Discussion:
Feeding the Chooks
(too old to reply)
Rich80105
2020-11-22 00:53:44 UTC
Permalink
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
not totally gone. The following is carefully staged as satire:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.

On the same theme, see:

https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
and a response:
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/

The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
Crash
2020-11-22 02:28:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.

Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?


--
Crash McBash
Gordon
2020-11-22 02:49:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
And in doing so gave a more balanced, and represensitive Parliament.
Post by Crash
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
However, how much attention is gets from others does require attention.
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
The point is that during these elections, there was considerable talk if any
one party could get more than 50% of the seats. The overall view was it it
was most unlikely, close to impossible.

So a) Labour did get more than 50% of the votes and b) across the ocean the
folks of the US of A have a President who has yet to concede their election.
His twittering ad nasuam about a rigged election, or a stolen one has added
fuel to the How did they do it? thought.

There is one thing a democracy needs and that is robust election process
which all people can trust. Without this there is no democracy, just in
fighting.
Post by Crash
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-11-22 08:55:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
John Bowes
2020-11-23 00:12:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
Chook80106 has spoken! It must be true. Pity the chook is renown for being a liar and invariably as full of shit as a used treasure :)
Rich80105
2020-11-23 01:07:42 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 16:12:52 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
Chook80106 has spoken! It must be true. Pity the chook is renown for being a liar and invariably as full of shit as a used treasure :)
Give up your childish abuse, John Bowes. Your posts to this usenet
group are far too often a disgrace.
John Bowes
2020-11-23 04:49:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 16:12:52 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
Chook80106 has spoken! It must be true. Pity the chook is renown for being a liar and invariably as full of shit as a used treasure :)
Give up your childish abuse, John Bowes. Your posts to this usenet
group are far too often a disgrace.
Speak for yourself Rich! You refuse to debate, I refuse to stop pointing out the truth about you Rich. You call it abuse, I call it an accurate summation of your behaviour and belief (shared by your glorious misleader Ardern) in a failed political ethos!
Crash
2020-11-23 01:07:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.

Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?


--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
2020-11-23 01:20:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
I think John Key summarised the reasons for that quite well.
James Christophers
2020-11-23 05:41:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.

But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.

If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
Post by Crash
--
Crash McBash
Crash
2020-11-23 07:14:50 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves. Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.

Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.


--
Crash McBash
James Christophers
2020-11-24 00:32:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?

John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Crash
2020-11-24 08:41:05 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
Post by James Christophers
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?. John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly. I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most. I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering. What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)? For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?

What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.

When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.


--
Crash McBash
James Christophers
2020-11-24 22:54:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earnersuckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing little a level-headed finance minister obliged to keep rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.

You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.

[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
James Christophers
2020-11-25 01:13:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to keep rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
History and its inevitable consequences don't just switch off like a light when a party leader hightails it out of office to sugar off to more profitable prospects. It has been said that as PM John Key bequeathed no meaningful legacy to his country. In fact, he most certainly did, and the current government are having to wrestle meaningfully with the damage his 'legacy' has wrought, while his own party has imploded in strife and disaffection for precisely the same reasons.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
Again, refer to my immediately preceding para.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
Crash
2020-11-26 07:24:13 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:13:37 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to keep
rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
John Key's career depended not on creating real value, but by trading
to transfer risk from one party to another to the benfit of clients
and himself; he inherited some preliminary actions re SFC which he
amplified to enable some to escape major losses or even gain at the
expense of government. The sale of state assets at less than real
value was another sleight of hand that left the national poorer; his
actions regarding competition led to record profits for banks - for
which he is still being rewarded . . . The net effect of the Key
years was a weaker economy, a less efficient 'crony capitalism'
economy, emerging problems with inequality and poverty, a reliance on
cheap imported labour, too high youth unemployment, a refusal to
acknowledge signficant housing problems, clear underinvestment in
health, social welfare, schools, building regulation, a false mantra
that tax rates were still too high . . . and of course Dirty Tricks
and blatant dishonesty by the likes of Judith 'totem pole' Collins in
her pursuit of self-interest.
We think of the disasters of Muldoon, Roger Douglas and Ruth
Richardson - no previous government has destroyed as much of New
Zealand's future well-being as the Key government.
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.

The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement. Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.

Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
History and its inevitable consequences don't just switch off like a light when a party leader hightails it out of office to sugar off to more profitable prospects. It has been said that as PM John Key bequeathed no meaningful legacy to his country. In fact, he most certainly did, and the current government are having to wrestle meaningfully with the damage his 'legacy' has wrought, while his own party has imploded in strife and disaffection for precisely the same reasons.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
Again, refer to my immediately preceding para.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
--
Crash McBash
James Christophers
2020-11-26 23:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:13:37 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to keep
rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
John Key's career depended not on creating real value, but by trading
to transfer risk from one party to another to the benfit of clients
and himself; he inherited some preliminary actions re SFC which he
amplified to enable some to escape major losses or even gain at the
expense of government. The sale of state assets at less than real
value was another sleight of hand that left the national poorer; his
actions regarding competition led to record profits for banks - for
which he is still being rewarded . . . The net effect of the Key
years was a weaker economy, a less efficient 'crony capitalism'
economy, emerging problems with inequality and poverty, a reliance on
cheap imported labour, too high youth unemployment, a refusal to
acknowledge signficant housing problems, clear underinvestment in
health, social welfare, schools, building regulation, a false mantra
that tax rates were still too high . . . and of course Dirty Tricks
and blatant dishonesty by the likes of Judith 'totem pole' Collins in
her pursuit of self-interest.
We think of the disasters of Muldoon, Roger Douglas and Ruth
Richardson - no previous government has destroyed as much of New
Zealand's future well-being as the Key government.
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement. Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
Equally, it could be said that Labour had spent too long failing to outdo Key - not National per se - in the popularity stakes. Worth bearing in mind, though, that popularity based on sleight-of-hand false prophecy and blatant patronage for the already supremely well-off is both the habit and the corruption that lies behind every charismatic Mr Nice Guy dictatorship.

National's core problem had lain dormant for many, many years; namely, while it has always had an air of off-hand complacency about it, more recently its fortunes rested virtually exclusively on the calculatedly low-rent larrikin behaviour of one individual - its top smell. The moment he sugared off, the party's rank shallowness, the vacuum, was immediately made plain for all to see. There was no credible succession to be had. None whatever. This, I will always maintain, is **solely** John Key's fault, his most wanton lacuna of all. If ever there were a case of "self before party", then Key is its exemplar. And it is for that, and his slavish pandering to his own constituency - the already plenty-rich-enough - at the expense of the low-waged majority, that National as an entity is finally exposed for its intellectual vacancy in those areas of governance that matter most. Collins has only further confirmed and consolidated it, and still continues to do so - to her own and her party's continuing cost, she being a classic example of those who make themseleves hostage to their own shallow thinking and hubris.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
History and its inevitable consequences don't just switch off like a light when a party leader hightails it out of office to sugar off to more profitable prospects. It has been said that as PM John Key bequeathed no meaningful legacy to his country. In fact, he most certainly did, and the current government are having to wrestle meaningfully with the damage his 'legacy' has wrought, while his own party has imploded in strife and disaffection for precisely the same reasons.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
Again, refer to my immediately preceding para.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
--
Crash McBash
Nellie the Elephant
2020-11-27 01:53:29 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:21:00 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:13:37 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to
keep
Post by James Christophers
Post by Crash
rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
John Key's career depended not on creating real value, but by trading
to transfer risk from one party to another to the benfit of clients
and himself; he inherited some preliminary actions re SFC which he
amplified to enable some to escape major losses or even gain at the
expense of government. The sale of state assets at less than real
value was another sleight of hand that left the national poorer; his
actions regarding competition led to record profits for banks - for
which he is still being rewarded . . . The net effect of the Key
years was a weaker economy, a less efficient 'crony capitalism'
economy, emerging problems with inequality and poverty, a reliance on
cheap imported labour, too high youth unemployment, a refusal to
acknowledge signficant housing problems, clear underinvestment in
health, social welfare, schools, building regulation, a false mantra
that tax rates were still too high . . . and of course Dirty Tricks
and blatant dishonesty by the likes of Judith 'totem pole' Collins in
her pursuit of self-interest.
We think of the disasters of Muldoon, Roger Douglas and Ruth
Richardson - no previous government has destroyed as much of New
Zealand's future well-being as the Key government.
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement. Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
Equally, it could be said that Labour had spent too long failing to outdo Key - not National per se - in the popularity stakes. Worth bearing in mind, though, that popularity based on sleight-of-hand false prophecy and blatant patronage for the already supremely well-off is both the habit and the corruption that lies behind every charismatic Mr Nice Guy dictatorship.
National's core problem had lain dormant for many, many years; namely, while it has always had an air of off-hand complacency about it, more recently its fortunes rested virtually exclusively on the calculatedly low-rent larrikin behaviour of one individual - its top smell. The moment he sugared off, the party's rank shallowness, the vacuum, was immediately made plain for all to see. There was no credible succession to be had. None whatever. This, I will always maintain, is **solely** John Key's fault
And there we have it folks.
" This, I will always maintain"
Straight from the horses mouth and no room for discussion, debate,
difference of opinion or, god help us, dissent.
A pointless post from a person who is convinced of his own
superiority.
All others are inferior and therefore, by definition, --- just
wrong.


, his most wanton lacuna of all. If ever there were a case of "self
before party", then Key is its exemplar. And it is for that, and his
slavish pandering to his own constituency - the already
plenty-rich-enough - at the expense of the low-waged majority, that
National as an entity is finally exposed for its intellectual vacancy
in those areas of governance that matter most. Collins has only
further confirmed and consolidated it, and still continues to do so -
to her own and her
Post by James Christophers
party's continuing cost, she being a classic example of those who make themseleves hostage to their own shallow thinking and hubris.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
History and its inevitable consequences don't just switch off like a light when a party leader hightails it out of office to sugar off to more profitable prospects. It has been said that as PM John Key bequeathed no meaningful legacy to his country. In fact, he most certainly did, and the current government are having to wrestle meaningfully with the damage his 'legacy' has wrought, while his own party has imploded in strife and disaffection for precisely the same reasons.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
Again, refer to my immediately preceding para.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
--
Crash McBash
John Bowes
2020-11-27 04:53:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nellie the Elephant
On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 15:21:00 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:13:37 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to
keep
Post by Crash
rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
John Key's career depended not on creating real value, but by trading
to transfer risk from one party to another to the benfit of clients
and himself; he inherited some preliminary actions re SFC which he
amplified to enable some to escape major losses or even gain at the
expense of government. The sale of state assets at less than real
value was another sleight of hand that left the national poorer; his
actions regarding competition led to record profits for banks - for
which he is still being rewarded . . . The net effect of the Key
years was a weaker economy, a less efficient 'crony capitalism'
economy, emerging problems with inequality and poverty, a reliance on
cheap imported labour, too high youth unemployment, a refusal to
acknowledge signficant housing problems, clear underinvestment in
health, social welfare, schools, building regulation, a false mantra
that tax rates were still too high . . . and of course Dirty Tricks
and blatant dishonesty by the likes of Judith 'totem pole' Collins in
her pursuit of self-interest.
We think of the disasters of Muldoon, Roger Douglas and Ruth
Richardson - no previous government has destroyed as much of New
Zealand's future well-being as the Key government.
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement. Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
Equally, it could be said that Labour had spent too long failing to outdo Key - not National per se - in the popularity stakes. Worth bearing in mind, though, that popularity based on sleight-of-hand false prophecy and blatant patronage for the already supremely well-off is both the habit and the corruption that lies behind every charismatic Mr Nice Guy dictatorship.
National's core problem had lain dormant for many, many years; namely, while it has always had an air of off-hand complacency about it, more recently its fortunes rested virtually exclusively on the calculatedly low-rent larrikin behaviour of one individual - its top smell. The moment he sugared off, the party's rank shallowness, the vacuum, was immediately made plain for all to see. There was no credible succession to be had. None whatever. This, I will always maintain, is **solely** John Key's fault
And there we have it folks.
" This, I will always maintain"
Straight from the horses mouth and no room for discussion, debate,
difference of opinion or, god help us, dissent.
A pointless post from a person who is convinced of his own
superiority.
All others are inferior and therefore, by definition, --- just
wrong.
, his most wanton lacuna of all. If ever there were a case of "self
before party", then Key is its exemplar. And it is for that, and his
slavish pandering to his own constituency - the already
plenty-rich-enough - at the expense of the low-waged majority, that
National as an entity is finally exposed for its intellectual vacancy
in those areas of governance that matter most. Collins has only
further confirmed and consolidated it, and still continues to do so -
to her own and her
party's continuing cost, she being a classic example of those who make themseleves hostage to their own shallow thinking and hubris.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
History and its inevitable consequences don't just switch off like a light when a party leader hightails it out of office to sugar off to more profitable prospects. It has been said that as PM John Key bequeathed no meaningful legacy to his country. In fact, he most certainly did, and the current government are having to wrestle meaningfully with the damage his 'legacy' has wrought, while his own party has imploded in strife and disaffection for precisely the same reasons.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
Again, refer to my immediately preceding para.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
--
Crash McBash
Don't you mean ANOTHER pointless and self serving post from a career loser?
Gordon
2020-11-27 03:46:45 UTC
Permalink
On 2020-11-26, Crash <***@dontbother.invalid> wrote:

{Huge snip }
Post by Crash
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement. Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
Let us not foget that it was the Lange/Douglas Government which took a sharp
turn to largely where we are to-day.

I do think Rich that you need to stop thinking about past Governments as if
they were still in the present. Let them go into history.
James Christophers
2020-11-27 04:57:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gordon
{Huge snip }
Post by Crash
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement. Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
Let us not foget that it was the Lange/Douglas Government which took a sharp
turn to largely where we are to-day.
I do think Rich that you need to stop thinking about past Governments as if
they were still in the present. Let them go into history.
Sorry, Gordon, but cliché or no, it is the past that shapes both our present and our future.

Lange's/Douglas's term of office slavishly aped the policies of the collusive Thatcher/Reagan hiatus where the brand new seductive "neo-con" "trickle-down" thinking of Hayek and his "perfect knowledge" cadre held sway throughout the western economies. During this same period, Thatcher sold the UK out to de-regulated banking and transnational finance and its intrinsic predatory thinking and destroying the UK's industrial and manufacturing base; while Reagan with his own hands-off bank-deregulation and tax-cuts policies drove the US into a debt spiral from which it has never recovered. The upshot is that China now holds the world total hostage in the supply of essential manufactured goods without which the world would come to a grinding halt PDQ. If you would argue otherwise, simply dump everything in your household onto your front lawn and see how that works out! If your house is recently built, this also includes the nails holding the frame and the floorboards together plus the clangy steel roof that stirs you from your nightly slumbers to tell you it's raining out there.

Those Chinese tentacles will never cease searching out every oportunity and weakness of western economies for continued dominance. In economic terms, at least, that's the difference between an economy in the hands of highly educated technocrats in government and what we have.

Ozymandias.
Rich80105
2020-11-27 10:05:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Crash
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:13:37 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to keep
rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
John Key's career depended not on creating real value, but by trading
to transfer risk from one party to another to the benfit of clients
and himself; he inherited some preliminary actions re SFC which he
amplified to enable some to escape major losses or even gain at the
expense of government. The sale of state assets at less than real
value was another sleight of hand that left the national poorer; his
actions regarding competition led to record profits for banks - for
which he is still being rewarded . . . The net effect of the Key
years was a weaker economy, a less efficient 'crony capitalism'
economy, emerging problems with inequality and poverty, a reliance on
cheap imported labour, too high youth unemployment, a refusal to
acknowledge signficant housing problems, clear underinvestment in
health, social welfare, schools, building regulation, a false mantra
that tax rates were still too high . . . and of course Dirty Tricks
and blatant dishonesty by the likes of Judith 'totem pole' Collins in
her pursuit of self-interest.
We think of the disasters of Muldoon, Roger Douglas and Ruth
Richardson - no previous government has destroyed as much of New
Zealand's future well-being as the Key government.
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
Key was very very good at the long game - in effect it took three
years for more than a relatively small group to see what he was doing.
Being elected is only a partial endorsement - Trump was more clearly
defective than most but still got elected once, and came remarkeably
close in the recent election.
Post by Crash
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement.
New Zealand has always been a mixed public / private economy, with
more public enterprise due to the need for huge spending on roads,
rail, hospitals etc following high immigration in the early years.
Muldoon took things too far with personal domination - Holyoake had
run a largely consensus administration, with some balancing of ideas;
Muldoon forced his own view on most things which started going wrong
as he found himself out of his depth.
Post by Crash
Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Both were the significant drivers of the extremist policies that led
to high unemployed and stated the loss of an egalitarian society.
Post by Crash
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
They were not as bad overall as the Key era for New Zealand - Key
deliberately traded New Zealand into a poorer position longterm
through selloffs that were wasted on tax cuts for hte wealthy.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do
with all the failed promises Labour made in the 2017 election
(Kiwibuild, Auckland light rail to start with)?
See above.
Post by Crash
For that matter, what
did Winston Peters and NZF have to do with it?
He only put Labour in the driving seat! How trivial is that, eh?
Post by Crash
What did John Key have to do with the pandemic and National's utter
failure in the 2020 election? The answer is nothing, John Key was
already a footnote in our history.
Answered above.
History and its inevitable consequences don't just switch off like a light when a party leader hightails it out of office to sugar off to more profitable prospects. It has been said that as PM John Key bequeathed no meaningful legacy to his country. In fact, he most certainly did, and the current government are having to wrestle meaningfully with the damage his 'legacy' has wrought, while his own party has imploded in strife and disaffection for precisely the same reasons.
Post by Crash
When you speak of the current Labour government, all references to
John Key are irrelevant unless you also reference past Labour leaders
such as Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little and perhaps Clark.
Again, refer to my immediately preceding para.
All have had their faults - those who follow, likewise no matter their political stripe. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune brought both by a rapidly changing world and implacable natural forces test the best of mettle. As such, then, I view Ardern as having so far shaped up pretty well to what has been demanded of her and her team, the quid pro quo being the immutable if perhaps inane Mick Jagger dictum.
John Bowes
2020-11-27 19:51:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:13:37 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 16:32:26 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 21:41:34 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
David Farrar has toned things down a bit in recent times - "fomenting
happy mischief" is no longer proudly featured on his blog, but the
primary purpose of giving the extremists something to froth about is
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2020/11/statistical_anomalies_in_the_2020_new_zealand_election.html
but still manages to cater for the fringe dwellers.
DPF says in his point 1 that "MMP was designed to stop any party
getting a majority". This is patently not the case and he will not
ever be able to cite any documentation to support this contention. MMP
was designed to ensure that political parties that could garner over
5% of the party vote were represented by MPs in Parliament.
Any article with an outrageously incorrect statement like this does
not warrant any further attention.
See the comments below the article from PhilBest and Ed Snack and
muppeth8r . . .
Farrar is very clever - his article (it has his name at the top
anyway), is designed so the chooks with a brain know it is a spoof;
the headless chooks see it as proof that 'we wuz robbed', that Trump
right; that NZ is the same as the USA, etc., etc. A win both ways
for the target audience. I am surprised he didn't put in a sop to
those that believe the party with the most votes has the right to
govern . . .
DPF was simply drawing a long bow - pointing out statistics that might
be considered as evidence of suspect results that might warrant
forensic investigation.
Absent of any hard evidence, it is a puff piece of little value.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Crash
Post by Rich80105
https://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2020/10/nz-general-election-2020-was-it-rigged.html
https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2020/11/21/ken-cant-count-no-the-new-zealand-election-wasnt-rigged/
The days of dirty tricks are largely, but not completely gone.
The theory that the 2020 election results must be rigged because no
single party has ever received such high percentage of party votes as
Labour did is nothing more than a theory unless proven correct.
National received over 47% support in two elections (2011 and 2014) so
why does a mere 3% more warrant suspicion this time around?
An unusually high level of National voters appear to have moved to
ACT; I suspect National was seen as putting their own interests ahead
of the good of the country.
An even more unusually high level of National voters appear to have
moved to Labour. Who would have thought that possible?
Dismay, disgust and disillusion together with motivation and opportunity are all it takes. 'Nuff said.
But never forget that the origins of National''s present-day woes lie not with the current leader and those immediately preceding her, but solely with John Key and no one else.
If anyone needs to ask why or how, then they simply haven't been paying attention since November 2008. Dupes all.
While you may denigrate National under John Key, the results speak for
themselves.
My post doesn't denigrate National per se; rather, I view the outcomes of John Key's behaviour during his entire 8-plus years' incumbency has having been the prime factor in National's recent trouncing at the ballot box. Top of the list you may place his total neglect of the critical need to address the handling and organising of a down-the-track leadership succession, crucial to the continuance of any effective, stable party and its policies. The sorry fact is, what he left behind him has been the rag-tag tragi-comedy of an unstable, ineffectual bugger's muddle of an Opposition bereft of any leadership or sense of direction; passengers on a boat slowly sinking like a sieve, courtesy of its own bilge-drilling disaffected. How could such an unforgivable lacuna possibly have happened, some might rightly ask?
That explains the 2017 result. This is 2020.
2017 was just another marker on the chart of New Zealand's slippery slide towards today's dominance of the zero-productivity asset/rentier class. It was already well out of control way before 2017 (John Key made sure of that and that it would stay that way) and the condition is now chronic. Surprised? Really?
Post by Crash
John Key is the classic fly-by-night operator who focuses wholly and solely on his own personal advancement and enrichment. Under the guise of a corporate persona in ill-fitting pinstripes (his trousers never fit him right), he hides in plain sight as a discount retailer of greed and avarice to his own kind. Even now, I am astonished that prior to the 2008 election so few New Zealanders had the born wit, let alone the balls, to call out John Key for the blatantly transparent Arthur Daley he's always been and plainly still is. Thus New Zealand's time-worn electoral apathy and complacency. Suckers every one, and for every sucker there's an opportunist lying in wait. Even so, no-one on this group can truthfully deny I didn't warn more than once of what would transpire once such a consummate fly-boy huckster got his sticky fingers on the prize.
The 'Arthur Daley' character was a never-achieved career criminal
Key is New Zealand's latter-day 'Arfur Daley as achiever. But unlike you, cheap, vulgar, socially half-formed and unread, and never - as one writer tartly put it - troubled by erudition.
Post by Crash
always subservient to Terry (played by Denis Waterman) and "her
indoors"?.
Two words: Casino finance.
Post by Crash
John Key may not meet your approval but he was elected 3
times to Government, and 'Arfur'?
Around the world, 'Arfur and his kind continue to this very day, just like John Key, doing a nice little earner suckering the gullible punter, while 'er indoors (Casino finance) continues just as tastelessly crass, Rolexed and medallioned as ever.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Great political leadership is pointless unless it results
in electoral success and National under John Key achieved that in
spades, whereas Labour under Bill Rowling (for example) did not.
Again, I was not originally addressing electoral success per se. In any case, electoral success can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown. Under Key the economy inexorably stultified precisely in step with his accelerating and uncaring widening of New Zealand's already developing wealth gap. If anyone can identify a single John Key policy intended and designed specifically to redress the societal divide that was already at full throttle, then I'll be pleased to know of it. Until then, I continue to hold to the views I've expressed in my preceding para.
You continue to denigrate John Key and National in spite of their
electoral popularity. In 2008. 2011 and 2014 Key won, you lost, and
badly.
I did rather well during Key's incumbency and still do, not as an economically burdensome wealth extractor but by lending funds to the nation's infrastructure, simply because this way best serves my needs.
Post by Crash
I share your view of John Key as a shallow leader, but there
is no denying he was an achiever in what mattered most.
To Key and no one else.
Post by Crash
I share your
view that under Key, the National governments he led were not
innovative, but this does not detract from electoral success.
Just one more time, if I may: electoral success is not nearly enough since it can never be the sole guarantor of good, sound governance, as John Key's behaviour has shown.
Post by Crash
Post by Crash
Labour under Jacinda Ardern have achieved even greater electoral
success.
It remains to be seen how that success works out over time. She's got her work cut out, and then some, too much of it being down to the economic and societal damage Key cynically heaped on this country without a single thought for its inevitable consequences. Because, for Key and his cronies, it's has been and will always be, "Pull up the ladder, Jack, I'm alright". And the leopard - hunter and destroyer-without-conscience of the most disadvantaged and the vulnerable - doesn't change its spots.
Your right in that she has her work cut out, but the reasons for that
are nothing to do with John Key or National and everything to do with
her promises going into the 2017 election and the Government she lead
since then chronically under-delivering.
Like most, you know the current government now has little prospect of delivering as proposed what Ardern and her lot once so exuberantly, imprudently promised.[1] The reasons for this need no re-stating. However, consider the impossible conundrum of a rigorously independent Reserve Bank continuing to print and shovel the cheapest money ever into the pockets of the zero-productivity wealth-extraction/rentier sector while our productive sector - our indispensable lifeblood **earner** no less - is virtually on its knees to the unheeding retail-banks and the hard-nosed, fast-buck property investor. This is what our finance minister is up against as he tries somehow to support the mass of New Zealanders who, already over-committed as they struggle to fund the basics of life, can never seem to be able to keep up, let alone "get ahead". Covid-19 and the extreme severity of the response to it, mean that from now on you'll mostly be seeing a level-headed finance minister obliged to keep
rolling the boulder up the hill like some latter-day Sysiphus while Adrian Orr continues sweetly to further steepen the gradient to fulfil his mandate. Beyond madness.
You say John Key is shallow, and you're right. As an economic entity, New Zealand's economy under Key has suffered nine long years of his wilful intellectual indolence.[2] When it came to governing the countrye, John Key was the very embodiment of uncaring indolence personified. Could this character flaw have been writ even larger? I think not. But you'll have noted that there's never once been any evidence of any such an uncaring indolence in the conduct of his private finances and career advancement, cynicism, greed and self-interest being the very essence of his cold, shrivelled soul.
[1] The recent election landslide suggests that, in the light of Covid-19 and the inevitable severity of government policies to meet it, voters have largely been willing - for the time being at any rate - to 'forgive' such politically callow behaviour and the woeful lack of due diligence behind it.
[2] (Previously missing) To avert further unwelcome exposure coming down the line, Key, in cahoots with English and Treasury, swept the biggest financial failure in New Zealand's history - the SCF scandal - under the carpet by destroying $1.5 BILLION of taxpayer wealth. If you don't believe this, then read "The Billion Dollar Balloon" (Chris Lee), obtainable from bookstores and/or your local library.
John Key's career depended not on creating real value, but by trading
to transfer risk from one party to another to the benfit of clients
and himself; he inherited some preliminary actions re SFC which he
amplified to enable some to escape major losses or even gain at the
expense of government. The sale of state assets at less than real
value was another sleight of hand that left the national poorer; his
actions regarding competition led to record profits for banks - for
which he is still being rewarded . . . The net effect of the Key
years was a weaker economy, a less efficient 'crony capitalism'
economy, emerging problems with inequality and poverty, a reliance on
cheap imported labour, too high youth unemployment, a refusal to
acknowledge signficant housing problems, clear underinvestment in
health, social welfare, schools, building regulation, a false mantra
that tax rates were still too high . . . and of course Dirty Tricks
and blatant dishonesty by the likes of Judith 'totem pole' Collins in
her pursuit of self-interest.
We think of the disasters of Muldoon, Roger Douglas and Ruth
Richardson - no previous government has destroyed as much of New
Zealand's future well-being as the Key government.
Rich, your posts are as relentlessly free of the truth as they are
anti-National. John Key led National governments that were re-elected
in 2011 and 2014. If half of what you claim were true this would
never have happened.
Key was very very good at the long game - in effect it took three
years for more than a relatively small group to see what he was doing.
Being elected is only a partial endorsement - Trump was more clearly
defective than most but still got elected once, and came remarkeably
close in the recent election.
Post by Crash
The disaster that you define as Muldoon was in fact a continuation of
a closed economy presided over by every Labour and National government
prior to that time along with previous governments dating back to
European settlement.
New Zealand has always been a mixed public / private economy, with
more public enterprise due to the need for huge spending on roads,
rail, hospitals etc following high immigration in the early years.
Muldoon took things too far with personal domination - Holyoake had
run a largely consensus administration, with some balancing of ideas;
Muldoon forced his own view on most things which started going wrong
as he found himself out of his depth.
Post by Crash
Douglas and Richardson were never a PM but both
were part of governments subsequently re-elected.
Both were the significant drivers of the extremist policies that led
to high unemployed and stated the loss of an egalitarian society.
Post by Crash
Whatever your viewpoint now on any of these governments, the fact is
that at the time they were popular enough to be re-elected.
They were not as bad overall as the Key era for New Zealand - Key
deliberately traded New Zealand into a poorer position longterm
through selloffs that were wasted on tax cuts for hte wealthy.
Total crap as usual from Rich:)

Loading...