LOL So now it is National's fault that people eat too much and exercise not enough? What would you prefer? 100% Tax Rate - a bit of pocket money for everybody and Nanny state is cooking our meals and monitoring our fitness program?
Printable View
FP
If I went to Mr Astles restaurant my obligation is to behave appropriately, respect other diners, and pay my bill in full at the conclusion of the dinner. His obligation is to deliver high quality cuisine matched with good service. I wouldn't expect to be interrogated at the door as to who I vote for. Call me old fashioned but I thought denying someone a good or service based on political beliefs was illegal. As far as Helen Clark goes she might present a somewhat interesting situation should she take her father to Antoines next time she is in Auckland from New York, as he is a former Chairman of the Waikato National Party! "Yes Mr Clark I like your politics but your daughter will have to eat at MacDonalds or wait in the car." The man is an embarrassment to the National Party. However what goes around comes around.
FP
Apparently its the most exclusive (meaning expensive) restaurant in Auckland. As to Mr Astles and the National Party he is an active and very successful fundraiser for the party, good on him, I have no issue with that, but banning people from his restaurant based on their politics is abhorrent and not the way we do things in NZ
But he wanted a couch put in the restaurant. Is this a normal request from a customer?
But turn it into politics if you need to.
Dotcom should not be given the time of day. He is a criminal and should be deported.
Latest news appear to be a big jump to the right in France? Didn't really read it properly through my fuzzy head but maybe they will have the lead in a counter revolution against the radical muslim infusion of european society. If they get this ball rolling I can see Putin joining hands with them and the american right following. Now wont this be an interesting world? Dot Com? - I thought he only ate McDonalds?
UKIP doing OK as well in the UK ....even winning votes in Scotland
Report punters calling for Clegg to resign .....poor Lib Dems
Not good for the left it seems but we need the turmoil now for sanity in a few years time.
When he came here in 2010, flush with $$$$$ and was supporting John Banks and was welcomed by National Ministers one suspects that if he made a reservation then nothing would have been a problem " you would like a couch Mr Dotcom? absolutely how many and what colour" ? Fast forward 2014 " Get lost Mr Dotcom, your not welcome at this restaurant" ( subtext in 2010 you had lots of $$$ and you supported National, now you don't, so we don't want to know you)
While some may be like that, I dont think it would be like that at Antoines. It is a place where they set the rules - you have to knock to get in as they keep the door locked. They still use manual credit card machine because ???
They would not bring in a couch, even if John Key asked in my opinion.
Keep an eye on the John Banks trial in the High Court, dot.com might be in for a bit of a shock.:ohmy:
How many volts?
HS
from my understanding the hacking and other charges arose in Germany in 1994 as a 2o year old. However, you are right, I guess it does seem concerning that the National Government granted residency in November 2010 despite these historic conviction,s an issue the government seems curiously reluctant to explore .The current charges arose from an indictment filed in Virginia by the US government in January 2012. The charges remain that -charges.
I think those guys are a bit of a sideshow. Have a look at the first page or two of this discourse in parliament about inequality. For those hanging on John Key's every word, and believing all he says, his replies are suitable. But for those of us who know the real facts, and it should be more of us, he's so full of it.
http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/de...s-to-ministers
Labour left us in a mess - false. Multiple good stats to show this wasn't the case at all. The opposite was true.
We're doing better than Australia - highly debatable over the medium term, even the short term.
Power prices went up more while Labour was in (yes, but only because wholesale gas prices had to double as Maui ran out).
More being employed recently, yes, but only because their policies helped put them on the dole in the first place. Unemployment rate still above where Labour had it.
Wouldn't accept that the very rich have had a 50% wealth increase, while the poor in the selected suburb went back by 20% in real terms.
Rob Stock wrote a great article in the SST yesterday, but it's not available on the web yet, about inequality being expected to rise when the July 2014 update comes out.
This should be a very important topic for the upcoming elections. Hard for National to wriggle out of this argument, they don't have the facts on their side.
True - and he fully disclosed these convictions when he asked for NZ residence. I guess at that stage he and his money was quite welcome in NZ. Popular politicians circled around him like moths the light (or should I say like vultures)?
What sort of character would now want to throw him out of the country despite him having done nothing wrong since his immigration in NZ? First taking the money and if things turn sour throw him out? Are you another of his former friends who now wants to get rid of him?
Sgt Pepper,
You have made a claim in several posts now that" National Ministers" or the "National Government" supported this criminal´s residency application. You also claim he contributed funds to National. Do you have any info to back up these claims ?
Ministers do not issue residency visas, Immigration NZ does and from what I´ve read, they did so on their own without political influence in Dotcom´s case ! I don´t think they should have as any cursory glance into this guy surely would have failed a character test.
He obviously thinks buying political influence is the right thing to do here in NZ. Started by giving funds to John Banks and then got pi..ed off when Banks wouldn´t return the favour and help him out of jail. Now the revenge is playing out in the courts.
It is on record that he has since had Winston Peters & Russel Norman visit his palace, one assumes to discuss politics.
Then he moves onto Hone/Mana, offering money to buy his so called party a ride on Hone´s coat tails, assuming he will win his seat again.
I think you are barking up the wrong tree with regard to the criminal that is Dotcom.
Colin James on the strong links being forged between Labour and the Greens, and policy.
http://www.colinjames.co.nz/a-green-...consistencies/
One thing that Labour and the Greens agree on, is that farming ruminants might not always be the best use of our land and resources.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farm...ion-dollar-hit
Note how loudly National have been saying they insulated houses flat out in their last terms. The Greens say:
http://www.interest.co.nz/property/7...nsulate-200000
These 2 separate and completely different parties, are planning to register a combined list for both parties, so Hone & his team and whoever will stand for the DotCon party, will stand together despite having no common policies.
So if we assume Hone will win Te Tai Tokerau, then all votes that the Internet party and Mana receive will count towards MPs.
If the Internet Party stood separately, they realise that they would not get any MPs as they have no realistic opportunity to win a constituency seat and are highly unlikely to reach the 5% threshold for list MPs.
But if for arguments sake the Internet Party gets 3% (something I doubt very much) and Hone wins his seat, the list will get about 3-4 MPs.
So DotCon has bought Hone by promising funding for the election campaign in return for putting some of "his" people on the list.
That has the potential for the Internet Party to coat tail on Hone into Parliament. Welcome to MMP and a couple of men (Hone & Dotcom) totally void of any scruples !
Still not sure how 2 parties can have a common list. The mind boggles how far that could be taken with all sorts of half-baked nutter parties.
P.S. Still not sure - using your example - how the list could end up with 3 or 4 MPs, which presumably would have to be in the Mana party.
Have a look at this EZ: https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...radestats.html
Digest the stats and you give me your Positives and Negatives of our exports that drove trade surplus up to $1.2b.
This is the real picture of our economy right now, not your long list of negatives National is achieving in your mind and how Labour and the Greens would do so much better. These are cold hard facts that you hate & I bet my bottom dollar your try your best to downgrade these stats the same way you tried & failed to discredit these stats. http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/k...rrent_account/ The current account balance is there to remind us all just how much overspending by the last wretched Labour Govt. there was. Add the Greens. Honi, Winnie-the-Pooh & the fat man into the mix and you have got a comedy show wrecking ball on the way to bankrupting the country for good.
Stats are are good indicator, in fact the real indicator with whats happening concerning our economy and how well our Govt. is doing is it not? You might not like this stat too EZ. http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/k...ousehold_debt/ Just like the current account balance, the household debt swing shaply downwards after our current National Govt. came into power. Look at this chart http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/k...ortgage_rates/ and that's partly the reason why. You can't drive interest rates down that low in good time by over spending.
National has done a impressively splendid job in the last two terms & I feel they have set themselves beautifully to do better than that in their third term. Of course if the Comedy show from the Marxist Circus manage to con the country and get in, they will do just fine riding National success wave until that runs out of steam, then the worm will turn. It happened(worm chart) very quickly for National towards the positive back in 2008, but I'm afraid the Left plays the long slow drain game. Once they commit to spending on the lazy and useless, only National can save us ... again, like they always do.
EZ, I'd be really interested in your reply.
Think of it as a marrage - with the new party being called "Internet-NoMana Party" - the Internet Party and the Mana Party are now sub-parties, much like Greens were originally a subparty of the 'Alliance'. They submit 1 list and if the new combined party gets under 5%, they are reliant on Hone winning his seat, which will bring in numbers 2 and 3 (and maybe 4?) from the list, who will be from the Internet sub-party. What will be interesting is whether Hone will get Minto (Bradford has called this the sham it is so has left the NoMana party?) onto the list at 4 or if that is another Internet party person.
So yes, while the right may have cups of tea, the Left go to these ridiculous lengths.
Iceman
your comments are fair. I looked back at my post, my comments of him arriving with "lots of $$ and supporting National" meant that he was a right of centre supporter politically not donating cash to National, as there there is no evidence for that . In so far as his application for residency goes however he was granted residency under the investor plus category by the Ministry. The application was, in October 2010, approved by the then Minister of Immigration Dr Coleman. Now at this point you could speculate that either Dr Coleman was not fully briefed on his past convictions by the Ministry or assuming he was, made, it could be asserted ,an error in judgement in granting him resident status. Time will tell how this all plays out.
His convictions were allowed to be erased form the German system after a period of time. And for that reason he did not have convictions at the time. Many agencies in this country frame the question differently. "Have you ever appeared as a defendant in a Court of law" or similar is used by the armed services.
Getting young people voting is good. That alliance is not. Interesting that not one of the young guys at my work would vote for them. Word of mouth polls at work pretty much follow what the news polls say. Young people often vote on personalities. That's not good for labour.
IF they are going to vote for this bunch of rabble, leave them alone - let sleeping dogs lie - as they say. I would say that the great certainty of this mess is that a significant percentage of Int. party supporters will baulk at supporting Hone and back off and a similar number of Mana party supporters, including friends of Sue Bradford will have a similar reaction.
Spot on Craic.
Not very often would I agree with Mrs Bradford..but this time yes...its all about the money for Hone.
I think you are right Fungus.
Have not some folk said that in ten years many will be shaking there heads in disbelief that anyone took this big kraut seriously .
Disclosure a very dear friend of mine was born in Germany.
You forgot to add in "some of my best friends are Maoris" and "we once had a negro to dinner as well". Overweight he is, big he is, German national he is. A "kraut" as in a derogatory reference to Germans is an unnecessary and mean spirited word beloved of those of little imagination and limited intellect....not that I mean that in a derogatory sense you understand.
Cuzzie, how is a 1.2bill trade surplus going to save National in this election, when they don't get the cash, and they are not getting in enough taxes and other income to pay for their outgoing expenses, including interest? Didn't you read the bit about how the trade surplus is probably going to disappear next season on the back of a lower dairy payout?
Belgarian, as you say, at least any votes going to Hone's megaparty won't go to National, and they won't be helping form a coalition on that side of the house.
You're reading the wrong numbers, El Zorro. It's the voters who count, not the frustrated cashiers and self appointed economists. If you want to put Hone, Dot Com ,Cunliffe in a box and try and sell them to the voters as a working package to run the country, then you will lose your deposit.
I'd hope just Labour and the Greens will be enough. And I'm sure that advisors like Crosby Textor will be the brains behind the scary false message that you are helping push out into cyberspace Craic..
http://www.stuff.co.nz/510500/Nats-s...icks-in-Aussie
That article is from 2008!
So that approach to win centrist voters to the left doesn't work then.
Have labour come up with anything new in the last six years that might turn people to them? Nope nothing new. Just hoping they have enough radical left wing party support to get in and over-rule the center.
Well spotted Slimwin, but you can see the theme here, Crosby Textor are very expensive, and their advice will have been written down. Find a weak spot in the opposition, some perception that is less than perfect, then perhaps make some stuff up that is hard to disprove (like 'Labour left NZ with a big mess in 2008') and then hammer the message relentlessly, so that eventually many voters think that it's accurate, and repeat it everywhere they go.
Actually I thought the Kiwibuild policy was a new one, and it's a great one, when you consider all the jobs and training it will provide, along with cheaper houses. At no cost to taxpayers.
Problem is for Labours big mess is backed up by stats that don't lie. Here's the stat you love to hate again http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/statistics/k...rrent_account/ Just look at 05 to 08 on that chart in the negitive. It tells us what that Govt. has saved less what it invested on & have spent. Labour current account between 05 & 08 was awful to say the least. However when you see National take over the reign, there is a marked improvement.
What we hear from you EZ constantly is the very thing you complain about, you make up stuff.
Labour left NZ in a terrible state and Labour fanboys try to turn that into a National problem. They are the fixes of our economy EZ, not the breakers like Labour are. It was a National Party problem back in 08 alright & they bloodywell fixed it - just like they always do.
Clearly you think a 1.2bill deficit would also have no change on our economy if you think a 1.2bill surplus is not going to help. Left wing thinking right there.
Yes, I did read that more than likely there will be an adjustment towards a lower dairy payout, but what you are not adding is that this is from record highs. Think about that for a second or two.
EZ, thanks for proving me right, you could not nor would not acknowledge the positive in a trade surplus increase that's up to $1.2b as said by me in post #3882, but you most certainly could find a negative in there somewhere. You proved me right EZ, oh yeah I do feel your pain right now.
Question, why is Labour and its followers so negatively geared, why?
Cuzzie, if you are going to post stuff about the current account and trade surpluses ad infinitum, please look up wikipedia or something, to find out what they mean, or represent. The current account deficit is all of us spending more than we earn, not the govt's domain at all. It'll be trending negative under National's watch too. We've already covered this numerous times. The 1.2bill trade surplus is temporary, and is the sum of all export sales minus imported goods costs. Again, not directly to do with govt. Both are indicators.
The Budget Surplus/Deficit is another thing entirely. That is competely up to the govt in power. Labour had budget surpluses every year they were in, over 9 years. National has posted deficits (bl..dy big ones!) every year since they got in. By juggling some figures, they are trying to post a small surplus next year, all the while still borrowing to pay off new interest costs. Sorry Cuzzie, your beloved National Party is a fraud.
I'd hope the Internet-Mana party stay in the wilderness, but achieve something else the country needs: pulling votes away from National, to make sure they only get two terms of making a mess of the economy. Labour and the Greens have too much to offer NZ, I don't want to wait another three years to see the work being started.
Hi EZ, aren't you doing the same thing you blame National of? Blaming National for running budget deficits in the post GFC and Christchurch earth quake era and comparing that to Labour's surpluses they achieved during one of the largest boom phases, leading directly into the GFC (pre-GFC)?
It sort of feels like praising a mediocre farmer for harvesting some crop in autumn, while beating up a top framer for not doing the same thing during winter ....
Not sure, whom you want to convince with repeating the same (nonsensical) comparison again and again - did you too get advise from this Australian consulting firm?
If Labour / Green wants to do something about their poor performance in the polls, than they better look at themselves. Difficult to gain a majority if the strategy is to exclude the center. At this stage there are 3 parties who all seem to compete for the extreme left: Mana, Green and Labour, leaving the center field wide open for National. IMHO did Labour kill its chances to win the election when they gave David Shearer the boot and choose instead a leader nobody except the unions seems to want (not even Labour voters).
Just finished reading the paper. The local Hospital Board is worried by the number of mental health patients it must accommodate because there is no where else for them to go. The NZIER warns of social harm if people could never afford to buy a house and Local Government NZ wants a discussion on housing affordability.
Never mind they must all be negatively geared Labour followers ( according to Cuzzie who probably works for Crosby- Textor)
The Current Account deficit is down, probably because we have all these rich Asians buying their way into the Country and donating to the National Party.
ACC is doing so well we can expect large drops in levies and of course it helped Bill wih his budget surplus. Forget the dramas when National took office and ACC was about to collapse. Forget the large numbers refused assistance because their problems were age related wear and tear etc.
All is well,the centre right National Party, heavily balanced to the right is doing OK
westerly
Interesting the mental health bit. My bro used to work high up in management for the mental health services in NZ. About five years ago he was saying they are just seeing a dramatic rise in patients in their 50's who were chronic weed smokers in their teens and twenties. This was before the advent of hydroponic super weeds and chemical versions. Aparrenlyt it hits one in three and happens later as the brain deteriates. It'll be interesting to see how our country is in 30yrs if the greens get it legalized.
Maybe some national voters may have voted for the big guy to get free internet. I just can't see them voting for the alliance. There'll be a few of course. The same way there'll be a few that vote for the conservatives. And a few that still think the world is 6000 years old...
Can't be THAT old or Labour would have worked out an effective strategy for governing the country by now.
EZ, get current account deficit out of your mind, it is the Current Account Balance and forget about wikipedia as anybody can edit it and stick to what the Reserve Bank states which is: The Balance of Payments statements set out a country’s transactions with the rest of the world. The current account balance is the sum of the balances of trade in goods and services, current transfers, and investment income. More simply, the current account measures what a country saves minus what it spends or invests. The graph shows that since 1990, New Zealand has been a net borrower. Thus, the current account deficit has reflected the amounts of other countries’ savings that New Zealand has had to borrow, in order to finance spending. The last time that New Zealand was a net saver — that is, had a current account surplus — was 1973.
So the country as a whole EZ was doing very bad while Labour was in power between the years of 2005 and 2008. Meanwhile the country as a whole was doing far better, in fact many times better under National from 2008 to now - what part of that can't you compute EZ because it is clear to me. Like I said, I feel your pain and pain is what we see every time you post.
As for your next rant, please supply as with hard cold facts that Labour has "had a budget surplus every year they were in, over 9 years & National has posted deficits every year since they got in". Links that are not Labour propaganda would be good.
And by the way it is completely not competely, you're welcome.
What does a Funnyliffe, a Pooh, a Hone now with Money, an Angry Green Man, a Fat Crim and a Harré got in common? Not a lot and will be even less fun finding out.
I just posted this a few days ago, you must have missed it Cuzzie. Regarding Wikipedia, it is self-correcting, much like the way we on the left have to point out the errors or misleading statements you make.
Wikipedia on its own accuracy:
I'd go along with that.Quote:
Dan Gillmor, a Silicon Valley commentator and author commented in October 2004 that, "I don't think anyone is saying Wikipedia is an absolute replacement for a traditional encyclopedia. But in the topics I know something about, I've found Wikipedia to be as accurate as any other source I've found."[49]
Sorry about the typo, you (curiously) didn't have any in your post.
I am relieved after seeing the detail that has come out about the marriage without any mana between the Mana Party and the Internet Party (Alliance) . It is now obvious that Dotcom’s promised $1M will ensure a 3rd term for a National lead Government.
While Belgarion may be right that some National party voters may consider voting the IP, that wish of his has evaporated with the announcements detailing the deal. There is nothing in it for the IP (whoever they are) but Hone will benefit if things turn out as he hopes. The wildest optimistic result would be that they got 3% and 4 MPs, which would be Hone, Annette Sykes, John Minto and Laila Harré. I don’t know any National voters/supporters that would willingly vote for that bunch.
It is as left wing as left wing can be. An apt name would be the Dotcommunist Party as Barry Soper points out.
But this causes major problems for the Labour/Greens. Most of the votes for the Alliance is likely to come from the Greens and is highly unlikely to increase the Left blocks vote more than at the margins. Instead it will further fragment it and make Cunliffe’s job even more impossible. It is also highly likely to alleviate and scare more voters. This hotchpotch of parties offering themselves up to change the Government has gone even further over to the Left than an alternative Labour lead Government was a couple of days ago, further away from most voters.
I predict more Labour leaning voters will now head towards National, not the other way around.
Equally important is the fact that this will scare the living daylights out of Winston and he will most certainly not be supporting a Labour lead Government where the Greens and the Alliance’s bunch will have equal or more influence than himself. That leaves him with only National to finish of his political career in a constructive Government, singing his swan song on the NZ political stage.
Now just wait for National to drop a “hint” to their Maori supporters in Te Tai Tokerau to sign up to the Maori roll and vote for Labour’s Kelvin Davies. R.I.P. Mana and Internet parties.
Dotcom may not realise it but it appears that his misguided foray into NZ politics and his spending of $1M has given John Key an easier ride into 3rd term as PM. Dotcom will have plenty of time to reflect of the folly of his ways, from whatever mansion he will be residing in come early 2015 !
Another missed opportunity by Labour. Laila Harre would have been a great catch for them and as a replacement for David Cunliffe, could have lifted the part by a point or two. The only stray left around the place the man with the hole in his head, Minto and he wouldn't be much good to them at this late stage.
Sounds like you're trying some spin of your own, Iceman. Here's a right-wing article with notably no balanced comment from the other side. It's pure electioneering.
http://www.interest.co.nz/personal-f...ant-income-red
All wage/salary earners pay income tax, but that's a fairly average sized part of total govt revenue, GST being a component that affects everyone, including those without jobs. That was not mentioned in the article, of course not. Then there are the levies on power, fuel, ciggies, alcohol, gaming etc. If Bill English is correct about the improved income redistribution, why have the poor become poorer, and the rich list has gone up in value by 50% in just a few years? Sit this article beside the actual GINI index rework coming up in July, and we'll see who is spinning a line.
Yawn.
A hackneyed old chestnut.
Easiest way to disprove that is observe Australia.
Australia has been growing much faster and much richer than NZ for yonks. i.e. they have been concentrating on the size of the cake rather than a static redistribution of the cake which stops the cake from growing.
Now look at the size of Australian welfare benefits per recipient compared to NZ.
QED - quod erat demonstrandum.
MVT: Australia has been able to take some easy money out by mining resources. Sort of like an oil well, it runs out eventually. But as you say, they have grown the cake.
That is exactly what Labour did in their last three terms. The number of SMEs reached a peak, manufacturing was recovering, employment at a good high, GDP per capita strongly trended upwards, the tax take trended upwards to a new high, they posted strong budget surpluses and paid off historic debt. Welfare payments were of course reducing, because more were in work.
Your argument appears to be that National is growing the cake. On which of those metrics that I've mentioned, did they do that after 2008? All of those metrics trended down after 2008, and are only now recovering to 2008 levels - some have not made it back. Or perhaps more accurately, what you mean is that after helping the GFC along and dropping NZ in a hole, National is only just now starting to get the economy moving?
I would argue that most of this response has been due to very high export dairy prices in the last two years or so, and logging prices and other commodities being stronger than they were. National has achieved nothing notable, but I'm patiently waiting for data to disprove that, from someone on the blinkered right.
EZ, thanks for posting your chart for budget surplus and deficits. Now I must ask you this question, do you even know what these stats mean? By definition, a budget surplus is excessive taxation for what the Government is doing. Labour had no disasters to cope with during their tenor, National did, yet Labour mostly spent money on welfare while robbing the workers. I must admit I was shocked to see just how little Cullin paid back debt I honestly thought Labour must of been in a Budget deficit at least once in an effort to pay back debt they were growing.
Between 2000 and 2007, the New Zealand economy expanded by an average of 3.5% each year as private consumption and residential investment grew strongly. Annual inflation averaged 2.6%, comfortably within the Reserve Bank's 1% to 3% target range, while the current account deficit averaged 5.8% of GDP over this period. The world economy was in good shape and there were no Canterbury earthquakes or mining disasters. Put Clark & Co in power from 08 to now and we would be done for, these were Global Economic good times.
From 2008 on the New Zealand economy entered recession in early 2008, before the effects of the global financial crisis set in later in the year. A drought over the 2007/08 summer led to lower production of dairy products in the first half of 2008. Domestic activity slowed sharply over 2008 as high fuel and food prices dampened domestic consumption while high interest rates and falling house prices drove a rapid decline in residential investment.
The outlook for the New Zealand economy deteriorated sharply following the intensification of the global financial crisis in September 08. Similar to experiences across advanced economies, business and consumer confidence plummeted as uncertainty dominated the global financial and economic environment. In addition, local banks access to funding in overseas markets was temporarily curtailed at the height of the crisis. Economic activity contracted 0.9% in the December quarter 08, with production GDP affected by a reduction in manufacturing, construction and wholesale and retail trade. On the expenditure side, investment fell sharply while the extent of uncertainty in the global economy was evident in large declines for both services and goods exports. Overseas importers ran down stocks in the face of the uncertainty, while inbound tourism continued to weaken as fears around job security and declining incomes weighed on decisions to travel. These were Global Economic Bad times.
Given the above as we go into the election campaign, the focus should be on getting the most bang for our buck and reducing the tax burden, not dreaming up new ways to increase spending to reduce the surplus.
Our National Govt. has battled through the global financial crisis, disasters and an economic downturn the last few years and come out on top. EZ, here is the thing, there was no way National was ever going to have a budget surplus given what they had to play with & if they did that, this would of been achieved though lack of spending where it was most needed. That my friend would have the loonie left with plenty of ammo & a Labour Govt for the last three years. National did what they had to & did it well.
Now the country as a whole can reap the rewards. I know if the looney left wing circus wins the next election, they will most certainly appreciate all the positive work National has done, unlike the mess Labour left us in 08.
So in short a "Budget Surplus Should Pay Back Debt", not hold onto it like Cullin did. That is the message upheld from the New Zealand Taxpayers Union too and that is exactly what John Key is doing.
BTW EZ, you have been on my case plenty of times about my poor spelling at times & fair enough - I'm not a good speller. I thought you were, but that was just pretence too.
Between 2000 and 2007, the New Zealand economy expanded by an average of 3.5% each year as private consumption and residential investment grew strongly. Annual inflation averaged 2.6%, comfortably within the Reserve Bank's 1% to 3% target range, while the current account deficit averaged 5.8% of GDP over this period. The world economy was in good shape and there were no Canterbury earthquakes or mining disasters. Put Clark & Co in power from 08 to now and we would be done for, these were Global Economic good times.
Perhaps Labours good management enabled National to survive all the diasters you mention. Interestingly the last current account surplus was under a Labour Government
But Labour usually makes the hard decisions while the Conservatives just carry on
westerly
You are a whopper, Cuzzie - faced with real facts you now say Labour must have been overtaxing us. No, they levied fair taxes and grew the pie. Thousands of new SMEs formed. What's more important is what they did with the money. In many cases they did the most prudent thing they could, they repaid old debts, most of which had been around since the Muldoon years. Your National mates implied this was a bad idea, yet it saved them from a more embarrassing position over the last few years, didn't it.
Where have they been battling ( I think they plodded), and in what way are they "on top" ? This is Crosby Textor speak - I have it on good authority they are still involved behind the scenes for National. This means that any oft-repeated message has come from them, it's a result of a survey session, the slightest doubts in Labour being able to govern are amplified with the help of hefty fibs, lies and obfuscations, and belted out at every occasion in the house, on radio and on TV, and in the press. That doesn't mean that any of it is true. Because Labour did a great job of running the country over three terms.Quote:
Cuzzie: Our National Govt. has battled through the global financial crisis, disasters and an economic downturn the last few years and come out on top.
But National, for example, are bringing us a bright future. They've been doing this since 2008 apparently. We'll have more jobs, better pay for everyone, and a budget surplus. Just a small one, in case taxpayers think they are being 'done'? Don't forget we also need to pay the interest on all those new govt loans.
Regarding your spelling, that's not bad at all, most times, it's just curious it's perfect sometimes, and loose on other posts. How many people are posting using the Cuzzie moniker?
Australian tax rates $80000 to $180000 = 0.37c
Above $180000 = 0.44c
No wonder there welfare benefits are better. If you are a non resident you are also taxed at higher rate. The recently elected Govt has also slashed expenditure in a similar way to JK ' s Party.
westerly
Westerly, here's another article on inequality that gives some more detail. The GINI index never looks at capital gains, and NZ is one of the few places where slow and steady capital gains are still untaxed (nod to FP). The very wealthy tend not to fill out surveys, either.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11229270
Now you're accusing me of being more than one person. EZ, you really are the most delusional one eyed lefty one could ever come across. I will say it again, by definition a budget surplus is excessive taxation for what the Government is doing. I will add that a surplus is grown by not putting the money gained back into the community or not paying off their debt. Kind of like what Lefty Brown is doing to parts of Auckland right now. National has grown with the country by putting back into it. What is your take on a budget surplus? Furthermore to that, nobody can deny Labour ran the country in better Global economic times than National - nobody & would love to see you try. Add the disasters National had to cope with and they still came out smelling of roses. When Labour lost by a massive landslide back in 2008 they were smelling more like what you put around roses - horse dung.
As for fibs and lies that's Clarks best tool, fabrication of the truth. A signed painting that was not her work and a speeding Crown limo come to mind.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, Employment is up & it is. Fact.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact.
You are quite correct when you state that with National, we will have a budget surplus even after paying off more debt from the last Labour Govt. gone through a major Global financial crisis & we can't forget the Christchurch earthquakes. Fact, I feel like you're starting to see the light through all that fog.
A good Govt. can do that EZ, thank goodness we didn't have the likes of Cullin gambling and losing taxpayer money during the last two terms.
Right now I'm feeling a bit like the guy you are about to lose your bet with EZ - pretty smug. I don't have to get into bed with the clowns Labour has to.
We don't hear the loonie left on here talking up Pooh, Hare, Fatman, Honi with the Fatmans money , Funny... what's his name(you know, the tall dude that thinks he's a leader) plus the Angry Little Green Man much do we. EZ, belg, westerly, why don't you all tell us how happy and excited you all are about this multiplicity of freaks. A collection of the odd and unusual. If they did get in what would the odds of them even surviving half a term?
Cuzzie, you implied that at the time labour left office, the adult minimum wage wasNo it wasn't, here are the actual figures.Quote:
"$9.60. Fact"
http://www.dol.govt.nz/er/pay/minimu...ousminimum.asp
After all this time, it's only slightly above where it was sitting in 2008, and it's well below a liveable wage for someone with a family on one income.
What does that mean? It sure sounds good. You should help to write the incredulous bylines that National is using. They seem to have dropped "Brighter Future" and have stuff about families, and a new website look, with not too much detail in behind it. As shallow as their policies.Quote:
Cuzzie -National has grown with the country by putting back into it.
Cuzzie, go back in the Hansard and you'll see that in 2006-2008, National were spewing forth about how Labour should return some taxes to NZers. Of course it wouldn't have been much per person, but the main aim was for a lower tax on the higher earners, and National duly put that in place above all else, even while the tax take was rapidly dropping after the GFC. Labour had achieved solid budget surpluses (not a big percentage of the total income to govt) and repaid old loans with some of it, to greatly reduce the interest burden on future budgets. National has been lucky that interest rates plummeted worldwide, so at the moment, the overhang of interest that will be due from their new loans is not that noticeable. But we'll all have to pick up the tab from their crappy handling of the economy (part funded by those loans) sooner or later, and judging from the rich list performances over the last few years, the wealthy have not had any issues with National. It's the rest of us who have had to tighten our belts.
So your complaining that they borrowed money for the economy and to rebuild chch when interest rates were low? That sounds like good business to me.
It makes perfect sense up to a point, to borrow in that situation. But even taking the Christchurch effect out, National still borrowed huge amounts, and at a quicker rate, than Treasury had predicted for the GFC in 2008. They have not reduced the annual costs affecting the govt budget with all their slashing about the place, partly because more were put on the dole through National's actions, and others in the private sector as a follow-on effect. If you reduce the size of govt, some retailers and businesses in the private sector will be affected. That reduced the tax take further, so they presided over an overall drop in the productive base of our economy. That's shown clearly by the drop and stall in GDP per capita. It had been strongly trending upwards before 2008. Net population is trending upwards, so the economy needs to expand each year on average, just to keep pace.
National can run all the spin they like, this data is still there in the record, anyone can see they haven't done the job too well at all.
I'm having a good dig around looking for National Party links to Crosby Textor. Here is a link to a whole chapter in "The Hollow Men".
http://www.nickyhager.info/the-manip...he-hollow-men/
Fascinating then, it's even more amazing now, that some of the latest blogs about the place still repeat these old messages as though they are fact. They were fabricated and put out there by Crosby Textor through the National Party, now they have a life of their own.
Brash outright lied about Crosby Textor when first asked in 2005, he'd already met both principals in 2004, and they were spending money with them. The latest National crop would be a lot more circumspect about mentioning using Crosby Textor, but it sure looks like they are using the same Crosby Textor techniques that have worked for them in the past.
Belgarion: is middle NZ that susceptible to this sort of brainwashing? I think I already know the answer.Quote:
A lot of the words in this message plan (reprinted in full in the notes) come straight from the first Crosby/Textor report. It repeated the leveraging opportunities:
* While the economy is going well currently, it has nothing to do with the Labour Government. They have been lucky.
* Labour has been distracted by its social reform agenda, and is doing nothing to ensure a strong economy going forward.
* We have lost the New Zealand Values of Initiative and Rewards for working hard and ‘Getting Ahead’.
* There is no incentive for individuals to better themselves, be it through the tax system, the education system or the welfare system; and
* If we don’t put in place plans for a stronger economy now, we will suffer badly in the next economic downturn.29
Textor returned for more meetings with National on 23–24 February 2005. These included ‘Peter Keenan and Textor meeting with Leader [Don Brash] on styles of lines to use and language re framing/positioning’.30 This is another important part of the Crosby/Textor technique. Textor explained that by ‘framing’ he meant ‘setting a notion not about the issues people think about but giving them a WAY to think about the issues in question, that is giving them a model or a structure or equation’.31
[QUOTE=elZorro;483578]I'm having a good dig around looking for National Party links to Crosby Textor. Here is a link to a whole chapter in "The Hollow Men". "
My golly you must be bored EZ.
Why the fetish with this Australian outfit ?
[QUOTE=iceman;483580]Because I think Labour are being too polite in this election process. I'm trying to explain what they are up against. Crosby Textor don't come cheap, and since 2004 they appear to have been the main force behind an erroneous perception of the wonderful gods who are National, and the poor cousins (Labour). In fact, Labour has done the hard yards in an attempt to set the NZ economy up for greater things. Quite a bit of that work might have been dismantled by National after 2008, but it wouldn't take long for Labour to get things going again.
Real export income, not a process of looking after landholders and big business in the hope that something will happen. They'll sell us out, those favoured few certainly don't want to be big employers if they can help it. Witness the decay in the general manufacturing sector.
[QUOTE=elZorro;483619]It is much simpler than that. Labour with a Leader & leadership team that completely fails to connect with voters is up against a highly popular PM & Government that in reality is so centrist that is taken over both center right and center left. In doing so it has pushed Labour out on the left flank where the votes are few and far between !
Just relax and accept Labour is broken and needs another couple of terms in Opposition to rebuild ;)
EZ, it might pay to read the written word if you are going to quote from that statement. I said and copy & paste, "You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact." Post #3926
That statement is 100% true. You have taken your own spin on my written words to try to say I'm wrong. Typical loonie left ignorance.
Read what I say sloooowly EZ - Again, "You are quite correct when you state that with National, the minimum wage has increased from a miserable $9.60 under Labour. Fact." The $9.60 is the minimum wage one could earn. Since 2008 and under National that has been raised 20%, that's not bad. A hard working new entrant working 60 hours per week would be earning $29952.00 back in 08 under the repression and on the minimum wage would now be earning $35568.00 or about $108.00 a week better off. So much for Labour looking after the youth.
My calculations have been based on the minimum wage back in 2008 which was $9.60 under Labour and that was after a big increase by them of $0.60 the year before. I've added the minimum wage from 2014 into the equation which is $11.40. EZ made the mistake of thinking the adult is less than new entrants into the workforce. Don't know how he did that because I said the minimum wage only and nowhere did that include adults min. wage.
Here's the calculations for a new entrant into the workforce on the minimum wage working 60 hours a week for 2008 & 2014 before tax.
2008 - 60 hours X $9.60 = $576.00 or $29952.00 a year.
2014 - 60 hours X $11.40 = $684.00 or $35568.00 a year.
Difference is $108 a week or $5616 a year better off in 2014 under National.
So there you go EZ, the youth are $108.00 a week better off now than the scungy halfpennies Labour used to offer. I guess that confirms what I always thought, under National if you are young and are prepared to work, you will be rewarded. Under Labour you will be rewarded for sitting on your a$$ and the workers will have to support you all the way.
The National party are putting forward one party with a possible pair of semi-independents. The left are trying build a pyramid of losers of every persuasion from Maori radicals, gofers of the super rich, and a collection of Green Semi-green and colour blind recycled exes and you say that National are the "win at any cost" side? You wouldnt like to put a few shekels on the result? I have another grand to bet on a National Led gov. after the votes are counted if you are game.
BTW an adult earning the min. back in 2008 & working 60 hours a week would have earned $720.00 before tax. Fast forward to now under the same circumstances, the min. per week would be $855.00 which is $135.00 each and every week better off. That's a $7020.00 a year increase, way better than what Labour did.
Doesn't really change the picture much.
This chart is copied from David Farrar's Kiwiblog.
It shows that taking into account tax cuts and cost of living increases, someone on minimum wage has had an increase in their real disposable income of 11% under the last six years of national
Attachment 5879
[QUOTE=iceman;483629]Iceman, I'm worried about you, comrade. I wouldn't mind being told that it's a simple situation, if my data was wrong. I don't think it is, because the really savvy ones on this thread never take me to task about the figures. So you can all see the bad data from National's policies, but that doesn't seem to matter, as we're "heading in the right direction now".
Look past the spin, and if you guys were really concerned about NZ's future, instead of being far more interested in your own slice of the pie, you would have to vote Labour. We can't all be millionaires. Some of us have to get jobs and make stuff, provide backup services for other NZers. We have to be able to apply the education we spend a lot of money on, increasingly a student cost. If we can't do that in a better way, we may as well pack our bags and try somewhere else.
David Farrar- he doesn't vote Labour does he?
How is it that the CPI index change for the 2010-2011 area doesn't seem to factor in a change in GST from 12.5% to 15%. I'd have thought that would have had a big impact. I realise there were changing tax rates to balance some of that. CPI seems to include rents. Of course they are racing upwards at the moment. Takehome pay isn't. Despite fuel being more expensive than it was, the budgeted household costs for that have decreased. Why? People are using their cars less, because that's a fact of life. They can't afford to run them like they used to.
Quote:
The figure shows that $23.55 of every $100 spent by households on goods and services covered by the CPI is spent on housing and household utilities, compared with $22.75 in 2008. This reflects increased spending on rent. Food accounts for $18.79 of every $100 spent, compared with $17.83 in 2008. This increase reflects a 14.2 percent rise in food prices from the June 2008 quarter to the June 2011 quarter. Consumers price index review: 2011 8
Other groups declined in relative importance, including transport (down from $16.18 to $15.12 of every $100 spent), with lower spending on cars contributing to the fall. Petrol declined from $5.47 to $5.27 of every $100 spent.
[QUOTE=elZorro;483679]I have no concerns about my own future, having taken it upon myself to look after my own financial situation. However I am concerned about NZ's future. Therefore I will vote in the most effective way to keep Labour/Greens and Internet-Mana away from the treasury benches.
Because I used to work a 70 hour week over 5 days to get ahead, it worked.14 hours a day working for myself. Eight years of 14 hour days all without one holiday. My 21 year old son works 60 hours over a six day period now. When you're young and learning you tend to do it the hard way, not the smart way. I just carried on the same formula for the adult wage, but will concede that we tend to do it the smarter way by then and hours decrease.
Labour need to get meaner you say EZ?Their shout in the face, incessant picking at small points and small minded politics is what has shifted me from them. If the figures really worked in their favour , they would use them.
And to not think every party uses spin is idiotic.
Yep, your sane and the rest of the world is crazy huh?
You lose all credibility when you resort to childish name calling .
To my knowledge no party has said who they would work with at the next election. It is all conjecture at this stage but given your given your rather extreme right wing views
it is only to be expected I suppose
westerly
[QUOTE=iceman;483785]I didn't single anyone out in my comments, and of course we are all victims of self-interest at times. However the data stands up by itself, those graphs and stats are from Statistics NZ. They paint a picture of a stagnating economy and savage borrowing against crown assets. I wonder how many of the people who strongly support National on this forum, have commercial property or rental housing lease income. This would produce a clear conflict of interest when we discuss CGT, for example. My comments about wanting Labour in after the election, is all about seeing this economy of ours employing people over a wider area than it does at present.
[QUOTE=elZorro;483804]That's hardly a conflict of interest. It's simply a direct interest and all voters/taxpayers have some direct interest, which is why the masses vote and why Labour exists. That is because votes are easily bought. Promising to Rob Peter to pay Paul always attracts a lot of Pauls.
Well then westerly, all you could do is have a go at me, fair enough after all it was name calling. I apologise, now tell me how happy you are that Labour need to do deals with NZ First, The Green Party, Mana and the Internet Party in order to topple New Zealands most popular party, National? What makes you think the Internet founder will be in any position to be Honi's sugar daddy heading into our election when the world is folding on him all be it with one hell of a buckle. Sorry, my mistake - I forgot you have not got a humorous side to you, but here is the thing westerly, mate you have just got to laugh. Make no bones about it - National is looking more than likely right now & so they bloodywell should be.
The left of centre is no more, it's gone - National now owns both sides of centre. But I hear Labour say that they see light at the end of the tunnel. I say go out and buy some more tunnel because you are going to need it.
Winston Churchill once said "Some men change their party for the sake of their principles, others their principles for the sake of their party. This represents the NZ left wing marxist circus that is now a world-wide joke. They are laughing at us all which is not fair. Lefties short your ****e out for goodness sake, you are nothing but the laughing stock you deserve to be. Plus I really miss a solid strong opposition party Labour used to be. The greens are half they are already in popularity, good grief what a misdemeanour that is right there. Can't even hold off a bunch of NWO fraudsters.
How's that then westerly, steamed you up a bit? Hope so and hope you get so fired up you can go out and do something to save your party. Like I said, we need a strong opposition party to get the best out of this Govt. You would be doing John Key & me a favour as well as Labour in the long run.
The best example of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" I have seen in years. Who has not been calling Collins "Crusher" in recent posts to name but one. "no party has said who they would work with" once again selective reading of the facts. Harre is the best example apart from her German principal who has stated "not national under any circumstances and the list goes on
All National supporters for one and they live in every corner of the Globe. The question should be, why aren't you laughing belg.? I'll have a crack and say, "because you find yourself and your party in this unfortunate situation", rather you than me. How about you tell me just how happy you are with what is going on for Labour and the things they have to do to get into power. The things they have to do that they don't want to do. National should make it by themselves as they are polling over 50% right now, this must make you very jealous because right now Labour are only good enough to hover in the 20's. With the collective bunch of misfits, they might get as high as 45%. I, like you would like to see Labour polling that high, but then you can't say that if you support the misfits. Your probs - not mine. Lifes good right now and will be a hell of a lot better after the next election. belg, I'm laughing too.
ref: Crosby Textor
I anticipate that the Prime Minister will come under intense pressure to disengage himself and the National Party with Crosby Textor. As Parmalatt, the Italian global dairy company, which has a substantial share in the Australian fresh milk market engaging Crosby Textor as its advisor as they are so concerned at the inroads the New Zealand Company A2 Corporation is having in Australia.
Not a good look for John Key to be associated with Crosby Textor at this time if its actively working to discredit a successful New Zealand company .
[QUOTE=craic;483862]The best example of the "Pot calling the Kettle black" I have seen in years. Who has not been calling Collins "Crusher" in recent posts to name but one.
Not me craic
westerly
The fetish with this outfit continues. Every political party uses advisors and advocates. Big deal. This Parmalat attack in Australia has been exposed by the media and Parmalat looks bad and A2M has had great free advertising.
I have not seen any leftwingers on here voice concerns over a multi millionaire (most likely all ill gotten) neo-liberal German citizen funding a scam list to USE a Maori seat to get his own people into Parliament in order to influence an incoming Labour lead (dream on) Government to block his extradition to the US.
The Left receives him with open arms as some sort of saviour. The Left in NZ today is desperate and totally bereft of ANY principles. This includes leftie commentators on this thread where noone seems to be concerned about this, but very concerned about Crosby Textor or whatever they´re called. Only Sue Bradford has taken a principled stand.