Discussion:
Wow
(too old to reply)
Tony
2020-12-02 03:51:31 UTC
Permalink
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Crash
2020-12-02 04:57:04 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.




--
Crash McBash
Tony
2020-12-02 06:12:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair. I did so
last time and I will do so this time.
James Christophers
2020-12-04 03:06:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!

Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do so.

I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be a cork on a storm-tossed sea.

The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good, but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.

Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
Tony
2020-12-04 04:03:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!
Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out
from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the
time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly
unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic
landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving
them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally
promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do
so.
I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever
economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are
necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the
fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say
or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a
needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be
a cork on a storm-tossed sea.
The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good,
but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one
involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly
varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed
down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.
Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying
expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
I expect you took hours to put that nonsense together. Pity you screwed it up.
I am not authoritarian, that is something I know to be correct. My career
attests to that.
You, on the other hand, wield your limited abilities in a manner that most of
us find laughable. Lots of words and stuff all content.
Do please find an idea that is not one that you stole from somebody else and
re-worded. We all look forward to that.
Rich80105
2020-12-04 04:31:11 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!
Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out
from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the
time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly
unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic
landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving
them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally
promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do
so.
I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever
economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are
necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the
fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say
or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a
needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be
a cork on a storm-tossed sea.
The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good,
but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one
involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly
varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed
down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.
Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying
expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
I expect you took hours to put that nonsense together. Pity you screwed it up.
What a nasty comment. All it does is confirm that you are consistent
in your desire to be offensive.
Post by Tony
I am not authoritarian, that is something I know to be correct.
You are getting confused. Your posts show all teh characteristics of
an authoritarian - your unsupported personal opinion is to your mind
always sufficient proof, not only for yourself, but in your mind
sufficient for anyone else. You have no authority, Tony, but can still
be authoritarian with your zero value posts.
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
There you go again - how can anyone argue with your total lack of
evidence!
Post by Tony
You, on the other hand, wield your limited abilities in a manner that most of
us find laughable. Lots of words and stuff all content.
We all have limited abilities, but James Christophers has a valuable
ability to make his meaning clear in a way that does not cause
needless offence, but can put in a bit of humour to leaven the
message. Perhaps you are jealous . . .
Post by Tony
Do please find an idea that is not one that you stole from somebody else and
re-worded. We all look forward to that.
It certainly appears that very few of your ideas have ever been held
by anyone else, Tony; but contrary to your views I suspect many do not
find that appealing. However you take pride in never giving any
supporting evidence for your views; perhaps your lack of the ability
to provide any evidence of your arguments has in some way persuaded
you of your belief in your own infallibility.
James Christophers
2020-12-04 05:39:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!
Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out
from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the
time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly
unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic
landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving
them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally
promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do
so.
I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever
economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are
necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the
fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say
or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a
needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be
a cork on a storm-tossed sea.
The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good,
but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one
involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly
varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed
down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.
Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying
expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
I expect you took hours to put that nonsense together.
Moments only, solely because I have the required facts to hand to deploy as needed. You should try it sometime. It'd be a first for you, as well. Fancy that!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Pity you screwed it up.
Show how.
Post by Rich80105
What a nasty comment. All it does is confirm that you are consistent
in your desire to be offensive.
Those whose degenerate compulsions oblige them to seek out and dub others as what they insanely perceive as offensive, are more often than not themselves offensive - eg. Trump (he's also insanely authoritarian, too! Funny that, eh?)
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
I am not authoritarian, that is something I know to be correct.
You are not a three-legged 15-ton ballerina, that is something you also know to be correct, and bully for you, say I!
Post by Rich80105
You are getting confused. Your posts show all the characteristics of
an authoritarian
Correct wording. Which is precisely why I specifically wrote, 'Spoken like', not "Spoken as...'.


- your unsupported personal opinion is to your mind
Post by Rich80105
always sufficient proof, not only for yourself, but in your mind
sufficient for anyone else. You have no authority, Tony, but can still
be authoritarian with your zero value posts.
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow! Some career, eh?
Post by Rich80105
There you go again - how can anyone argue with your total lack of
evidence!
Post by Tony
You, on the other hand, wield your limited abilities in a manner that most of
us find laughable. Lots of words and stuff all content.
Usenet's democratic and flexible style and form are - thank God - eclectic, ranging from the driest erudition or maybe conversational discourse and debate, then on and down to the anti-intellectual nadir of that creepy nether hell-hole where old men, made mad by their spooky binary compulsions, get off exchanging noughts and ones between each other simply to confirm to each other they haven't actually died. Yet.
Post by Rich80105
We all have limited abilities, but James Christophers has a valuable
ability to make his meaning clear in a way that does not cause
needless offence, but can put in a bit of humour to leaven the
message. Perhaps you are jealous . . .
Ah yes, Envy - the little green monster that corrupts the mind, corrodes the will, destroying the very heart and soul!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Do please find an idea that is not one that you stole from somebody else and
re-worded.
From alpha to omega, Academe itself is replete with original works of great erudition and imagination, much if not most of it resting on, and/or referring to, the works of those who have gone before. And you would yet disown and disavow such garnered learning, not to mention the resulting elevation of the consciousness - yes you, that so-called "classically educated" scholar, no less - 70% Latin pass an' all?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
We all look forward to that.
That's twice in this exchange you have speciously spoken for others, you unknowingly presumptuous little squirt.
Post by Rich80105
It certainly appears that very few of your ideas have ever been held
by anyone else, Tony; but contrary to your views I suspect many do not
find that appealing. However you take pride in never giving any
supporting evidence for your views; perhaps your lack of the ability
to provide any evidence of your arguments has in some way persuaded
you of your belief in your own infallibility.
Tony
2020-12-04 06:18:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!
Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out
from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the
time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly
unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic
landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving
them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally
promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do
so.
I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever
economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are
necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the
fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say
or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a
needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be
a cork on a storm-tossed sea.
The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good,
but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one
involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly
varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed
down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.
Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying
expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
I expect you took hours to put that nonsense together.
Moments only, solely because I have the required facts to hand to deploy as
needed. You should try it sometime. It'd be a first for you, as well. Fancy
that!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Pity you screwed it up.
Show how.
Post by Rich80105
What a nasty comment. All it does is confirm that you are consistent
in your desire to be offensive.
Those whose degenerate compulsions oblige them to seek out and dub others as
what they insanely perceive as offensive, are more often than not themselves
offensive - eg. Trump (he's also insanely authoritarian, too! Funny that, eh?)
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
I am not authoritarian, that is something I know to be correct.
You are not a three-legged 15-ton ballerina, that is something you also know
to be correct, and bully for you, say I!
Post by Rich80105
You are getting confused. Your posts show all the characteristics of
an authoritarian
Correct wording. Which is precisely why I specifically wrote, 'Spoken like',
not "Spoken as...'.
- your unsupported personal opinion is to your mind
Post by Rich80105
always sufficient proof, not only for yourself, but in your mind
sufficient for anyone else. You have no authority, Tony, but can still
be authoritarian with your zero value posts.
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
Post by Rich80105
There you go again - how can anyone argue with your total lack of
evidence!
Post by Tony
You, on the other hand, wield your limited abilities in a manner that most of
us find laughable. Lots of words and stuff all content.
Usenet's democratic and flexible style and form are - thank God - eclectic,
ranging from the driest erudition or maybe conversational discourse and debate,
then on and down to the anti-intellectual nadir of that creepy nether hell-hole
where old men, made mad by their spooky binary compulsions, get off exchanging
noughts and ones between each other simply to confirm to each other they
haven't actually died. Yet.
Post by Rich80105
We all have limited abilities, but James Christophers has a valuable
ability to make his meaning clear in a way that does not cause
needless offence, but can put in a bit of humour to leaven the
message. Perhaps you are jealous . . .
Ah yes, Envy - the little green monster that corrupts the mind, corrodes the
will, destroying the very heart and soul!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Do please find an idea that is not one that you stole from somebody else and
re-worded.
From alpha to omega, Academe itself is replete with original works of great
erudition and imagination, much if not most of it resting on, and/or referring
to, the works of those who have gone before. And you would yet disown and
disavow such garnered learning, not to mention the resulting elevation of the
consciousness - yes you, that so-called "classically educated" scholar, no less
- 70% Latin pass an' all?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
We all look forward to that.
That's twice in this exchange you have speciously spoken for others, you
unknowingly presumptuous little squirt.
Post by Rich80105
It certainly appears that very few of your ideas have ever been held
by anyone else, Tony; but contrary to your views I suspect many do not
find that appealing. However you take pride in never giving any
supporting evidence for your views; perhaps your lack of the ability
to provide any evidence of your arguments has in some way persuaded
you of your belief in your own infallibility.
Once more you have proven just how shallow you are and how your appalling
childhood has engineered your even worse adulthood.
You are incapable of balance and incapable of debate and incapable of humainty.
Trump's problem is narcissism, yours is much worse.
George
2020-12-04 18:58:54 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 04 Dec 2020 00:18:19 -0600
Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net dot nz> wrote:

Snipped to enhance the message
Post by Tony
Once more you have proven just how shallow you are and how your
appalling childhood has engineered your even worse adulthood.
You are incapable of balance and incapable of debate and incapable of
humainty. Trump's problem is narcissism, yours is much worse.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Tony
2020-12-04 20:27:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
On Fri, 04 Dec 2020 00:18:19 -0600
Snipped to enhance the message
Post by Tony
Once more you have proven just how shallow you are and how your
appalling childhood has engineered your even worse adulthood.
You are incapable of balance and incapable of debate and incapable of
humainty. Trump's problem is narcissism, yours is much worse.
Thanks :)
Tony
2020-12-04 20:15:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed as irrelevant history
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
You really are a genuinely stupid man, I have never been paid for writing code
of any description. Not at any time in my career have I been a computer
programmer or a paid writer of software. You are guilty of making an idiotic
assumption and using that false assumption as a weapon. In fact you use your
modest vocabulary as a weapon and never as a tool for genuine communication.
And you have taken Rich in, not that it is more than a trivial task to do so.
He faithfully, almost reverently, assumes that you communicate well. You do
not; it is, as I have stated, a weapon. And a cowardly one at that. You have no
desire to communicate, merely to bully with the only weapon you have, the
ridiculous use of largely irrelevant and over-bearing words. Your only reason
for being in this newsgroup is to show us how clever you are; well, you failed
miserably.

You and Rich deserve each other. He is a liar and has less intellectual
capacity than a cockroach otherwise he would understand there is more to life
than politics, much, much more.
He hangs on your every word and then joins with you as a member of the most
childish tag team that this newsgroup has ever endured, and probably ever will
have to endure. He is on record as having complained that two other posters tag
teamed him (I was not one of them) and then he joins with you to do the same
thing. He is the one that deliberately mispelled a politicians name and then
complained when somebody else did that. He is also the only person here that I
am aware of that has defamed hard working people, and expressed as many
opinions as me, no in fact many more opinions than me without a shred of
evidence and of course he argues that I should not do that; as have you. Nobody
does hypocrisy like Rich. And you are also in that category, you often express
opinions without evidence - let me be clear, you are entitled to do that and so
is everybody else. You and Rich are bullies, you have bullied several people
here. In your case with your deliberate use of words in an attempt to bumfuzzle
people (and to pretend you are smarter than you really are) and Rich with his
acidic sarcasm and defamatory remarks about people in this newsgroup and
elsewhere.

Disagreeing with either of you is likely to start a drizzle of mild abuse which
gradually becomes a torrent as others attempt to claim the same rights as you
two have to express an opinion. Well, there we are - we do have that right so
grow up old man (and you are certainly deeper into your dotage than I am) if
you can. You and Rich really should get a room.
James Christophers
2020-12-04 22:06:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed as irrelevant history
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
You really are a genuinely stupid man, I have never been paid for writing code
of any description. Not at any time in my career have I been a computer
programmer or a paid writer of software.
Should I be impressed!?
Post by Tony
You are guilty of making an idiotic assumption and using that false assumption as a weapon.
And you have taken Rich in, not that it is more than a trivial task to do so.
He faithfully, almost reverently, assumes that you communicate well. You do not; it is, as I have stated, a weapon. And a cowardly one at that. You have no
desire to communicate, merely to bully with the only weapon you have, the
ridiculous use of largely irrelevant and over-bearing words.
Your only reason
for being in this newsgroup is to show us how clever you are; well, you failed
miserably.
You and Rich deserve each other. He is a liar and has less intellectual
capacity than a cockroach otherwise he would understand there is more to life
than politics, much, much more. He hangs on your every word and then joins with you as a member of the most
childish tag team that this newsgroup has ever endured, and probably ever will
have to endure. He is on record as having complained that two other posters tag
teamed him (I was not one of them) and then he joins with you to do the same
thing. He is the one that deliberately mispelled a politicians name and then
complained when somebody else did that. He is also the only person here that I
am aware of that has defamed hard working people, and expressed as many
opinions as me, no in fact many more opinions than me without a shred of
evidence and of course he argues that I should not do that; as have you. Nobody
does hypocrisy like Rich. And you are also in that category, you often express
opinions without evidence - let me be clear, you are entitled to do that and so
is everybody else. You and Rich are bullies, you have bullied several people
here. In your case with your deliberate use of words in an attempt to bumfuzzle
people (and to pretend you are smarter than you really are) and Rich with his
acidic sarcasm and defamatory remarks about people in this newsgroup and
elsewhere.
Disagreeing with either of you is likely to start a drizzle of mild abuse which
gradually becomes a torrent as others attempt to claim the same rights as you
two have to express an opinion. Well, there we are - we do have that right so
grow up old man (and you are certainly deeper into your dotage than I am) if
you can. You and Rich really should get a room.
So one may safely add hysteria to your unbecoming catalogue of compulsions.

I which case, find another defence mechanism. The one you're using plainly ain't working. If you'd be paying attention, you'd have realised that long before now.
Tony
2020-12-04 22:15:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed as irrelevant history
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
You really are a genuinely stupid man, I have never been paid for writing code
of any description. Not at any time in my career have I been a computer
programmer or a paid writer of software.
Should I be impressed!?
No of course not.
But you made a stupid mistake, you made an assumption based on a desire to be
abusive.
As we all know, that is your reason for existance.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
You are guilty of making an idiotic assumption and using that false
assumption as a weapon.
And you have taken Rich in, not that it is more than a trivial task to do so.
He faithfully, almost reverently, assumes that you communicate well. You do
not; it is, as I have stated, a weapon. And a cowardly one at that. You have no
desire to communicate, merely to bully with the only weapon you have, the
ridiculous use of largely irrelevant and over-bearing words.
Your only reason
for being in this newsgroup is to show us how clever you are; well, you failed
miserably.
You and Rich deserve each other. He is a liar and has less intellectual
capacity than a cockroach otherwise he would understand there is more to life
than politics, much, much more. He hangs on your every word and then joins
with you as a member of the most
childish tag team that this newsgroup has ever endured, and probably ever will
have to endure. He is on record as having complained that two other posters tag
teamed him (I was not one of them) and then he joins with you to do the same
thing. He is the one that deliberately mispelled a politicians name and then
complained when somebody else did that. He is also the only person here that I
am aware of that has defamed hard working people, and expressed as many
opinions as me, no in fact many more opinions than me without a shred of
evidence and of course he argues that I should not do that; as have you. Nobody
does hypocrisy like Rich. And you are also in that category, you often express
opinions without evidence - let me be clear, you are entitled to do that and so
is everybody else. You and Rich are bullies, you have bullied several people
here. In your case with your deliberate use of words in an attempt to bumfuzzle
people (and to pretend you are smarter than you really are) and Rich with his
acidic sarcasm and defamatory remarks about people in this newsgroup and
elsewhere.
Disagreeing with either of you is likely to start a drizzle of mild abuse which
gradually becomes a torrent as others attempt to claim the same rights as you
two have to express an opinion. Well, there we are - we do have that right so
grow up old man (and you are certainly deeper into your dotage than I am) if
you can. You and Rich really should get a room.
So one may safely add hysteria to your unbecoming catalogue of compulsions.
I which case, find another defence mechanism. The one you're using plainly
ain't working. If you'd be paying attention, you'd have realised that long
before now.
I do not have a need for defence, you are no threat to me (or anybody else for
that matter).
John Bowes
2020-12-05 06:10:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed as irrelevant history
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
You really are a genuinely stupid man, I have never been paid for writing code
of any description. Not at any time in my career have I been a computer
programmer or a paid writer of software. You are guilty of making an idiotic
assumption and using that false assumption as a weapon. In fact you use your
modest vocabulary as a weapon and never as a tool for genuine communication.
And you have taken Rich in, not that it is more than a trivial task to do so.
He faithfully, almost reverently, assumes that you communicate well. You do
not; it is, as I have stated, a weapon. And a cowardly one at that. You have no
desire to communicate, merely to bully with the only weapon you have, the
ridiculous use of largely irrelevant and over-bearing words. Your only reason
for being in this newsgroup is to show us how clever you are; well, you failed
miserably.
You and Rich deserve each other. He is a liar and has less intellectual
capacity than a cockroach otherwise he would understand there is more to life
than politics, much, much more.
He hangs on your every word and then joins with you as a member of the most
childish tag team that this newsgroup has ever endured, and probably ever will
have to endure. He is on record as having complained that two other posters tag
teamed him (I was not one of them) and then he joins with you to do the same
thing. He is the one that deliberately mispelled a politicians name and then
complained when somebody else did that. He is also the only person here that I
am aware of that has defamed hard working people, and expressed as many
opinions as me, no in fact many more opinions than me without a shred of
evidence and of course he argues that I should not do that; as have you. Nobody
does hypocrisy like Rich. And you are also in that category, you often express
opinions without evidence - let me be clear, you are entitled to do that and so
is everybody else. You and Rich are bullies, you have bullied several people
here. In your case with your deliberate use of words in an attempt to bumfuzzle
people (and to pretend you are smarter than you really are) and Rich with his
acidic sarcasm and defamatory remarks about people in this newsgroup and
elsewhere.
Disagreeing with either of you is likely to start a drizzle of mild abuse which
gradually becomes a torrent as others attempt to claim the same rights as you
two have to express an opinion. Well, there we are - we do have that right so
grow up old man (and you are certainly deeper into your dotage than I am) if
you can. You and Rich really should get a room.
Guess Keith's happy providing employment for a caregiver who cleans more shit offf Keiths arse than he spews out of his finger tips :)
Nellie the Elephant
2020-12-08 01:22:22 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 04 Dec 2020 14:15:41 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed as irrelevant history
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
You really are a genuinely stupid man, I have never been paid for writing code
of any description. Not at any time in my career have I been a computer
programmer or a paid writer of software. You are guilty of making an idiotic
assumption and using that false assumption as a weapon. In fact you use your
modest vocabulary as a weapon and never as a tool for genuine communication.
And you have taken Rich in, not that it is more than a trivial task to do so.
He faithfully, almost reverently, assumes that you communicate well. You do
not; it is, as I have stated, a weapon. And a cowardly one at that. You have no
desire to communicate, merely to bully with the only weapon you have, the
ridiculous use of largely irrelevant and over-bearing words. Your only reason
for being in this newsgroup is to show us how clever you are; well, you failed
miserably.
You and Rich deserve each other. He is a liar and has less intellectual
capacity than a cockroach otherwise he would understand there is more to life
than politics, much, much more.
He hangs on your every word and then joins with you as a member of the most
childish tag team that this newsgroup has ever endured, and probably ever will
have to endure. He is on record as having complained that two other posters tag
teamed him (I was not one of them) and then he joins with you to do the same
thing. He is the one that deliberately mispelled a politicians name and then
complained when somebody else did that. He is also the only person here that I
am aware of that has defamed hard working people, and expressed as many
opinions as me, no in fact many more opinions than me without a shred of
evidence and of course he argues that I should not do that; as have you. Nobody
does hypocrisy like Rich. And you are also in that category, you often express
opinions without evidence - let me be clear, you are entitled to do that and so
is everybody else. You and Rich are bullies, you have bullied several people
here. In your case with your deliberate use of words in an attempt to bumfuzzle
people (and to pretend you are smarter than you really are) and Rich with his
acidic sarcasm and defamatory remarks about people in this newsgroup and
elsewhere.
Disagreeing with either of you is likely to start a drizzle of mild abuse which
gradually becomes a torrent as others attempt to claim the same rights as you
two have to express an opinion. Well, there we are - we do have that right so
grow up old man (and you are certainly deeper into your dotage than I am) if
you can. You and Rich really should get a room.
James' response was very weak, I wonder why.
Interesting how Rich does not respond. Maybe you got everything spot
on.
Oops, no "maybe" about it.
Euripides
2020-12-08 22:08:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nellie the Elephant
On Fri, 04 Dec 2020 14:15:41 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed as irrelevant history
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
Deep into your dotage but now reduced to writing code to make ends meet? Wow!
Some career, eh?
You really are a genuinely stupid man, I have never been paid for writing code
of any description. Not at any time in my career have I been a computer
programmer or a paid writer of software. You are guilty of making an idiotic
assumption and using that false assumption as a weapon. In fact you use your
modest vocabulary as a weapon and never as a tool for genuine communication.
And you have taken Rich in, not that it is more than a trivial task to do so.
He faithfully, almost reverently, assumes that you communicate well. You do
not; it is, as I have stated, a weapon. And a cowardly one at that. You have no
desire to communicate, merely to bully with the only weapon you have, the
ridiculous use of largely irrelevant and over-bearing words. Your only reason
for being in this newsgroup is to show us how clever you are; well, you failed
miserably.
You and Rich deserve each other. He is a liar and has less intellectual
capacity than a cockroach otherwise he would understand there is more to life
than politics, much, much more.
He hangs on your every word and then joins with you as a member of the most
childish tag team that this newsgroup has ever endured, and probably ever will
have to endure. He is on record as having complained that two other posters tag
teamed him (I was not one of them) and then he joins with you to do the same
thing. He is the one that deliberately mispelled a politicians name and then
complained when somebody else did that. He is also the only person here that I
am aware of that has defamed hard working people, and expressed as many
opinions as me, no in fact many more opinions than me without a shred of
evidence and of course he argues that I should not do that; as have you. Nobody
does hypocrisy like Rich. And you are also in that category, you often express
opinions without evidence - let me be clear, you are entitled to do that and so
is everybody else. You and Rich are bullies, you have bullied several people
here. In your case with your deliberate use of words in an attempt to bumfuzzle
people (and to pretend you are smarter than you really are) and Rich with his
acidic sarcasm and defamatory remarks about people in this newsgroup and
elsewhere.
Disagreeing with either of you is likely to start a drizzle of mild abuse which
gradually becomes a torrent as others attempt to claim the same rights as you
two have to express an opinion. Well, there we are - we do have that right so
grow up old man (and you are certainly deeper into your dotage than I am) if
you can. You and Rich really should get a room.
James' response was very weak, I wonder why.
Interesting how Rich does not respond. Maybe you got everything spot
on.
Oops, no "maybe" about it.
Food for thought.

Tony
2020-12-04 05:40:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!
Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out
from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the
time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly
unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic
landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving
them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally
promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do
so.
I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever
economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are
necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the
fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say
or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a
needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be
a cork on a storm-tossed sea.
The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good,
but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one
involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly
varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed
down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.
Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying
expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
I expect you took hours to put that nonsense together. Pity you screwed it up.
What a nasty comment. All it does is confirm that you are consistent
in your desire to be offensive.
Post by Tony
I am not authoritarian, that is something I know to be correct.
You are getting confused. Your posts show all teh characteristics of
an authoritarian - your unsupported personal opinion is to your mind
always sufficient proof, not only for yourself, but in your mind
sufficient for anyone else. You have no authority, Tony, but can still
be authoritarian with your zero value posts.
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
There you go again - how can anyone argue with your total lack of
evidence!
Post by Tony
You, on the other hand, wield your limited abilities in a manner that most of
us find laughable. Lots of words and stuff all content.
We all have limited abilities, but James Christophers has a valuable
ability to make his meaning clear in a way that does not cause
needless offence, but can put in a bit of humour to leaven the
message. Perhaps you are jealous . . .
Post by Tony
Do please find an idea that is not one that you stole from somebody else and
re-worded. We all look forward to that.
It certainly appears that very few of your ideas have ever been held
by anyone else, Tony; but contrary to your views I suspect many do not
find that appealing. However you take pride in never giving any
supporting evidence for your views; perhaps your lack of the ability
to provide any evidence of your arguments has in some way persuaded
you of your belief in your own infallibility.
You and Keith can continue your tag-teaming and your rather sleazy love (both
of you) for abusing people who disagree with you.
You and he have never provided any evidence of your skills or education that
entitles either of you to comment about the posts of others. You are both
completely without any provenance (as in authenticity),
And yet you demand absolutely that others prove their qualifications to dare to
disagree with you.
Keith is cleverer than you, rarely if ever caught in a lie, but you are a
serial liar and well and truly found to be so in this newsgroup. When lying
fails you become abusive. The pair of you are nasty old men who deserve only
aprobrium and may you both get exactly that.
Your childish post here is evidence of that being another example of your silly
complaint that I do not provide evidence to support my opinions. Well old man
neither do you and neither does Keith. Suck it up.
John Bowes
2020-12-05 06:08:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:03:27 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
--
Crash McBash
Fair enough Crash. I will give them as much time as I feel is fair.
All a-tremble and with baited breath, Labour awaits your lordly imprimatur!
Post by Tony
I did so last time and I will do so this time.
Spoken like a true authoritarian!
Covid-19 and its inevitable long-term consequences have kicked the props out
from under whatever financial heft might have been at Labour's disposal at the
time it made what I always thought and said on this forum were hopelessly
unrealistic promises. Thus irrational exuberance. And with the economic
landscape now having so radically shifted against the government, I'm "giving
them" no time whatever to achieve much if not most of what they had originally
promised since, again, it would in my view be unrealistic, even fatuous to do
so.
I think Robertson is likely to do the utmost he can to advance whatever
economic priorities are set, but even so, his actions and outcomes are
necessarily severely circumscribed by events here (particularly the
fiscal/OCR/debt conundrum), and, worldwide, scenarios over which he has no say
or control. Internationally, Zealand is characterised and categorised as a
needy taker from, rather than a monied giver to, and thereby cannot help but be
a cork on a storm-tossed sea.
The one favourable factor among several is that New Zealand's credit is good,
but such a view is based not on an isolated assessment but on a comparative one
involving and including other economic partners and competitors in similarly
varying and similarly unfavourable circumstances. Hence those "Ratings" handed
down from the Olympian heights of global financing's Fat Controllers.
Hope is a fine thing - what's more, it doesn't cost a dime; whereas satisfying
expectations is not only expensive but infinitely harder to accomplish.
I expect you took hours to put that nonsense together. Pity you screwed it up.
What a nasty comment. All it does is confirm that you are consistent
in your desire to be offensive.
All the comment confirms is that both Keith and you are nasty authoritarian imbeciles rich!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
I am not authoritarian, that is something I know to be correct.
<zero value authoritarian bullshit snipped>
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
My career attests to that.
There you go again - how can anyone argue with your total lack of
evidence!
So it's okay for you and Keith to have a lack of evidence for your misinformed opinions but everyone else needs to support them? Sounds like an authoritarian imbeciles demand to me :)
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
You, on the other hand, wield your limited abilities in a manner that most of
us find laughable. Lots of words and stuff all content.
<further bullshit in support of the authoritarian Keith snipped>
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Do please find an idea that is not one that you stole from somebody else and
re-worded. We all look forward to that.
<another post highlighting the authoritarian Rich's lack of comprehension snipped>
James Christophers
2020-12-03 03:19:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
How about this way of going about it:

Do not try to advance a step at a time. Define your objectives clearly and move towards them in quantum leaps. ... Once the programme begins to be implemented, do not stop until you have completed it. The fire ofopponents is much less accurate if they have to shoot at a rapidly moving target.

So in this case, how might this ultimately work out, do you suppose?

As for the trivial matter of funding - from where and by whom? Increased real per-capita productivity perhaps?

Well, I'm only being reasonable, aren't I ?
Crash
2020-12-03 19:37:03 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 19:19:11 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
Do not try to advance a step at a time. Define your objectives clearly and move towards them in quantum leaps. ... Once the programme begins to be implemented, do not stop until you have completed it. The fire ofopponents is much less accurate if they have to shoot at a rapidly moving target.
So in this case, how might this ultimately work out, do you suppose?
I don't care how Labour go about delivery - defining objectives and
delivering is the key. They have been elected on hope and faith.
Post by James Christophers
As for the trivial matter of funding - from where and by whom? Increased real per-capita productivity perhaps?
Well, I'm only being reasonable, aren't I?
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-12-03 20:40:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 19:19:11 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
Do not try to advance a step at a time. Define your objectives clearly and move towards them in quantum leaps. ... Once the programme begins to be implemented, do not stop until you have completed it. The fire ofopponents is much less accurate if they have to shoot at a rapidly moving target.
So in this case, how might this ultimately work out, do you suppose?
I don't care how Labour go about delivery - defining objectives and
delivering is the key. They have been elected on hope and faith.
As indeed are all Governments, although the mixture of hopes does not
always produce exactly the government many expect.

A recent announcment gives a clear objective and measurement for the
government sector to achieve carbon neutrality. Poverty measurements
are complex as by their nature they are relative rather than absolute
- while significant rises in benefits and in pay rates for some low
wage occupations will help, they have been offset to an unknown extent
by increases in rents - in part because returning New Zealanders have
had an effect, but also because the rises in benefits meant that there
was a capacity to pay, and rising property prices give an incentive to
owners to seek a return on those higher capital values. It is a
difficult area which does not appear to have clear solutions, from any
party in parliament.
Post by Crash
Post by James Christophers
As for the trivial matter of funding - from where and by whom? Increased real per-capita productivity perhaps?
Well, I'm only being reasonable, aren't I?
Gordon
2020-12-04 06:40:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
I don't care how Labour go about delivery - defining objectives and
delivering is the key. They have been elected on hope and faith.
As indeed are all Governments, although the mixture of hopes does not
always produce exactly the government many expect.
Dang! This is a bad day, I agree with Rich.
Post by Rich80105
A recent announcment gives a clear objective and measurement for the
government sector to achieve carbon neutrality.
No, it said what the Government was going to do as the CLIMATE EMERGENCY has
been declared. The exemptions where by far the majority in this statement.




Poverty measurements
Post by Rich80105
are complex as by their nature they are relative rather than absolute
- while significant rises in benefits and in pay rates for some low
wage occupations will help, they have been offset to an unknown extent
by increases in rents - in part because returning New Zealanders have
had an effect,
But most owing to the supply/demand ratio for houses. Double the number of
houses over night and house prices would certainly cool, renters would have
a choice so the not fit for purpose houses will stay empty. Rents would
adjust to true market values.

This is one area that market forces will govern okay if house supply is free to
meet the demand.

Labours 100,000 houses in ten years is the correct way to go. However having
messed it up (failed) last time it is unlikely to get going again any time
soon.

I note that the idea of build a house to the size required is catching on.
One bedroom houses are in demand 60% and 2 bedroom 20% so there is the 80%
of the 80/20 rule.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/123598530/new-kainga-ora-complex-reflects-growing-demand-for-smaller-state-houses




but also because the rises in benefits meant that there
Post by Rich80105
was a capacity to pay, and rising property prices give an incentive to
owners to seek a return on those higher capital values. It is a
difficult area which does not appear to have clear solutions, from any
party in parliament.
James Christophers
2020-12-04 00:03:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 19:19:11 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Tue, 01 Dec 2020 21:51:31 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
As predicted when Labour proposed this initiative as policy prior to
the election.
Post by Tony
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
Correct, but they are delivering on a pre-election commitment. That
needs to be acknowledged even if there is no major deliverable from
it.
Post by Tony
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
Correct. With a caucus of 65 MPs, this term Labour need to focus
relentlessly on delivery on pre-election promises.
Post by Tony
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Fair comment, but personally I would give them longer to get started.
The next budget (May 2021) will be a key milestone to measure what
they have achieved to date, where they are heading and how well the
economy is being managed.
Do not try to advance a step at a time. Define your objectives clearly and move towards them in quantum leaps. ... Once the programme begins to be implemented, do not stop until you have completed it. The fire of opponents is much less accurate if they have to shoot at a rapidly moving target.
So in this case, how might this ultimately work out, do you suppose?
I don't care how Labour go about delivery - defining objectives and
delivering is the key.
Which gest us no further whic is why I ask: as per Roger Douglas's dictum (above)? Or what?
Post by Crash
They have been elected on hope and faith.
Their own included, in terms of retaining power in 2023. As I've said before, current local and global conditions are now testing the best of mettle. We have a government walking on the thinnest of ice as it tries to balance an impossible conundrum against near-undeliverable compromise. There can therefore be no radical eonomic shifts made during the remainder of this cycle and the impverishment and disfranchising of the worse-off caused by the consequent increasing wealth-extraction will continue. But public patience and indulgence will become exhausted. So come 2023, when it comes to favouring or rejecting "the devil you know", it's germane to ask, how might the National party - or any other party for that matter - do any better?
Post by Crash
As for the trivial matter of funding - from where and by whom? Increased real per-capita productivity perhaps?
This is the key. The only logical, commonsense key. And no one is talking about it let alone implementing it; or if they are, then is it is to little if any effect.

But as ever, "Tomorrow never dies".
Gordon
2020-12-04 06:20:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 19:19:11 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
[snip]
Post by Crash
Post by James Christophers
Do not try to advance a step at a time. Define your objectives clearly and move towards them in quantum leaps. ... Once the programme begins to be implemented, do not stop until you have completed it. The fire ofopponents is much less accurate if they have to shoot at a rapidly moving target.
So in this case, how might this ultimately work out, do you suppose?
I don't care how Labour go about delivery - defining objectives and
delivering is the key. They have been elected on hope and faith.
Of course, there is nothing else on offer at election time. We can not see
into the future.

All Governments will fail to deliver all of their election promises. So we
have to have faith, hope, that they will get as many done as possible.
John Bowes
2020-12-02 04:59:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
Virtue signalling BULLSHIT! All they're any good at!
To govern they need a leader and no matter what Harvard thinks Labour is lacking in anyone with leadership skills Or any skills for that matter! btw I don't consider blaming others for their own failings is a skill!
Gordon
2020-12-02 06:50:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are enough
people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their policies.
When will they address child poverty and housing not to mention the other
pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017 election, to
deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time they will actually govern
and not fail dismally.
We all must remember that the Labour Government has declared a CLIMATE
EMERGENCY. So that will take all their efforts until it is over.

I read somewhere that Jacida does not like to spend her political capital. I
guess that goes for any politican. However, you can not please all of the
people all of the time so a Government needs to do what it thinks needs to
be done and if it gets kicked to the kerb in the next election it will have
done what it thought needed doing. History will be the judge.

There is also the isssue of Labour and National being laminate. Look at one
side and you see something different from the other but the middle is the
same. No gap separates them.

So the option is one of tweaking small things. Then the other side has a go.
George
2020-12-02 19:13:33 UTC
Permalink
On 2 Dec 2020 06:50:50 GMT
Post by Gordon
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are
enough people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their
policies. When will they address child poverty and housing not to
mention the other pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017
election, to deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time
they will actually govern and not fail dismally.
We all must remember that the Labour Government has declared a CLIMATE
EMERGENCY. So that will take all their efforts until it is over.
Mainly they will have to invent situations. Pull in 'experts' who
no-one has heard of before or after.
Meanwhile harbor tide gages will continue to show very small increments
if any at all.
Post by Gordon
I read somewhere that Jacida does not like to spend her political
capital. I guess that goes for any politican. However, you can not
please all of the people all of the time so a Government needs to do
what it thinks needs to be done and if it gets kicked to the kerb in
the next election it will have done what it thought needed doing.
History will be the judge.
There is also the isssue of Labour and National being laminate. Look
at one side and you see something different from the other but the
middle is the same. No gap separates them.
So the option is one of tweaking small things. Then the other side has a go.
And they take their facts from the same set of Public Servants
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Tony
2020-12-03 00:46:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by George
On 2 Dec 2020 06:50:50 GMT
Post by Gordon
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are
enough people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their
policies. When will they address child poverty and housing not to
mention the other pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017
election, to deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time
they will actually govern and not fail dismally.
We all must remember that the Labour Government has declared a CLIMATE
EMERGENCY.
A purely political framework. What is need is policy and there is none yet,
hopefully that will change.
The other thing that is vital is to stop arguing that climate change is mainly
man made - that is not proven, it is an assumption made by people who hope to
profit from it.
Post by George
So that will take all their efforts until it is over.
Mainly they will have to invent situations. Pull in 'experts' who
no-one has heard of before or after.
Meanwhile harbor tide gages will continue to show very small increments
if any at all.
Post by Gordon
I read somewhere that Jacida does not like to spend her political
capital. I guess that goes for any politican. However, you can not
please all of the people all of the time so a Government needs to do
what it thinks needs to be done and if it gets kicked to the kerb in
the next election it will have done what it thought needed doing.
History will be the judge.
There is also the isssue of Labour and National being laminate. Look
at one side and you see something different from the other but the
middle is the same. No gap separates them.
So the option is one of tweaking small things. Then the other side has a go.
And they take their facts from the same set of Public Servants
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Rich80105
2020-12-03 01:44:39 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 02 Dec 2020 18:46:55 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by George
On 2 Dec 2020 06:50:50 GMT
Post by Gordon
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are
enough people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their
policies. When will they address child poverty and housing not to
mention the other pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017
election, to deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time
they will actually govern and not fail dismally.
We all must remember that the Labour Government has declared a CLIMATE
EMERGENCY.
A purely political framework. What is need is policy and there is none yet,
hopefully that will change.
Perhaps your opinion did not allow you to read the whole statement -
included in the declaration agreed by Parliament was "show leadership
and demonstrate what is possible to other sectors of the New Zealand
economy by reducing the Government’s own emissions and becoming a
carbon-neutral Government by 2025."
Post by Tony
The other thing that is vital is to stop arguing that climate change is mainly
man made - that is not proven, it is an assumption made by people who hope to
profit from it.
Post by George
So that will take all their efforts until it is over.
Mainly they will have to invent situations. Pull in 'experts' who
no-one has heard of before or after.
Meanwhile harbor tide gages will continue to show very small increments
if any at all.
Post by Gordon
I read somewhere that Jacida does not like to spend her political
capital. I guess that goes for any politican. However, you can not
please all of the people all of the time so a Government needs to do
what it thinks needs to be done and if it gets kicked to the kerb in
the next election it will have done what it thought needed doing.
History will be the judge.
There is also the isssue of Labour and National being laminate. Look
at one side and you see something different from the other but the
middle is the same. No gap separates them.
So the option is one of tweaking small things. Then the other side has a go.
And they take their facts from the same set of Public Servants
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Tony
2020-12-03 02:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Wed, 02 Dec 2020 18:46:55 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by George
On 2 Dec 2020 06:50:50 GMT
Post by Gordon
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are
enough people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their
policies. When will they address child poverty and housing not to
mention the other pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017
election, to deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time
they will actually govern and not fail dismally.
We all must remember that the Labour Government has declared a CLIMATE
EMERGENCY.
A purely political framework. What is need is policy and there is none yet,
hopefully that will change.
Perhaps your opinion did not allow you to read the whole statement -
included in the declaration agreed by Parliament was "show leadership
and demonstrate what is possible to other sectors of the New Zealand
economy by reducing the Government’s own emissions and becoming a
carbon-neutral Government by 2025."
Perhaps you believe that is policy, well it is not because there are no
measurements and until there are it is merely a wish.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
The other thing that is vital is to stop arguing that climate change is mainly
man made - that is not proven, it is an assumption made by people who hope to
profit from it.
Post by George
So that will take all their efforts until it is over.
Mainly they will have to invent situations. Pull in 'experts' who
no-one has heard of before or after.
Meanwhile harbor tide gages will continue to show very small increments
if any at all.
Post by Gordon
I read somewhere that Jacida does not like to spend her political
capital. I guess that goes for any politican. However, you can not
please all of the people all of the time so a Government needs to do
what it thinks needs to be done and if it gets kicked to the kerb in
the next election it will have done what it thought needed doing.
History will be the judge.
There is also the isssue of Labour and National being laminate. Look
at one side and you see something different from the other but the
middle is the same. No gap separates them.
So the option is one of tweaking small things. Then the other side has a go.
And they take their facts from the same set of Public Servants
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
John Bowes
2020-12-03 05:50:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Wed, 02 Dec 2020 18:46:55 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by George
On 2 Dec 2020 06:50:50 GMT
Post by Gordon
Post by Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300173110/labours-big-new-tax-makes-02-percentage-point-dent-in-inequality
Yes, five eighths of bugger all difference.
Just political nonsense. Labour should be delighted that there are
enough people in this country that swallow the shallowness of their
policies. When will they address child poverty and housing not to
mention the other pressing issues?
I will give them a few months, just as I did after the 2017
election, to deliver some of their promises. Hopefully this time
they will actually govern and not fail dismally.
We all must remember that the Labour Government has declared a CLIMATE
EMERGENCY.
A purely political framework. What is need is policy and there is none yet,
hopefully that will change.
Perhaps your opinion did not allow you to read the whole statement -
included in the declaration agreed by Parliament was "show leadership
and demonstrate what is possible to other sectors of the New Zealand
economy by reducing the Government’s own emissions and becoming a
carbon-neutral Government by 2025."
Problem is parliament doesn't have leadership Rich: just a virtue signaling liar and a party that failed ALL it's main policy's last term!
Loading...