is free medical and dental appointments, wff, accomodation supplements or help etc. Yet it is school lunches that is a step too far. ....


Hence Balance continually beating the drum about Ardern/Hipkins forever seeking to grow their dependent supporter base. See how vile it is?

The system is to an extent broken, and it will be bloody difficult to turn it around without serious pain for a generation...which is of course politically unacceptable.

[blackcap]

Hence Balance continually beating the drum about Ardern/Hipkins forever seeking to grow their dependent supporter base. See how vile it is?

The system is to an extent broken, and it will be bloody difficult to turn it around without serious pain for a generation...which is of course politically unacceptable.

Which in turn leads to more deprivation and an ever increasing state... which is very much politically acceptable.

[Bjauck]

Hence Balance continually beating the drum about Ardern/Hipkins forever seeking to grow their dependent supporter base. See how vile it is?

The system is to an extent broken, and it will be bloody difficult to turn it around without serious pain for a generation...which is of course politically unacceptable. We are on the same page! However I would add that previous National Givernments too have been complicit in developing the broken system.

[Daytr]

I see.
So the big stick of the state will be used to extort tax from the good parents who feed their children, to hand over to those that don't.

What a cop out.

What say the big stick is used to decrease the benefits of parents who are on one, by the value of the school lunches consumed by their children, and increase tax on working parents who don't feed their kids by the same amount.

Anyone think this would send a better signal to parents to care for their family first, rather than squander on selfish bad choices?

It's like food banks.

They give away free food and suddenly there is more demand for them.

What a surprise.
Who would of thought?

No doubt the socialists will opt for anything that increases state dependence, with the likes of school lunches.

Getty, all bluster and no solutions.
Please by all means offer a solution that will prevent kids going hungry.
I'm all ears.

The State funds many things, including children's dentistry, subsidizes prescription drugs, pays the pension, subsidizes child care.
Anyone could argue that these should all be responsibility of the individual.
Ahhh but hungry kids doesn't cut it and in this case the victims, the kids aren't responsible.

[Daytr]

Hence Balance continually beating the drum about Ardern/Hipkins forever seeking to grow their dependent supporter base. See how vile it is?

The system is to an extent broken, and it will be bloody difficult to turn it around without serious pain for a generation...which is of course politically unacceptable.

Yeah the broken system happened in three years eh. 🙄
How about the broken system over the last 30 years or so was exposed by the pandemic and put the broken system into acute arrest.

Honestly you guys that blame Ardern for everything. What did Key do in his nine years to address any of these issues?
Oh yeah he under funded them. Education, health, DOC, housing.

[blackcap]

Honestly you guys that blame Ardern for everything. What did Key do in his nine years to address any of these issues?
Oh yeah he under funded them. Education, health, DOC, housing.

And therein lies the problem. State funding is not the solution.

[Daytr]

And therein lies the problem. State funding is not the solution.

Please do provide your wisdom on what is the solution?

[blackcap]

Please do provide your wisdom on what is the solution?

Just more state funding solves no problems. Look at all the money that has been poured into Africa to no avail.

State funding is ok, if there is accountability and time limits. There need to be incentives to get off state funding.

Just throwing money at a problem does not fix it. I thought that was well evident.

[Daytr]

Just more state funding solves no problems. Look at all the money that has been poured into Africa to no avail.

State funding is ok, if there is accountability and time limits. There need to be incentives to get off state funding.

Just throwing money at a problem does not fix it. I thought that was well evident.

So no other solution offered.
Where did I suggest just throw money at it or have no accountability?
Nobody wants that.

[Bjauck]

Just more state funding solves no problems. Look at all the money that has been poured into Africa to no avail.

State funding is ok, if there is accountability and time limits. There need to be incentives to get off state funding.

Just throwing money at a problem does not fix it. I thought that was well evident. Sure some of the difficult decisions are involved with ensuring the economic and fiscal systems work for the majority of families by providing affordable accommodation (that does not rely on government subsidies) and by directing investment to providing well paid employment that enables the vast majority of families to live comfortably in warm family sized homes.

Government benefits would then again become the safety net for periods of some people’s lives.

Does NZ have the stomach for those changes?

[blackcap]

Sure some of the difficult decisions are involved with ensuring the economic and fiscal systems work for the majority of families by providing affordable accommodation (that does not rely on government subsidies) and by directing investment to providing well paid employment that enables the vast majority of families to live comfortably in warm family sized homes.

Government benefits would then again become the safety net for periods of some people’s lives.

Does NZ have the stomach for those changes?

To your first point, totally agree, there needs to be a mindshift from investing in houses, to investing in actual producing assets.

Do we have the stomach? Obviously not by what has transpired the last 20 years.

[Getty]

Getty, all bluster and no solutions.
Please by all means offer a solution that will prevent kids going hungry.
I'm all ears.

The State funds many things, including children's dentistry, subsidizes prescription drugs, pays the pension, subsidizes child care.
Anyone could argue that these should all be responsibility of the individual.
Ahhh but hungry kids doesn't cut it and in this case the victims, the kids aren't responsible.

Take off your eye patch and re read my post.

This school lunch debacle needs nipping in the bud.

Introduce unemployment benefits and what do you get?
More unemployment .

Introduce food banks, what do you get?
More demand.

Perhaps you get the picture.

As Alf Filiapina says about drive by shootings, we can't let this get to the stage where the community accepts it

Why should the good mums and dads who look after their families be penalised by those that don't care, and know the supposed do gooders will go into bat for them?

[mistaTea]

Take off your eye patch and re read my post.

This school lunch debacle needs nipping in the bud.

Introduce unemployment benefits and what do you get?
More unemployment .

Introduce food banks, what do you get?
More demand.

Perhaps you get the picture.

As Alf Filiapina says about drive by shootings, we can't let this get to the stage where the community accepts it

Why should the good mums and dads who look after their families be penalised by those that don't care, and know the supposed do gooders will go into bat for them?

Very good observations.

As I said in an earlier message... if we want to change the model so that we ramp up income tax etc like we see in Scandinavia... and then the State becomes responsible for more facets of our lives (including feeding the kids at school) then this should be put in a Manifesto ahead of an election so we can vote on it.

There is a good argument to follow the Scandinavian model.

There is a good argument not to also, in that can we really trust successive NZ governments to spend the additioal revenue wisely?

Regardess of ones views, it should be out in the open.

Not the other way... which is to do it by stealth. Gradually add more 'freebies' here and there. Always with the heart in the right place of course. It does increase State dependency, and inevitably leads to higher taxes over time. But rather than be the frog in the pot of water with the temperature gradually increasing... I would appreciate it if those parties would be upfront about how they want to take much more of our pay etc to increase overall felicity like we see in Scandinavia.

Bjauc makes some good points about how we already fund all sorts of things for kids (directly and indirectly) and that it is interesting that for many the idea of free lunches is the thing that is the step too far.

Fascinating topic, and I am enjoying considering all of the points raised. Everyone has made really valuable contributions, all coming at it from different angles.

[Daytr]

Take off your eye patch and re read my post.

This school lunch debacle needs nipping in the bud.

Introduce unemployment benefits and what do you get?
More unemployment .

Introduce food banks, what do you get?
More demand.

Perhaps you get the picture.

As Alf Filiapina says about drive by shootings, we can't let this get to the stage where the community accepts it

Why should the good mums and dads who look after their families be penalised by those that don't care, and know the supposed do gooders will go into bat for them?

As I thought, no solutions.
Kids go hungry.

[Daytr]

Stuff have just announced the closure of many local publications.
As I have mentioned on many occasions this was inevitable, the death of local reporting.

This follows the closure of many other regional publications in recent years.

Great work Winston Peters you are getting your wish.

[mistaTea]

Great work Winston Peters you are getting your wish.

How is it Winston's fault?

[Daytr]

How is it Winston's fault?

He has been the main driver within the Coalition of defunding the media.
He threatened the media at the very first cabinet meeting of the Coalition.
These are the sort of consequences that I predicted, local journalism will suffer.

[nztx]

Take off your eye patch and re read my post.

This school lunch debacle needs nipping in the bud.

Introduce unemployment benefits and what do you get?
More unemployment .

Introduce food banks, what do you get?
More demand.

Perhaps you get the picture.

As Alf Filiapina says about drive by shootings, we can't let this get to the stage where the community accepts it

Why should the good mums and dads who look after their families be penalised by those that don't care, and know the supposed do gooders will go into bat for them?


Indeed - good points

Auckland is already looking like some south American countries .. gang warfare, drugs, drive by shootings, ram raid burglaries, etc and as for the rest of the country hints of this lawlessness & a devoid in many parts Judiciary trying to aid & abet the transition to Scumlands ignoring looking after the better good and the society which keeps the overpaid ignorant in keep perched on their benches .

When did this Lawlessness start taking hold in NZ ? .. look no further than Labour's most recent 6 years ;)

Ardern's 501 imports, The free money avalanches, Pat a Jailbird on the head better out than in, Weak kneed judiciary who would rather talk about discounts, Davis's jail mind blinks .. and probably more ;)

Who is directly & indirectly paying for all this mindless BullSh**t ? :)

[Getty]

As I thought, no solutions.
Kids go hungry.

You thought or you fought, because you certainly did not think there Daze trader.

You are so immersed in welfarism you can not see user pays, even when it's spelt out in front of you.

I won't comment on where your head is stuck up, but you must have a very sore spine, and a good excuse why you can't see anything!

[Daytr]

Indeed - good points

Auckland is already looking like some south American countries .. gang warfare, drugs, drive by shootings, ram raid burglaries, etc and as for the rest of the country hints of this lawlessness & a devoid in many parts Judiciary trying to aid & abet the transition to Scumlands ignoring looking after the better good and the society which keeps the overpaid ignorant in keep perched on their benches .

When did this Lawlessness start taking hold in NZ ? .. look no further than Labour's most recent 6 years ;)

Ardern's 501 imports, The free money avalanches, Pat a Jailbird on the head better out than in, Weak kneed judiciary who would rather talk about discounts, Davis's jail mind blinks .. and probably more ;)

Who is directly & indirectly paying for all this mindless BullSh**t ? :)

And keep kids hungry and see what that does to the future generations.
Less educated.
More crime.
More drugs.
More on welfare.
It is short sighted, let alone cruel, not to invest in these kids future as it's an investment in the country's future.


You thought or you fought, because you certainly did not think there Daze trader.

You are so immersed in welfarism you can not see user pays, even when it's spelt out in front of you.

I won't comment on where your head is stuck up, but you must have a very sore spine, and a good excuse why you can't see anything!

User pays. You know that will really work.
The same parents who aren't feeding their kids are going to stump up with $5 a day for each kid or whatever it is for lunch money. 🙄

What cloud are you on?
And the kids who don't get given the $5 from their parents? They just go hungry.

Retirees are given all sorts of benefits, through Winston’s gold card. How about we scrap those and feed the kids.

[Panda-NZ-]

It is short sighted, let alone cruel, not to invest in these kids future as it's an investment in the country's future.


But daytr, the election cycle is only three years. It will be someone else's problem and the current Nat pollies will have their knighthoods by then.

Same mindset National have with climate change and super.

[nztx]

But daytr, the election cycle is only three years. It will be someone else's problem and the current Nat pollies will have their knighthoods by then.

Same mindset National have with climate change and super.



12 or 15 years didn't you mean ? .. unless our funny mate by some obscure event gets parachuted in as leader to kick over over the tables at Labour's cheerful little Saturday sausage sizzle ;)

[nztx]

And keep kids hungry and see what that does to the future generations.
Less educated.
More crime.
More drugs.
More on welfare.
It is short sighted, let alone cruel, not to invest in these kids future as it's an investment in the country's future.

Didn't Labour fix all that overnight along with all the other ills they said would be instantly fixed by Cindy Magic Stardust - the Crisis fixer in an instant .. or did every one get lied to & cheated again by Labour ? ;)

How did the Homeless, Poverty Kids & Car Dwelling population Stats look at the end of Labour's smashing, crashing, bank robbing, buckets in all directions, pot hole dodging, merry circus ? :)

[Getty]

User pays. You know that will really work.
The same parents who aren't feeding their kids are going to stump up with $5 a day for each kid or whatever it is for lunch money. 🙄

What cloud are you on?
And the kids who don't get given the $5 from their parents? They just go hungry.

Retirees are given all sorts of benefits, through Winston’s gold card. How about we scrap those and feed the kids.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but my cumulus waters down your objections.

Of course most of those who don't provide their kids lunch won't pay the $3 per lunch I last heard, or your $5.

They will suddenly discover their peanut butter sandwich making skills l previously mentioned.
On a good day they may become more adventurous.

And there will be no cash involved if they don't supply lunch, or get one from school.

Because it will be extracted from the bad parents by the same means you advocate it should be taken from the good parents!

Capiche?

Then in a short time the state lunch scheme will be unnecessary, and the demand you wish to impose, then increase, on future generations will evaporate.

Solutions should be to get the right outcome, not perpetuate and ingrain the problem.

And as for your cheap shot at the retirees who did feed their kids, you really are retrograde.

[dln]

Plenty of kid-starving ****heels currently collecting the pension.

[Daytr]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but my cumulus waters down your objections.

Of course most of those who don't provide their kids lunch won't pay the $3 per lunch I last heard, or your $5.

They will suddenly discover their peanut butter sandwich making skills l previously mentioned.
On a good day they may become more adventurous.

And there will be no cash involved if they don't supply lunch, or get one from school.

Because it will be extracted from the bad parents by the same means you advocate it should be taken from the good parents!

Capiche?

Then in a short time the state lunch scheme will be unnecessary, and the demand you wish to impose, then increase, on future generations will evaporate.

Solutions should be to get the right outcome, not perpetuate and ingrain the problem.

And as for your cheap shot at the retirees who did feed their kids, you really are retrograde.

The capiche as you express it is quite simple, as is your solution that simply won't work.

You are expecting parents who we can all agree are behaving irresponsibly to change behaviors just because they have less money. In fact the opposite will be true and more kids will suffer.

Capiche?

[Getty]

Plenty of kid-starving ****heels currently collecting the pension.

Are there now?

Please single them out, and forward their names to Daytr.

His notion that the masses should be punished because of the actions of a few, who get off scot free, needs to be seriously challenged!

[Getty]

The capiche as you express it is quite simple, as is your solution that simply won't work.

You are expecting parents who we can all agree are behaving irresponsibly to change behaviors just because they have less money. In fact the opposite will be true and more kids will suffer.

Capiche?

Some will not change behaviour, but it will be from their pocket lunch is provided, not you wanting to plunder the balance of the tax payers.

[Daytr]

Some will not change behaviour, but it will be from their pocket lunch is provided, not you wanting to plunder the balance of the tax payers.

And kids still go hungry, problem not solved now and creating generational problems for the future..
Is the gold card plundering the tax payer?
Is subsidizing childcare?
Is the pension?
Choose your weapon.

[mistaTea]

It’s still not too late for us all to have a cuddle you know.

[Getty]

And kids still go hungry, problem not solved now and creating generational problems for the future..
Is the gold card plundering the tax payer?
Is subsidizing childcare?
Is the pension?
Choose your weapon.

They say the pen is mightier than the sword, so l will pen my reply to you.

Somehow you have lost the plot.

We agree children need their school lunch, and l have pointed out to you that it will either be supplied from home by reformed behaviour, or else charged back to the parent by the means explained if supplied by school.

Yet you say the kids will still go hungry....

You then go on to question childcare and gold cards.

You really have thrown up your lunch.

[Panda-NZ-]

A wonderful glimpse in time before the devastation of rogernomics and ruthanasia to balance some numbers on a page.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BRnoIFC5I8

Look how well off we were (proper infrastructure, services etc).

[iceman]

I really cannot understand the objection that some have over provided school lunches. It is a way to ensure a state benefit actually is received by the child.

It is a small way to make sure NZ’s children are given a reasonable start, no matter the environment they find themselves in. Just as it is important make sure our old folk are cared for too.

The state used to provide school milk. How about a ready to drink carton of ensure or another meal replacement. It would be a cheap alternative providing nutrition for children. No heating or refrigeration needed.


Bjauck it is a wonderful idea to get the kids to drink milk. But what do you think will happen to the cartons after the drink from them ? Would you like to be the teacher that has up to 35 five year old kids to look after and now has to clean, fold in a certain way and dispose of these cartons ? Yes they can not simply throw them in a rubbish bin.
This may sound insignificant but tell that to the teachers that have to do this, alongside their normal work of looking after all these kids and trying to teach them. Many of them completely out of control and the teacher not even allowed to grab them by the shoulder when they are upsetting the class room and often attacking or threatening other kids. The class room isn't the utopia that many on here seem to think it is in NZ today and the teachers continue to be lumped with all sorts of extra crap that has nothing to do with educating the kids. We simply can not continue to add all this extra stuff to schools without fully funding people to administer it.
I know teachers that have had a gutsfull of this and are leaving the profession.

[Bjauck]

Bjauck it is a wonderful idea to get the kids to drink milk. But what do you think will happen to the cartons after the drink from them ? Would you like to be the teacher that has up to 35 five year old kids to look after and now has to clean, fold in a certain way and dispose of these cartons ? Yes they can not simply throw them in a rubbish bin.
This may sound insignificant but tell that to the teachers that have to do this, alongside their normal work of looking after all these kids and trying to teach them. Many of them completely out of control and the teacher not even allowed to grab them by the shoulder when they are upsetting the class room and often attacking or threatening other kids. The class room isn't the utopia that many on here seem to think it is in NZ today and the teachers continue to be lumped with all sorts of extra crap that has nothing to do with educating the kids. We simply can not continue to add all this extra stuff to schools without fully funding people to administer it.
I know teachers that have had a gutsfull of this and are leaving the profession. Good point about the recycling aspect. In the old days, school milk came in glass bottles which were returned to the supplier. The empty cartons could be thrown into a bin for sorting out later if necessary. Like anything, there would be a trial period to see if the positives outweigh the negatives. Hungry kids are more difficult to control.

[Bjauck]

A wonderful glimpse in time before the devastation of rogernomics and ruthanasia to balance some numbers on a page.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BRnoIFC5I8

Look how well off we were (proper infrastructure, services etc).
Yikes. A good paternalistic publicity film from a generation prior to Rogernomics for visitors or potential (white and/or British?) immigrants to join NZers who as the BBC sounding presenter chimes are taller easy-going of mostly British stock. Conformity being a prerequisite? However infrastructure for the smaller population may have been fit for the purposes of 1959. It is not a documentary.

[iceman]

Good point about the recycling aspect. In the old days, school milk came in glass bottles which were returned to the supplier. The empty cartons could be thrown into a bin for sorting out later if necessary. Like anything, there would be a trial period to see if the positives outweigh the negatives. Hungry kids are more difficult to control.

I do assume you are aware of the Fonterra Free Milk in Schools program that ended in 2000 after a few years, blamed on COVID like most other things. It was a great initiative by Fonterra but the delivery and administration of it was the killer. How many trials do we need ?

"Throwing into the bin" like you suggest is a typical "kick the can down the road" response to all these do-gooder programs that make everyone feel better but either deliver very little benefit or become too difficult/expensive to implement, or both. Just like most of Labour's "kindness" in the last 6 years.

There have been numerous reasons put on here over the last few pages on the difficulty of this and questionable benefit of this and other similar programs, but those promoting it just say there are no valid arguments against it. It looks like quite an ideological difference between those that want such feel good programs as long as the Government pays for it and those that want value for every dollar spent by Government.

[Bjauck]

I do assume you are aware of the Fonterra Free Milk in Schools program that ended in 2000 after a few years, blamed on COVID like most other things. It was a great initiative by Fonterra but the delivery and administration of it was the killer. How many trials do we need ?

"Throwing into the bin" like you suggest is a typical "kick the can down the road" response to all these do-gooder programs that make everyone feel better but either deliver very little benefit or become too difficult/expensive to implement, or both. Just like most of Labour's "kindness" in the last 6 years.

There have been numerous reasons put on here over the last few pages on the difficulty of this and questionable benefit of this and other similar programs, but those promoting it just say there are no valid arguments against it. It looks like quite an ideological difference between those that want such feel good programs as long as the Government pays for it and those that want value for every dollar spent by Government. I wasn’t suggesting a milk program but a liquid meal replacement program, for those who have antipathy towards a lunch scheme. As for value for taxpayer money spent or foregone. Ultimately that is coloured by a person’s social or political priority.

However, true I would prefer to be a do gooder than a do nothing. My preference is still for a comprehensive lunch programme along the lines of the British scheme. The British government had hardly been a hand-wringing socialist one for the past almost 15 years.

https://www.nrpfnetwork.org.uk/information-and-resources/rights-and-entitlements/services-for-children-and-families/free-school-meals#:~:text=The%20UK%20government%20funds%20free ,in%20certain%20local%20authority%20areas.

[Daytr]

They say the pen is mightier than the sword, so l will pen my reply to you.

Somehow you have lost the plot.

We agree children need their school lunch, and l have pointed out to you that it will either be supplied from home by reformed behaviour, or else charged back to the parent by the means explained if supplied by school.

Yet you say the kids will still go hungry....

You then go on to question childcare and gold cards.

You really have thrown up your lunch.

I can read the anger in your posts and it's clearly clouding your thinking.

What you have proposed simply won't work.
My reference to other welfare be it childcare or goldcards etc is why should the Government subsidize these sectors and not be willing to fund kids that are going hungry. Even David Seymour has backed down on his initial stance.

You questioned in another post about how many kids are going hungry.
It just displays that you have no idea about the extent of the issue and as such perhaps shouldn't be commenting on something you clearly know nothing about.

But by all means keep repeating your simplistic and unrealistic solution.
Yeah let's charge those guys who already can't afford lunch for their kids. That will teach em. That will get them to give up smoking, drinking or worse. In the worst cases, that won't be taken out on the kids. 🙄
Such a cure-all, why didn't anyone else think of that. 🙄

[Getty]

I can read the anger in your posts and it's clearly clouding your thinking.

What you have proposed simply won't work.
My reference to other welfare be it childcare or goldcards etc is why
should the Government subsidize these sectors and not be willing to fund kids that are going hungry. Even David Seymour has backed down on his initial stance.

You questioned in another post about how many kids are going hungry.
It just displays that you have no idea about the extent of the issue and as such perhaps shouldn't be commenting on something you clearly know nothing about.

But by all means keep repeating your simplistic and unrealistic solution.
Yeah let's charge those guys who already can't afford lunch for their kids. That will teach em. That will get them to give up smoking, drinking or worse. In the worst cases, that won't be taken out on the kids. 🙄
Such a cure-all, why didn't anyone else think of that. 🙄

Yout psychology analysis is hopeless.

Re post where I questioned numbers.

[Daytr]

Plenty of kid-starving ****heels currently collecting the pension.


Are there now?

Please single them out, and forward their names to Daytr.

His notion that the masses should be punished because of the actions of a few, who get off scot free, needs to be seriously challenged!


Yout psychology analysis is hopeless.

Re post where I questioned numbers.

You make it too easy.

[Getty]

You make it too easy.


With a misconstrue like that, you would get a job as a spin doctor for the Labour Party any time you want it.

[nztx]

With a misconstrue like that, you would get a job as a spin doctor for the Labour Party any time you want it.


They mightn't have any dough left though .. would a bit of story telling to fix a few other fishy tales fit instead ? ;)

[Panda-NZ-]

One does have a lifetime to save when it comes to a pension. It's not unpredictable or comes out of the blue.

It's true though that NZ's economy doesn't allow you to have a good income. Add WFF and accomodation supplement, & all the rest (incl super) it's all an expensive band aid for a low wage economy.

[Balance]

Have a read of what this government is still funding, despite all the bold talk about taking a knife to wasteful spending.

Time for ACT & NZF to really apply the hot iron to the backsides of Luxon and Willis to stop all the nonsensical spending.

https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/jordan-williams-we-can-t-afford-cancer-drugs-but-can-afford-this

Examples :

Hapai te hauora: Breathing your ancestors into life

"Hāpai te hauora’ as ‘breathing your ancestors into life’, captures the breadth & connections of a generation – rangatahi Māori–a generation moving forward together. This proposal builds on an HRC funded project (18/651) exploring the ways rangatahi Māori make sense of & live hāpai te hauora through navigating journeys of hauora & wellbeing."

Approved funding: $649,992

Timely access to rongoa Māori in cancer care services for Māori

"Prior to Europeans arriving in Aotearoa, traditional Māori way of healing was the only hauora practice Māori knew. Today, traditonal Māori healing is known as Rongoā Māori. Rongoā Māori is diverse and can include karakia [prayer], wai [water], waiata [music], himene [hymns], access to the ngahere [forest] and whenua [land].

For Māori health consumers, patients and whānau accessing cancer care service; seldom they are made aware of or referred early to rongoā Māori practitioners at the beginning of their cancer care journey.

Using tikanga Māori methodology and codesign with Māori health and iwi providers, our method will include interviews, and hui with rongoā Māori practitioners, Māori and Iwi providers, Māori health consumers, patients, their whānau, and health professionals in primary and secondary care in the MidCentral region to explore ways for timely access to rongoā Māori in cancer care services for Māori."

Approved funding: $398,771

Rather than fund the actual cancer medicines, the Government is funding "timely access" to cancer treatments witch-doctor cancer treatments. Ka pai!

If that doesn't work, there is always music therapy:

He Whiringa Māramatanga: Kaupapa Māori Music and healing

"‘He Whiringa Māramatanga’ examines Kaupapa Māori music theories and practices as a pathway to accelerating Māori well-being. Music theory is primarily located within Western music notation, harmony, and tonality. However, Māori Music, particularly through oral forms such as waiata, karakia, ruruku, haka, pūrākau and whakapapa, illustrate that Māori have unique key elements of musical theories to create oral legacies and that traditional Western definitions of ‘music’ may be confining for true Māori creative expression."

Approved funding: $377,550

[Panda-NZ-]

Yikes. A good paternalistic publicity film from a generation prior to Rogernomics for visitors or potential (white and/or British?) immigrants to join NZers who as the BBC sounding presenter chimes are taller easy-going of mostly British stock. Conformity being a prerequisite? However infrastructure for the smaller population may have been fit for the purposes of 1959. It is not a documentary.

True it may have been a rose tinted view.

But it would have been a time when Aussies would have wanted to move here. imagine that.

Today even the Aussie wealthy stay away even though they would be considerably better off in NZ in monetary terms.

[Bjauck]

True it may have been a rose tinted view.

But it would have been a time when Aussies would have wanted to move here. imagine that.

Today even the Aussie wealthy stay away even though they would be considerably better off in NZ in monetary terms. The UK took about 65% of NZ’s exports in 1955. It was comparatively great when there was imperial preference and when NZ was the UK’s farm. That generation of Kiwis often looked on Australians as uncouth ex-convicts. How the tables turned….

[Panda-NZ-]

We have imperial preference now thanks to Brexit, slightly less valuable than in the past though. ;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand%E2%80%93United_Kingdom_Free_Trade_Agre ement

The convicts are showing us both how it's done. It's a shame because we had so many men/women of quality in our ranks; ie only the best lords, knights and dames.

[Panda-NZ-]

Luxon's says previous business delegations were "C-list".

https://stuff.co.nz/politics/350316829/pm-christopher-luxon-concedes-c-list-comments-could-have-been-worded-better

In contrast to his high calibre team which has a dame on board (!), Air NZ ceo and the fonterra senior leadership team.

[winner69]

Luxon's says previous business delegations were "C-list".

https://stuff.co.nz/politics/350316829/pm-christopher-luxon-concedes-c-list-comments-could-have-been-worded-better

In contrast to his high calibre team which has a dame on board (!), Air NZ ceo and the fonterra senior leadership team.

Comment doing thevrounds ……. Trade team of A-listers - led by a C-lister Prime Minister

Seems pretty accurate description to me

[Panda-NZ-]

Comment doing thevrounds ……. Trade team of A-listers - led by a C-lister Prime Minister

Seems pretty accurate description to me

Lets hope they do the talking.. can't afford to have the success of the mission depend on luxon's warm character and charm.

I look forward to the list of tangible results from this business minded PM.

[mistaTea]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/king-charles-to-skip-new-zealand-during-downunder-trip/EEBS3SA2VJDB3BZ35LBQFATGWY/

Even Charles doesn’t want to set foot in NZ right now!

[Bjauck]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/king-charles-to-skip-new-zealand-during-downunder-trip/EEBS3SA2VJDB3BZ35LBQFATGWY/

Even Charles doesn’t want to set foot in NZ right now!
He is being treated for cancer. With his medical situation and at his age, it shows his sense of duty that he is making any trip.

QE2 was 76yo when she last visited NZ (in good health). KC3 is 75yo.

[mistaTea]

He is being treated for cancer. With his medical situation and at his age, it shows his sense of duty that he is making any trip.

QE2 was 76yo when she last visited NZ (in good health). KC3 is 75yo.

Yes I know mate.

I was just teasing. Charles still loves us, have no fear.