Wednesday, 16 September 2009

DOWN TO THE DOCTOR’S: Maori, Megatron and the Money-go-round

Libertarianz leader Dr Richard McGrath takes his regularly irreverent look at some of the past week’s headlines.

1. Key Under Pressure On Tobacco Price Hike - The Maori Party, brown wing of the Nicotine National Socialists, want to hurt the people they purport to represent via another increase in taxes on cigarettes. They also want a select committee to “bring these bastards from the tobacco companies out in the open.” Never mind that until the 1970s these same “bastards” used to provide New Zealanders with jobs. Never mind that many people still enjoy a smoke without hurting anyone else.
    Tariana Turia needn’t worry – although the Sunday Star Times article I’ve linked to claims the Key administration has an aversion to moves that could be seen as “nanny state,” John-Boy’s government is steaming ahead with an Emission Trading Scam and a capital gains tax (profit is such a filthy word, John - stamp it out as fast as you can).
    Tariana is fuming however that tobacco companies dropped their prices (as a lot of businesses do in a time of recession), and wants to punish them for it. One of ASH’s Obergruppenfuhrers, Ben Youdan, admits upping taxes would be a “revenue-booster” for the government. Thank you for your honesty, Ben. That’s what sin taxes are all about – stopping people enjoying themselves while gouging consumers. ASH, the Maori Party and John-Boy are a bunch of fucking morons. Don’t they realise that if Joe Average can’t afford to buy cigarettes legally, he will grow his own, or (more likely) buy some from a private “black” market source (which, of course, is illegal). And who will supply this contraband tobacco? Why, the same lovely people that supply people of all ages with cannabis, methamphetamine and other illicit drugs. The gangs. That’s it!
    Tariana must be gunning for the gang vote in 2011.

2. One in Six Now Born Into Poverty – The NZ Council of Christian Social Services delivers some chilling statistics – 20,000 more children on the welfare rolls over the past year; waiting lists for food parcels; families disintegrating under financial stress. One in six children now born into “poverty.” Unemployment trebling in the past year.
    John-Boy has the power to reverse these alarming trends, liberate the poor from welfare addiction and help them into jobs. Do it now, John: abolish GST, a tax that unfairly hits the poor hardest; make the first $50,000 of income tax-free (that way you could scrap Welfare for Families, the Labour Party’s ploy to lead middle class people to the trough and invite them to drink their own blood until they beome addicted to it); and end minimum wage laws. In other words, economic deregulation – as per Libertarianz Party policies from the 2008 election. Feel free, John – steal our ideas, we don’t mind.
    Those children who are not yet sucked into the public welfare system’s vortex of despair and misery may one day thank you for it.

Hide01 3. Hide: The Minister For Constitutional Change – What a disappointment Rodney Hide has been since he and his party joined the government benches. Supercity – one noose for the people of Auckland. Instead of scaling down and strangling the powers of the existing Auckland local bodies, Rodney Hide creates a bigger and more dangerous monster - Megatron, which will crush any resistance from ratepayers as it chews up their money.
    For 2010, Rodney proposes a Taxpayer’s Rights Bill – tying government spending increases to the rate of inflation and population increases – presumably the two multiplied together. Not cutting taxes on people who own real estate, but guaranteeing to increase these taxes. A Taxpayer’s Rights Bill is akin to a Rape Victim’s Rights Bill that doesn’t prosecute the rapist, but promises him a bigger and better violation next time.
hood01     If this is the best ACT can do, they are doomed in 2011. Rodney, you are on a suicide mission. From the ACT website, among the first four ACT “plans” are cutting government waste, reducing taxes, limiting the scope of local government and reducing bureaucracy. How the hell do Megatron and the Tax-Rape Victims Rights Bill achieve the above?
    For the first time - and I never thought I would do this - I am publicly calling for Rodney Hide’s replacement as leader of ACT. It is disappointing to see Rodney abandon principles the Libertarianz Party have always espoused, but from which ACT have departed under their current leader.

4. Public money spent on shopping – shades of Tuku Morgan, but worse; chief parasite at the Hutt Valley Youth Health Trust (Vibe) spent $21,000 on clothes about which she initially lied, saying they were for clients to wear to job interviews. Not only that, but her staff paid their children $70 an hour as cleaners. Not only that, but large wads of taxpayer money were transferred electronically (i.e. stolen) and placed into accounts belonging to the said parasite and her friend. And not only that, but money already extorted from productive people by the IRD, then handed on to bureaucrats and finally to Vibe, was not returned to the IRD fast enough by Vibe, who failed to file a declaration (“tax return”) in order to allow the IRD to estimate how much pre-stolen money they should re-steal from Vibe. The result: penalties for filing late tax returns, so that even more pre-stolen money ended up being re-stolen.
    Oh well, I guess the IRD were going to get it all eventually, anyway. Meanwhile, the chief parasite and her co-parasites were meeting in cafes, attending gyms, showering each other with gifts and throwing parties, with the money that Bob Russell (IRD’s head bloodsucker) took from you and I because we were too successful. Chief parasite’s husband says she has been “punished enough”. Apparently, “she was just hung out to dry by the board,” poor darling. Am I the only one who thinks this conniving, thieving scumbag should be sacked immediately, her name and photo circulated to every private employer in the country, and be forced to pay back every cent she stole, plus interest?                                   

See y’all next week!
Doc McGrath


  1. "Welfare for Families, the Labour Party’s ploy to lead middle class people to the trough and invite them to drink their own blood until they beome addicted to it" NOT PC

    Nah, THAT'S the quote of the day!

  2. Oops, I should've attributed that to the Doc. Sorry, Doc!

  3. We'll overlook your misattribution just this once, CF, but next time I'll get Sue Bradford to smack you!

  4. Agreed, Fist. Very good line, that! :)

    "Am I the only one who thinks .."

    No, you're not. I was furious when I heard that news on Monday morning, but little has been made of it. Theft, it would seem, isn't a big deal.

  5. In the UK there is a salutatory lesson in the Economics of Prohibition. see:>.
    Taxing tobacco heavily is a form of prohibition, the health nazis tell us it is to discourage us from smoking but this is what happens when you rachet the taxes up so high that alternative means of obtaining products become lucrative.

  6. Robert Winefield16 Sep 2009, 10:48:00


    Rodney Hide is 'The Hood' villain from Thunderbirds! I knew it all along.

  7. Yeah! He's a puppet!


  8. He is a more contemporary version of the puppet - He is a MUPPET

  9. On the cigarettes thing:
    You said they will grow their own, or purchase them from the black market.

    Am I the only person that has noticed the epidemic of Service stations and Dairys being held up for money and cigarettes.

    I would love to know what the statistics are on this.

    Every time the govt put up the tax on cigarettes there is a big run on armed holdups of dairys and servos.

    And all the mindless ones blame it on cigarettes - hell, If I smoked I would much rather sit peacefully at home with a nice cup of tea and a ciggy rather than have to go and hold up the dairy first.

    When will the mindless ones finally understand who is to blame - and its not the smokers - its the bloody politicians.

    Exactly the same thing will happen when they do the same with CHOCOLATE.
    You dont want to be anywhere NEAR my nanna when she cant get chocolate - Shell be waiting outside the dairy with her zimmer frame and a shotgun

  10. Yes, sheer fanaticism removes the capacity to reason, doesn't it. Which is why the term "libertarian fanatics" is so absurd: how can one 'fanatically' apply reason? ;)

    Re the CGT: While Key did not rule it out completely, (ZB: Mon morn), he was adamant that he was not in favour, in that it did not curb the former excesses of other housing markets, eg Australian.

    "I'd take a lot of convincing" were his words. FWIW.

  11. Your nana is the one the Conchords sing about!

  12. ""I'd take a lot of convincing" were his words. FWIW."

    W? Nothing.

  13. To pick up on Sus's statement, I have this depressing notion that Key is pontificating on not putting a CGT in because the current Tax Workforce may be going to recommend a 'land value tax' - worse in my opinion, we'll pay local body rates, and central government rates, not just when you sell a second property, but annually, and possibly on all property. They've already got the capital rating in place, and a system for them, so easy to institute.

    And Key will be able to (think) he can hide behind a facade he did not bring in a capital gains tax.

    I'm just flying a kite, but there is some percentage chance on it.

  14. I anyone doesn't believe that strictly controling cigarettes will lead to trouble- visit a prison.

    They are currency.

    The interest rate on borrowing is 100%!

  15. I anyone doesn't believe that strictly controling cigarettes will lead to trouble- visit a prison.

    They are currency.

    The interest rate on borrowing is 100%!

  16. The CGT is being touted as a way of preventing investors purchasing property and then flicking it on for a profit in a short period of time. Or at least that it is how it is reported.
    However this is considered trading and is already a taxable activity (I think at the company tax rate?)

  17. PaulB: yes, you are right. But a complete ignorance of NZ's tax law, vis a vis this debate, is rife - especially amongst the economists.

  18. The Supercity was going ahead with or without Rodney involved.Better him there dioing what he can rather than nothing at all.

    As people keep saying "ACT only got 3.5% of the vote"....well then whos fault is it then that they can only do 3.5% good?

    Still beats Libz 0000.00000 etc % of sweet bugger all..

  19. Quoth the Raven16 Sep 2009, 17:41:00

    James - Shouldn't Act be opposing Stalinist like centralization? That's if they were liberal and not the conservatives they've shown themselves to be. The problem is that Rodney is involved and not putting himself in complete opposition to this. Although it is entirely expected where any got the idea that Act is "the liberal party", akin to what the libertarianz here acutally are, I don't know. As much at pains me to say it freedom hater Roger Dougals has had one of the best ideas on Auckland that is have community councils able to compete with each other allowing people to opt out of them and set up their own. All he failed to do was say there was no need for a central authority.

  20. "I am publicly calling for Rodney Hide’s replacement as leader of ACT."

    Go ahead. Scream your fucking head off Richard. Rodney might even give a milligram of a damn.

  21. "Scream your fucking head off .."

    More your sort of thing, that.

    You just can't seem to help yourself which is a pity, because when you forget to be obnoxious you can make a good point.

  22. Richard McGrath17 Sep 2009, 08:03:00

    RB - Rodney used to represent the libertarian wing of ACT. Since when has the centralisation of local body power been a core libertarian issue or policy?

    Why should Rodney sully himself through association with the SuperCity powergrab, rather than refusing to becoming complicit in it? Or throwing a spanner in the works at every opportunity?

    Can someone from ACT tell me just how the SuperCity Megatron represents 'smaller government'?

  23. "Can someone from ACT tell me just how the SuperCity Megatron represents 'smaller government'?"

    In lieu of a response from any ACT supporter- its plain to anyone not confused about the enemy, that anything done to reduce leftist political power will in the long term reduce the size and influence of government. Rodney is using a device called strategy. Its what you do in wars. Look it up.

  24. Just how exactly does a bigger more powerful council result in less leftist power? What if the lefties get voted in you idiot? Then they have all the power, like Labour did for the last nine years.

  25. " What if the lefties get voted in you idiot? "

    Auckland politics has been dominated by the left for at least three decades, and if fuckwits like you with your paper thin intellect were in Rodney's place, they'd run it for another five.

  26. So the guy who has just proved himself wrong does his usual and starts hypocritically saying someone else has paper thin intellect.

    Crawl back under your rock.

  27. Yep, time to go Rodbeater. You've failed again.

  28. Richard McGrath17 Sep 2009, 10:29:00

    RB - what is the use in replacing big government lefties with big government righties? You still end up with oppression.

  29. Same old Cresswell LGM et all bullshit. The way you win arguments is by declaring that the opponent has lost.

    The only dumbarses around who can compete and umpire at the same time and see nothing irrational in such behaviour.

    "You still end up with oppression."

    Sigh... utterly hopeless. That's what happens when you discuss politics with people who have perceptions gleaned from weetbix packets.

    BTW, after your public call, has Rodney resigned yet Dicky?? Maybe he's just paralysed in abject fear of your judgment, as it echoed in the hallowed halls of a party that scored 30 votes in Mt Eden.

    Thanks again for the laff fuckwits..

  30. How many did your party score no-mates? None? Is that because there isn't a Rabid Nutcase party on the ballot, or because all the other rabid nutcases vote Green?

  31. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  32. Why Peter Cresswell is in fact PC:

  33. No Rodbeater, you've not been banned because you have anything to say, but because make every thread on which you contribute about you.

    Now piss off.

  34. I make it about me???

    For fucks sake you're unbelievable.

    Why don't you do as you advocate and take some personal responsibility for your own and your acolyte's behaviour.

    Its you and yours who constantly fail to address the argument.

    I have faith in Rod Hide, and if he is backed in the struggle, he will provide a favourable outcome. The chance of dislodging the left is marginal anyway, but Rodney is the only damn chance around at the moment. If he is sniped away at by all and sundry he will most certainly lose and the left will win.

    That what you want?? (probably yes, I reckon all libertarians are closet fags and commies, especially with your constant obsession with misrepresenting the right)

    You want both the left and right (as you perceive them) to lose so that you can step into he void and then sit upon your thick pile of Ayn Rand manuscripts and pose and postulate.

    Pfft, what a shambolic laughable farce.

  35. Elijah Lineberry17 Sep 2009, 11:32:00

    'Rod Hide'..ha seem obsessed with Rods, Rod Beater.

    I do not think any Libertarianz are closet fags; nothing closeted about me!

  36. "I reckon all libertarians are closet fags and commies, .."

    which brings us right back to this time, last year. 'Shambolic, laughable farce' pretty much sums it up.

    Anybody else sick of this nonsense? Because gee whiz, I am.

  37. Yeah that's right Sus, this "libertarian" site is a place where the right can be slandered and misrepresented and denied a chance to fight back.

    You damn well started it. I've probably been attacked by almost as many so called Libertarians in my time on the net than leftists.

    Look at that worthless dogmatic crap in the last comment of Richard's. You support that infantile sermonising shit do you??

    You can dish it out but you squeal like the same old commie pigs if you get any back.

    You think all the protesters in the US are leftists who want more big government, who want to enslave the Richards over there?? Do you??

    Because that is what Richard is saying in his desperate little inward looking world where he wants so desperately to carve a niche for his fucked up political brand.

    You're a sanctimonious lot of small time narcissists who don't have half the bottle of Rodney Hide, and yet you carry on like your God's gift to NZ politics.

    "I publicly call for Rod Hide's replacement".. pfft.. what outrageous arrogance.

  38. "I've probably been attacked by almost as many so called Libertarians in my time on the net than leftists."

    That's because you're an arsehole, you talk shit, and everyone hates you.

  39. "Yeah that's right Sus, this "libertarian" site is a place where the right can be slandered and misrepresented and denied a chance to fight back."

    No, just you.

    That's your last -- and since you don't understand that you've been banned I'll be deleting you and your sock puppets from now on.

    And the rest of you: I know it's like shooting blowfish in a barrel, but please don't feed the troll.

  40. You know what, I can safely post stuff at Red Alert and the Standard, but here on the "Libertarians" I get censored.

    Just another Progressive website where the small minded owner is as usual drunk with the heady power of post deletion.

    You and I Mr. Cresswell both know the real reason you're always deleting posts, and that is because you can't handle the truth, or having your sanctimonious self image put under threat.

    Be honest for once. You want to sit here firing bullets at Conservatives and then you turn to water when you get a few fired back.


    Enjoy yourself in the company of such luminaries as TWR and Elijah. Sycophancy or dissent, it is of course your choice.

  41. Redbaiter is the strongest anti-LEFT commentator around in NZ blogs. Period.

    Whale used to be staunch, but even he is moderating himself in his new money-making venture. Redbaiter maintains the hate. You really get the feeling that while the Libs might want to convert Labour voters and Unionists, Redbaiter knows it is just quicker, easier, and more fun to shoot the lot of them. Or gas them. Doesn't really matter - gets the job done.

    But then, we know the Libz are really lefties. Case in point: abolish GST, a tax that unfairly hits the poor hardest; make the first $50,000 of income tax-free .

    The whole reason why GST is so great, and NZ's income tax is good is precisely because they tax the bludging poor!. First time I read this, I thought it was a misprint: the goal has to be to have a flat 10% tax on all income BELOW $50,000 and then zero tax thereafter!
    Even better would be a real flat tax: say 1000% on the first 5,000, and zero thereafter!

    But abolishing GST and income tax on the first 50K?
    These might be Libz ideas, but the Alliance or Greens had them first.

    Libs are just red lefties even Labour won't touch.

  42. "Redbaiter is the strongest anti-LEFT commentator around..."

    But the problem is, he's an anti-everything campaigner, which isn't very helpful. He's never once posted a rational, helpful message here, listing any practical steps he or anyone else could take to make the world a better place. All he does is bitch and moan and rant and start calling people aethists and fags whenever anyone disagrees with him. "Shooting the lot of them", while possibly satisfying for some, is neither moral nor legal nor practical.

    And as for the Libz being lefties, I think you'll find that they would prefer no taxes at all, but the removal of taxes for a large chunk of the population is at least somewhere to start.

  43. "Redbaiter is the strongest anti-LEFT commentator around in NZ blogs. Period."


  44. It's not censorship to eject visitors from one's home.

    Free speech doesn't require that one provide your opponents, trolls or thread-jackers with a microphone.

    "Redbaiter is the strongest anti-LEFT commentator around in NZ blogs."

    Great, then go and visit him on his own blog, so he can stop polluting this one.

    (Because another thread has just been hijacked by the juvenile attention seeker.)

  45. "But abolishing GST and income tax on the first 50K?
    These might be Libz ideas, but the Alliance or Greens had them first.

    No, in fact that's been Libz policy since day one -- following which they were picked up by the others. That's how good ideas work.

  46. "It's not censorship to eject visitors from one's home."

    Listen, I do not deny you the right to delete posts. Of course you are free to do so if you wish, but the argument you use to justify your actions is weak and so full of holes it is laughable.

    Nobody has used the phrase "free speech" but you Mr. Cresswell. You do not seem to understand that the only entity who is ever going to be a real threat to free speech is the government. I understand that. Others here appear to. Why don't you FFS??

    You're always going on like some whimpering whining child about free fucking speech and its not ever the damn issue. Why can't you get over that hump??

    The reality is that you provide a website here where you comment on things political and invite comments from the public. To counter or agree with your own views.

    How this equates to your "home", where you rest with your family, sheltered from all that is outside and in your own comfort zone, and where people have to at least knock to enter, I'm damned if I know.

    You comment here on politics, you attack Conservatives, and your real problem is you don't like it when they attack back in the open space you provide for public comment. That open and free spsce that is allways there for your foul mouthed sycophants (see twr 12:03). If you disagree with this analysis, then make access to your site by password only. Or maybe you could just cease misrepresenting Conservatives.

    Your home??? Pffft... What self serving disingenuous crap.

    "(Because another thread has just been hijacked by the juvenile attention seeker.)"

    That's a false allegation too. All my initial posts were well on topic. (look at them FFS.!!) If there is indeed any diversion, its down to you and your simple minded acolytes.

  47. "...foul mouthed..."

    "Scream your fucking head off..." 6:06pm

    "fuckwits like you " 9:23am

    "...LGM et all bullshit..."
    "The only dumbarses..."
    "...for the laff fuckwits.." 10:56am

    "For fucks sake..." 11:24am

    "dogmatic crap..."
    "infantile sermonising shit..."
    "his fucked up political brand" 11:48am

    It's almost like you don't realise what a massive hypocrite you are.

    (Sorry PC, I can't help it, he's just lying now.)

  48. "(Sorry PC, I can't help it, he's just lying now.)"

    (Yep, I know. He does that. It strikes me that rather than banning him altogether I should just offer him a weekly 'Rodbeater Post' where he can just fulminate to himself in the comments -- on the basis that he leave all the other threads unpolluted.)

  49. "He does that."

    Does what? That I might be foul mouthed occasionally myself in no way prevents me from identifying that attribute in others.

    I didn't respond to twr's comment because I thought it was the usual brainless superfluity. Then you Mr. Cresswell come along and endorse it. Jesuz. Its why most of the time I leave this place thinking to myself "what the fuck??????- these people actually claim reason as their credo??"

  50. (I know, I know .. but some itches just have to be scratched!) :)

    "Jesuz. Its why most of the time I leave this place thinking to myself "what the fuck??????"

    Oddly enough, Red, the feeling is mutual.

  51. Richard McGrath17 Sep 2009, 18:41:00

    RB - let's see if we can discuss this issue constructively. I used to be a fan of Rodney Hide; I've turned up to ACT meetings and was impressed by what he had to say. I've talked to him one on one at the ISIL Freedom Summit in Rotorua a few years back. I admire his intellect and tenacity. But what he's doing with the SuperCity does not advance the cause of small government.

    Libz will applaud the "left" if they say or do something which coincides with Libz policies; likewise the "right".

    The right has traditionally (but inconsistently) supported economic freedom (the gold standard, free trade, privatisation of welfare, etc.) while advocating socially repressive measures such as military conscription, censorship of erotica and the persecution of homosexuals and cannabis users. .

    Lefties, on the other hand, often suggest economic enslavement (high taxation, minimum wage laws, compulsory unionism, etc.) while supporting liberal social measures such as drug legalisation and sexual freedom for adults.

    Libz support moves to downsize the size and scope of government. How will the SuperCity lead to a downsizing of government? Will ratepayer charges drop and services be privatised? If so, I will be the first to applaud Rodney. But history has shown us that when Leviathan is allowed to grow, it does not shrink back of its own accord. And the SuperCity is looking as though it will be local government on steroids.

    I agree with your comments that local government in Auckland and other areas has been dominated by the left for years, and it would be great to see the back of some of these no-hopers. But it would be disappointing to see them replaced by something different yet equally gruesome.

    National and ACT campaigned at the last election about Helen Clark's micro-management of people's lives using light bulbs and shower heads as examples. Months after the election, the Key government was still promoting a website called that suggested what light bulbs we should buy. FFS!

    Now the Govt is taking money from you and I to insulate the houses of people who couldn't be bothered forking out themselves - news items suggesting that many people taking up the offer of insulation paid for with Other People's Money were not exactly what you'd call paupers. Now they are throwing more taxpayer money at people with brown skin, many of whom live in the winterless north, to complete the home insulation. People of European descent from the frozen climes of Otago need not apply, as this is a sop to the Maori Party in exchange for support on some sort of unrelated legislation. How does total subsidisation of home insulation encourage thrift and saving?

    The Nats are rapidly proving themselves the moral equal of Helen Clark. Just look at Bill English trying to explain the milking of taxpayers to subsidise his property speculation in Karori.

    We were hoping a change of government might usher in a breath of fresh air in the sense of moral integrity. Pardon the Libz if we seem somewhat disappointed in the events that have transpired since John Key took office.

  52. To the Libz,

    What can you expect Rodney Hyde to achieve in parliament, considering that his party is not needed by the National to pass any legislation?

    See, this is the scenario with the Libz. If Rodney, didn't agree with National to form a partnership, then what would one expects the Libz to do?

    Yep, roast Rodney/ACT alive for not achieving anything. Now they're in government as a minor coalition, and what the Libz expect Rodney/ACT to achieve? Well something, but that something is not what the Libz want. The Libz wants Rodney/ACT to achieve more like considering they're minority, that any sane person can clearly see that it is impossible.

    So, all you Libz moan if he is in government, moan if he is not in minor partnership with National and you will still moan if they're out of parliament?

    Rod/ACT cannot change a thing in government and it is a fact. What do you expect?

    That's right boys , keep moaning.

  53. I expect one simple thing from Rodney Hide: To not support policies that are increase the size of the state or are counter to ACT's policies.

    I can expect ACT to have a proportionately small influence on this government, ACT holds 7% of the seats of this coalition government so would be expected to be able to get a similar proportion of policies advanced.

    However, you would not enter into a coalition agreement without at least expecting policies to NOT run in the opposite direction to yours. Otherwise you would have a confidence and supply agreement and vote on a case by case basis on each Bill.

    Rodney stood firm on Maori seats in Auckland, he could have insisted the new mega city had powers similar to what existed before the LGA 2002, which National voted against. National's local government policy was virtually nothing anyway.

    You only enter into a coalition if you are both broadly heading in the same direction on the things that matter - the problem is John Key is being pulled two different ways on certain issues. Given the Nats don't need ACT, I would have thought ACT had more scope to say no when it was contrary to its policy, so the nation would know National passes legislation because of the Maori Party, not ACT. It would be better for ACT for it can say, if more National voters prefer the ACT policy, they should shift votes next time round.

    My feel is that this government has changed only a few things - the obsessive control freak drive that Clark has is gone, and there is a friendlier outlook towards the business sector, and more scepticism about the state sector.

    In other words, people voted for National to stop doing what Labour was doing, but there are only a few steps of turning the clock back, and the occasional moving forward on the same direction as before - subsidised insulation for Maori houses and a big local authority for Auckland are of the latter category.

  54. Richard McGrath17 Sep 2009, 21:41:00

    FFF - thanks for the comment. I hear what you are saying. I guess the obvious question is: what would a Libertarianz MP do in Rodney Hide's place.

    Well, firstly we would not have entered into any coalition agreement with National, or even agreed to support it on supply and demand. If the Nats wanted our support on any issue, they would have to convince us that whatever measures they were proposing introduced no new coercion and was a move toward greater individual freedom.

    Rodney has accepted a job to do John Key's work by pushing through a law which, in Rodney's words, will offer "decisive [centralised]leadership", "robust [council-owned] infrastructure" and "[council-owned] facilities and services of a world class city".

    I thought Rodney would have wanted a devolution and privatisation of council services; instead he wants greater powers for a behemoth SuperCouncil, and millions if not billions of dollars coerced from ratepayers as venture capital for pipe dreams such as sports grounds, party venues on the Auckland waterfront and goodness knows what else.

    A Libz MP would have questioned the morality of coercing this money from property owners in the first place, and aimed to reduce property taxes. A Libz MP would have refused on principle to be complicit in formulating a bill (now law) that diminishes freedom and the chances of the little person in battling a gargantuan bureaucracy. A bureaucracy that will continue to squash anyone in its path, as petty minded local body bureaucrats throughout NZ have always done.

    A Libz MP would be ashamed to be associated with any law that increased the power of the state at the expense of individual sovereignty. A Libz MP that helped to centralise power in the fashion of Rodney would be disowned by his party.

    In his determination to "be a part of government", to "make a difference", to grab for himself a ministerial title, Rodney Hide has lost sight of what he once stood for and why people voted for him.

    He will pay the price for his betrayal of principle in 2011.

  55. That post by 'Sinner' summed up what the problem is... 'red maintains the hate'

    I am not motivated by 'hate'; I am motivated by ideas which have an intellectual basis.

    To be against something because of hate is just silly; I prefer to be against something because I can think of 20 reasons WHY I am against it, can think of 20 reasons why I am right, can think of 20 ways I could do it better and can propose those alternatives.

    "This is wrong - here are the 20 reasons why.. [list them] is how it should be done and the 20 ways to improve ..[list them]..and this is why..[list the reasons].."

    That is what I do; but then I am an intellectual and idealist who believes that people will (eventually) become supportive because of the soundess of the ideas and alternatives.

    "I hate this. It is wrong. The people doing it are just f**king wankers" ...(not really an intellectual basis for changing the Country, is it?)

  56. For those who who do not wish to participate in Mr. Cresswells campaign to censor the expression of right wing views, and to deny his other contributors (Mr. McGrath) a response to their posts, you can go here for the continuation of a discussion that Mr. Cresswell seems so anxious to prevent.

    Aren't you lucky to have him care for you so??

  57. "I am not motivated by 'hate'; I am motivated by ideas which have an intellectual basis."

    Which is all fine and dandy, Elijah--and precisely why the left has run all over their opposition.
    The left do what they have to do to win and at the end of the day that's what will matter. The moral high ground is no way to win a war. Sooner or later it's necessary to get down to business and start destroying the opposition by whatever means it takes.
    You seriously believe Kiwi voters are the slightest bit interested in the intellectual arguments? That intellectual arguments will wean them from Nanny's teat?
    I admire your optimism, but that's all it is. As we lurch further towards totalitarianism every day, you just keep on patting yourself on the back for your 'intellectual' approach.
    Pol Pot, Stalin and Adolf murdered millions of intellectuals. They knew what raw power was about.

  58. Richard,

    What I am thinking is that it is better that Rodney/ACT gets a compromise from the Nats in return for their support. This is better than get nothing at all.

    Rodney/ACT had been hit hard by the Libz for as long as I can remember, be it when they were in opposition or when they're in government as of today (as a minor partner). This ferocious criticism falls in the category of tautological argument. This means that regardless of what one does, there is ALWAYS a fault (ie, things will always be true in its evaluation regardless).

    Just do a search here on Not PC (on Rodney/ACT) and you see what I mean. You can find past blog posts here criticizing Rodney/ACT when they were in opposition, ie, when Labour was still in government and also blog posts criticizing them since they went into partnership with National after last election.

    Rodney/ACT can't make a major change and that's fact. They should be applauded if they can even make a single change and this is what the Libz should be supporting Rodney/ACT if they achieve that.

    See, if the Libz get into Parliament, others would view you exactly as Rodney. You won't be able to achieve anything with a 5 Libz MPs. Considering that the Libz hits Rodney/ACT hard from all directions (regardless of what they do), who is going to criticize the Libz (with their 5 MPs) for exactly the same thing (ie, incompetent for not achieving anything) when you're in Parliament?

    The Libz should support Rodney/ACT wherever possible, because they have similar (not exactly the same) views as the Libz. The Libz should concentrate hammering/hitting Labour/National/Greens/Maori party supporters (the dark side), in the hope that they may adopt the Libz/ACT views. It is easier to convince an ACT person about Libz philosophy, than a supporter from the dark side. So, concentrate on the bigger hurdle here, ie, convincing lefty supporters, rather than pointless frequent sniping against Rodney/ACT.

  59. Ha ha, KG, I understand what you are saying but I would rather the Libz win a general election because the electors believed in the correctness of what we are saying; in our idealism, our views on how to greatly improve New Zealand.

    To simply be a protest vote would make us deceitful and even worse than the status quo we seek to change.

    In short - I TRUST the people ...(yes, yes call me naive or an idealist if you want, but it is true! ha ha!)

  60. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  61. Sounds like you spend quite a lot of time thinking about that Rodbiter. Is there something you're trying to tell us?

  62. "In short - I TRUST the people"

    So do I--to vote with their hip pockets, to swallow the propaganda they're fed by the media, to be too damn lazy or too uninformed to check up on what teachers are teaching their kids..
    Those people you trust kept a socialist wrecking gang in power for eleven years Elijah.

  63. 'Trusting the people' is to make the implicit assumption that they are at least minimally conversant with economic and political principles--but our schools have produced generations of utterly uninformed election fodder instead.
    I don't know what the answer to the problem is but somehow I doubt it lies with the ballot box any more.

  64. Sooner or later it's necessary to get down to business and start destroying the opposition by whatever means it takes.

    Hitler thought so too.

    I hope Libz don't buy into this sinister nonsense from those who call themselves libertarians but who seek to chlorinate the pool.

    These are not people who love liberty.

  65. "sinister nonsense from those who call themselves libertarians" eh..

    You should name them Ruth! Is there a website where they hang out? Please share the details with us. :-)

  66. "These are not people who love liberty."

    Talking about the Nats, are you?


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.