Posts by dc_red
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
- Every Kiwi should be entitled to a bach on the coast
Every kiwi should have an awesome view of the coast from said bach, uninterrupted by monstrous eyesores, of the sort owned by John Key.
Travel to said bach should be on smooth, wide highways, unencumbered by traffic or tolls, and fuelled by petrol/diesel completely exempt from duty, excise, and GST.
-
Doesn't that just boil down to "Should something good be illegal?"
Don't ask Jim Anderton. ;-)
It's sort like "have you stopped beating your wife?" in that it requires you do agree with the questioner's world view in order to make sense of the question
Well said. Hadn't quite thought of it in those terms.
I'd have thought "do you hate politicians" was as "mom and apple pie" as you can get.
Perhaps, but then why stop at 99 MPs? Why not 79? Or 29? Or 9? Or in fact none whatsoever?
-
keep it the same, change it to X.
Exactly. The 99 MPs ballot would be a good example?
No "mom and apple pie".
No ability to interpret a vote for change as something already satisfied by existing law (as could happen with this referendum).
No potential for internal inconsistency in the question. e.g., it is quite plausible to reject the very notion that a smack has any role in "good" or "normal" parenting whatsoever. A minority opinion, I realize, but nevertheless a plausible one.
-
Cheers Paul, but re: Yates and renewal, etc., I'm wary of adopting the media narrative of "Labour party timeservers" without turning my attention to:
a) the same phenomena on the National Party benches; and
b) the dubious legacy of National's "new broom".Clark has managed to keep a party once renowned for its fractiousness in very tight alignment due in part of loyalty to sitting MPs ... although it sure helped that the polar extremes of the party have long since buggered off to their natural homes elsewhere on the political spectrum.
-
Right, getting myself back on topic. No particular order:
1. Cullen fund
2. Interest free student loans
3. Working for Families
4. Cut in lowest tax rate
5. Rebuilding state housing program
6. Kiwi saver(Lifetime achievement award: Helen Clark).
Things I supported but weren't popular so probably best not mentioned:
1. Civil Unions Bill (actually pragmatic as the alternative was probably marriage, a la Canada, which would really have had the populist mob foaming at the mouth).
2. Legalization of prostitution
3. Support for s59 appeal - award shared with National partyThings I didn't support:
1. De facto appointment of Jim Anderton as drugs tzar (and associated prohibitions).
2. Cancellation of tax bracket adjustments."Going out in a blaze of glory" policy:
1. Socialize primary medicine. Go on Labour, you've been itching to do it for 70 years, and it would be awesome. -
Nick - you're more or less right. But one interesting thing about those responses, and the media's current political narrative more generally, is that it's NOT the neoliberal variety of conservatism National usually promotes.
It's actually populist, talkback-style conservatism (to my mind at least).
The party that has most promoted that stance for the last 15 years or so is NZ First. Yet they (and Labour) languish in the polls, while the unreconstituted neolibs in National, and the anti child-beating Greens, fly high.
-
An alternative challenge:
Name six specific things National have said they will do if they are in government.
Off the top of my head, I can think of two: a new prison, and more tax cuts of an undefined and uncosted nature.
I think I once heard John Key say he'd scrap the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) but only once ... that policy may or may not exist.
-
What annoys me is that people seem to have forgotten that National voted for the law change. Yet they will now be able to surf the wave of outrage against it? ARGH!
Absolutely they're riding a wave of public ignorance on this, egged on by ignorant fuckwits in the media who label it a Labour initiative.
It's been pure electoral poison for Labour, while the Greens (who initiated and drove the Bill), and National (all in favour on a whipped vote) are riding high.
Go figure. The message, apparently, is that in future Labour would be well-advised not to vote on principle, merely adopt the most populist position. Other parties can do as they please free from consequences.
-
The Law says you need 350,000 signatures on a CIR petition. If the petition says "John Key is a Knob and should have to wear a T-Shirt everyday that says 'I Am A Knob'" and they can get 350,000 signatures ....
Nevermind that Key would just wear the T-shirt under another shirt.
Something similar happened in Canada, when the far-right fundie Stockwell Day took over the official opposition, and promised lots of "direct democracy". There was a widely publicizied 'campaign' for a binding referendum to change his first name to "Doris".
Personally, I would make Key wear a "More hollow than the last guy" t shirt.
-
This occurred to me too. I actually know former problem drinkers and alcoholics who now content themselves with a social toke. By any reasonable measure, harm has been greatly reduced, but there's no way of modelling that here.
Use = Abuse! Use = Abuse! (Repeat as necessary until power of rationale thought subsides).