This week: Bollocks, tax reclamation and vote-wasting
- NZ HERALD “‘Bollocks’ Groser tells climate change critics” – Climate Change Negotiations Minister Tim Groser spurns accusations by critics on the socialist left that he is siding with the governments of big “polluter” nations at the Cancun talkfest…
THE DOCTOR SAYS: Tim Groser deserves a slapping for several reasons, but not for the one suggested by Russel Norman and Charles Chauvel.
For a start, Groser deserves our opprobrium in the first place for buying into the fatuous concept of man'-made global warming.
Second, he should never have dignified this mass meeting of the deluded by his attendance, but having done so should have paid for it with his own money, as apparently Labour and the Greens did.
Third, he should stop slagging off people for being motivated by ideology. Being ideologically-driven, i.e. motivated by principle, is infinitely better than being poll-driven, i.e., motivated by power-lust. His spurning is however further evidence that the Nationalisation Party long ago abandoned the concept of acting on principle, though it still has this sham page on its website.
Perhaps the Herald’s headline is, in fact, a not-so-subtle swipe at Mr Groser. I note the lack of a comma after the word ‘bollocks,’ and the use of single inverted commas (which tend to denote nicknames) rather than double inverted commas (which tend to denote quoted speech), both of which imply the Herald’s sub-editors at least have a less than fulsome opinion of poor Timothy.
I had hoped from the headline that Mr Groser was telling Norman, Chauvel, et al, that the whole man-made global warming fraud was a load of bollocks – which it is. But no, he’s happy to use the myth of human induced weather changes as an excuse to further restrict human liberty and to make certain individuals hugely wealthy by taxing everyone while lowering living standards for people in developing countries.
I have a more apt nickname for Tim, recognizing that he and the anti-industrial lobby are not really enemies at heart, they just differ in outward appearance: ‘Green’ Groser, Minister of Climate Hysteria.
- DOM POST: “Wealthy families claim payouts” – A family uses perfectly legal loopholes to milk the Working for Families benefit. Bill English and Peter Dunne now want to effectively neuter LAQC tax claims…
THE DOCTOR SAYS: A family whose company earned over $700k has claimed $12k in benefits from the Welfare for Working Families slush fund, Helen Clark’s vehicle for buying middle class votes. And why not? Peter Dunne-Nothing and Bill ‘Twenty Percent’ English have conspired between them to tax the family hundreds of thousands of dollars in the past year alone.
What about Jim Bolger, who I seem to recall arranged his mother’s financial affairs by way of a family trust so that she would get subsidized rest home care. Will Dunne-Nothing and Twenty Percent close that loophole too? Or will they sort out their own family trusts first?
And has Bill English managed to sort out where he lives yet? Or is that one loophole he plans to keep open for ever? - DOM POST: “Electoral bill fails to cast off free speech shackles” – Simon Power aims to replace the Electoral Finance Act with... a different version of the same formula, that massively disadvantages anyone that dares to challenge the major political parties…
THE DOCTOR SAYS: When the Nationalization Party were in Opposition two years ago, one of their big campaign policies was overturning the sinister Electoral Finance Act.
So what did we get once they got once Power-Lust got into power? Some tinkering around the fringes of the Act. Some ineffective window-dressing. Wouldn’t want to spoil a good thing, now that the boot’s on other foot, eh Simon?
The spending threshold for political parties has been raised from 120k to 300k. Big deal. That’s still a limit on free speech, if the same odious rules apply (e.g. denoting voluntary private activity as though it was being charged out at commercial rates). With a Simian Power-Lust, our Justice Minister retains the theft of taxpayer money for the big parties to spend on TV advertising.
The Libertarianz Party has always believed forcing a taxpayer to fund the advertising of political parties whose policies make his bile rise is outrageous. We believe politicians should be self-funding. Personally, I believe MPs should be paid by the members of their own political party, and should arrange their own superannuation and subsidized travel perks. That would obviate the need for the sort of expensive farce being played out investigating the business affairs of Pansy Wong’s husband.
I will be asking the following question repeatedly, right up until election day next year: “Are you any better off than you were three years ago?” If not, why not?
And this: “Just what radical changes has the Key government made to reduce the overbearing nanny statism that we endured for nine years under Clark and Cullen?” Name them if you can. If you can’t, and you voted BlueLabour last time, why waste your votes on these hobos when there is a political party that stands for free markets, free speech, low taxation and less government?
That’s all for this week,
Catch you again next Wednesday!
Dr Richard McGrath
LIBZ LEADER
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny - when the
government fears the people, there is liberty.
- attributed to Thomas Jefferson
No comments:
Post a Comment