tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post1802667489621843925..comments2024-03-29T10:51:27.752+13:00Comments on Not PC: Now, THIS is a Decent Budget! [updated]Peter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-42696975342370115882010-05-23T18:25:47.852+12:002010-05-23T18:25:47.852+12:00"Did I say KG was a racist?"
So are you..."Did I say KG was a racist?"<br /><br />So are you saying he's not?<br /><br />"Anyway, he is not the only uneducated old man in a menial job...."<br /><br />Ah the bigotry of the elitist snob, i guess uneducated floor moppers aren't entitled to an opinion, such peasantry should just shut up and stick to mopping whilst elitist, know-it-all bigots like you decide what's best for all right.<br /><br />Would you like to deny him the vote too, all uneducated old floor moppers denied the vote, women too, or just those that you don't agree with?<br /><br />What about daily life, should he enter via the back, sit in the back of the bus, only allowed to the front when he's mopping it?MathewKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14385674205383405783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-53613389763150947822010-05-23T16:45:36.253+12:002010-05-23T16:45:36.253+12:00Did I say KG was a racist? No I did not. He protes...Did I say KG was a racist? No I did not. He protests too much.<br /><br />Anyway, he is not the only uneducated old man in a menial job who strides about the poop deck as a virtual admiral on the internet, with a chip on his shoulder about immigrants and so on. It's very common. <br /><br />Actually I feel sorry for him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-33814828289954376842010-05-23T15:05:54.113+12:002010-05-23T15:05:54.113+12:00""KG"'s blog has commenters by ...""KG"'s blog has commenters by the lovely names of "Go White Boy" "White Supremacist" and "National Front". And that's just in the last 4 days."<br /><br />So what's wrong with "Go White Boy", "White Supremacist" and "National Front". Is no one allowed to encourage white boys? Is no one allowed to believe that whites are supreme? Would you whine with quite the same vigor at a 'black power' commenter? National front, sounds like a patriot, is one no longer allowed to love ones country now. What is it with these people seeing racism in every closet and under every bed.<br /><br />I wonder if ruth has attacked the racism of non-whites with quite the same vigor. Yeah i'm sure she has, i'm sure there's plenty of evidence of that, keep fighting the racists girlfriend.<br /><br />"Anyway readers here can make up their own minds as to who is dishonest."<br /><br />I'm glad that at least that is allowed. Though i'm sure sarah wouldn't like that sort of thing.<br /><br />"You don't get many more vile, ignorant, bigoted blogs & followers than Crusader Rabid."<br /><br />Left some leftist stupidity and it got deleted isn't sarah, try voltaren for the back aches caused by that enormous axe you're carrying, the ads say there's nothing like voltaren.MathewKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14385674205383405783noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-53174180072382712872010-05-22T19:04:03.361+12:002010-05-22T19:04:03.361+12:00You don't get many more vile, ignorant, bigote...You don't get many more vile, ignorant, bigoted blogs & followers than Crusader Rabid. The funny thing is most of them call themselves Christians but you wouldn't know it from reading the hate they spew. <br /><br />I wouldn't necessarily term KG a racist, despite his support for the English Defence League. He's more just a sad old man with a very fixed world view.Sarah.Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-9474330998210173402010-05-22T18:43:13.007+12:002010-05-22T18:43:13.007+12:00lol! You'll have to do better than that, Wuthi...lol! You'll have to do better than that, Wuthie.<br />Your comprehension skills seem to be lacking, which is perhaps why you didn't address our support for <i>black</i> writers and political candidates.<br />And you have no idea how many racist commenters are deleted over at CR, so you're talking out of your ass, as usual.<br />I assume your definition of a <i>nice</i> old man is one who treats your drivel with polite indulgence-in which case you picked the wrong target.<br />Next time you're having dinner with Key and who else was it...ah yes, the American Embassy's resident spook--perhaps you should complain to them?<br />The "racist" epithet is one of the more simple-minded and cowardly tricks in the statist book, as is assuming guilt by association. If the opinions of trolls are to be used as evidence of a blog owner's leanings then your attitude fits better with the worldview of Marxists and their assorted fellow-travellers than any other.<br />That's my last words on the subject. Talking to you makes me feel as though I need another shower.KGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01940428991630766942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1168086856991405552010-05-22T18:38:25.738+12:002010-05-22T18:38:25.738+12:00Guilty by association is it?
I hope the hell YOU ...Guilty by association is it?<br /><br />I hope the hell YOU don't call yourself libertarian!Oswald Bastablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11828229103486326473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-72800576152455235132010-05-22T17:54:21.911+12:002010-05-22T17:54:21.911+12:00National Front got deleted - others were not - in...National Front got deleted - others were not - in fact far from being mocked they were aplauded. Anyway readers here can make up their own minds as to who is dishonest.<br /><br />I'd stick to mopping floors if I were you, you nasty old man.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-72860337934794096762010-05-22T16:53:15.061+12:002010-05-22T16:53:15.061+12:00""KG"'s blog has commenters by ...""KG"'s blog has commenters by the lovely names of "Go White Boy" "White Supremacist" and "National Front". And that's just in the last 4 days."<br /><br />Are you dishonest, obsessed or just plain stupid, Ruth?<br />Commenters are free to use pretty much whatever nick they like, and if you were honest you'd point out that regardless of the nick used, racist comments mostly get deleted. <br />Also, the occasional such comment is left up so our readers can mock and revile them. And they sure do.<br /><br />Your attempts to paint me and the majority of CR's readers as racists are pathetic. How come you never mention our support for Allan West (black) Thomas Sowell (black) and so on?<br />I'll take "pathetic" back--"slimy and dishonest" are a much better fit.KGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01940428991630766942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-60991093727455307972010-05-21T18:59:56.572+12:002010-05-21T18:59:56.572+12:00"Anarchy does not mean lawlessness. "
S...<i>"Anarchy does not mean lawlessness. "</i><br /><br /><i>Specifically, it means a market in force.</i><br /><br />No; it means a market in <i>defense</i>.<br /><br /><i>Nothing could be more absurd.</i><br /><br />On the contrary. It's utterly illogical to think that a monopoly on force could ever restrict the use of force against innocents: all it can do is empower criminals (both in and out of government).<br /><br />Imagine just breaking up the police in much the same way it is done in the US, where cities have their own police forces (LAPD, NYPD, etc): we could have Wellington (area) Police independent of Auckland Police, etc., instead of a national police force. How would this generate a "market in force", from your viewpoint?Gregnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-28617178361969981012010-05-21T17:37:23.234+12:002010-05-21T17:37:23.234+12:00Fact, you have alienated people that would have be...<i>Fact, you have alienated people that would have been your supporter</i><br /><br />I don't think so. <br /><br />Well know US blogger Ed Brayton says:<br /><br /><i>My former colleague Dave Weigel reports an interesting poll result, offered without comment:<br /><br />Overall, 38 percent of Americans view "libertarian" favorably to 37 who view it unfavorably. Democrats (39-37) and independents (44-32) view the term most favorably, while Republicans view it negatively by a 13-point (31-44) margin.</i><br /><br />Link: <br />http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/05/republicans_and_libertarians_a.php<br /><br />"KG"'s blog has commenters by the lovely names of "Go White Boy" "White Supremacist" and "National Front". And that's just in the last 4 days.<br /><br />Support libertarians can do without, I think.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-29241759843495620642010-05-21T13:26:56.982+12:002010-05-21T13:26:56.982+12:00Hi Dave,
I am still working on figures over all g...Hi Dave,<br /><br />I am still working on figures over all government spending, but I have done <a href="http://luke.howison.co.nz/government-departments.xls" rel="nofollow">some rough-and-ready figures</a> for the core government departments. Their budgets total $11.5 billion.<br /><br />Of the departments we would keep, their 2009 budgets come to $5.4 billion.<br /><br />Of the departments we would scrap, their budgets come to $6.1 billion.<br /><br />So, just considering the core government departments, and keeping their spending at current levels (mostly we would ruthlessly slash spending) <b>more than half</b> of government would be gone.<br /><br />Once you start counting the useless guff like the "Overseas Investment Commission" and "Creative New Zealand", not to mention local government, you can see that the burden on all New Zealanders to support our bloated state would be much, much lighter without all of this crap.Luke Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09929408708481681826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-35484841187113389532010-05-21T12:27:53.892+12:002010-05-21T12:27:53.892+12:00@ Hide Fan et al
Fair comments but the art of per...@ Hide Fan et al<br /><br />Fair comments but the art of persuasion is not helped by being uncertain and flaky about what you are trying to persuade people to do. If you think Libz could do with some improvements in that area (and many within the party do) why not get involved and bring your ideas to the table?<br /><br />As for Libz polling worse than B+B a few points. Firstly so did other parties such as ALCP. I don't see people advising them of the need to alter what they stand for because they received less votes than a comedy duo. Principles are costly things to have and the line between moderation and cowardice is a fine one.<br /><br />Secondly it is easy to get attention when you are a media personality as you are paid to be regularly in people's faces on TV - unlike Libz who are not allowed to buy TV advertising time, refuse to accept state sponsored TV time and have limited funds to do any campaigning whatsoever. Like it or no, the majority of folk rely on mainstream media for their political information and the media tends to ignore any party outside of parliament. Libz may be part of the regular scenery on the political blogsphere but 99% of the population probably never reads political blogs. More people probably watch 'Pulp Sport' on a single night than read any given blog in a week. This I think is the major reason for the low Libz vote take; walk down any street and ask people what the policies of the Libertarianz party (or the RAM or Democrats for Social Credit or a few others) are and I will wager almost all won't know - in fact most would have probably never heard of the party/ies.<br /><br />In short you have to be able to say that a majority of the people have heard your message before you can seriously judge if they dismiss it or not.<br /><br />As for potential supporters being alienated you are probably right - I was nearly just such an alienated potential supported myself - but I got over it and focused on the issues at hand.<br /><br />Lastly I think Liberty Scott best summed up the B+B success at the 2008 election when he said that all it proves is that there really are that number of people out there who just don't give a damn.<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />Sean Fitzpatrick - Libertarianz Deputy LeaderSean Fitzpatricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-58846191576405459332010-05-21T09:17:39.900+12:002010-05-21T09:17:39.900+12:00I agree there V. The Libz hasn't worked it out...I agree there V. The Libz hasn't worked it out that persuasion is the name of the game. They know what persuasion is, because they advocate between free action of man via persuasion and not coercion. KG had asked Richard McGrath on his blog, if the Libz wants to continue to exist as a party or perhaps give that up and become a pressure group. Richard replied that Libz still wants to be a party. The reality is, that's not what they're doing and as you pointed out, a comedy duo got more votes in the last election.<br /><br />In short, the Libz can't get laid if they go to a bar to pick up some chicks. They don't know how to persuade a girl (metaphorically). They have alienated many people who would have supported their ideas. They get trapped in the mentality of <i>don't compromise your principles</i>. But that's exactly what a pressure group should be doing, because they're wasting their time in trying to be a party, since they don't have any support at electorate level.<br /><br />It’s better for the Libz to wake up and realise that they should only exist as a pressure group and not a party. Fact, you have alienated people that would have been your supporter. Deregister your party and just exist as a pressure group, because you don't know what persuasion is.Hide Fannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-46149356622976985762010-05-21T02:12:36.722+12:002010-05-21T02:12:36.722+12:00I have one question.
Whilst I agree this Liberteri...I have one question.<br />Whilst I agree this Liberterianz budget proposal has considerable merit, and would eliminate the giveth with one hand and taketh with three hands nature of government, why do these policy proposals not resonate with any section of the electorate? A comedy duo received 11x more votes in 2008.Vnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-8731834741399789282010-05-20T18:13:15.852+12:002010-05-20T18:13:15.852+12:00Hi Luke.... I didn't mean you to be sweating o...Hi Luke.... I didn't mean you to be sweating over detailed figures with a slide rule or anything..... just an approximation would be interesting... :-)Dave Mannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15264331694328629975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-79447258370974008702010-05-20T16:13:58.284+12:002010-05-20T16:13:58.284+12:00@Greg, you said, "Anarchy does not mean lawle...@Greg, you said, "<i>Anarchy does not mean lawlessness. </i>"<br /><br />Specifically, it means a market in force.<br /><br />Nothing could be more absurd.Peter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-67041481239238435162010-05-20T16:13:57.272+12:002010-05-20T16:13:57.272+12:00@Greg, you said, "Anarchy does not mean lawle...@Greg, you said, "<i>Anarchy does not mean lawlessness. </i>"<br /><br />Specifically, it means a market in force.<br /><br />Nothing could be more absurd.Peter Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-80892433307881118472010-05-20T16:03:33.397+12:002010-05-20T16:03:33.397+12:00I think you are being intellectually dishonest her...<i>I think you are being intellectually dishonest here. You know very well that Libz have ALWAYS advocated a role for the state: protecting the inidividual rights of New Zealanders via a police force, defence force and justice system. That's not anarchy.</i><br /><br />Neither is anarchy.<br /><br />Anarchy does not mean lawlessness.Gregnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-31147507781861080672010-05-20T15:53:22.680+12:002010-05-20T15:53:22.680+12:00All other state assets not required for the essent...<i>All other state assets not required for the essential functions of government (law and order, and defence) will be sold.</i><br /><br />And when you're ready to sell off the rest, I'll get behind you. Until then...well, you have my vote, but only as the least-worst place to put it...<br /><br /><i>Am I reading this right? Under a Libz budget, the wealthy still pay more tax? That seems somewhat counter to principle? Wouldn't a single flat tax, of say, 10% work better as a transition measure than "first $x is tax free"?</i><br /><br />How does a single flat rate of 10% not end up with the wealthy paying more? A single flat rate of $x is the only way to be "fair"! (And it could even be a good policy: the majority of the population would revolt and demand <i>lower</i> taxes, for once!)<br /><br /><i>But the solution to all this waste is NOT to completely DELETE the state and government entirely;</i><br /><br />Well, actually, yes, that <i>is</i> the answer. But that's not what the Libertarianz are suggesting.Gregnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-42431300717181839912010-05-20T14:21:18.711+12:002010-05-20T14:21:18.711+12:00Hi Luke:
Thanks! This is exactly the list I remem...Hi Luke:<br /><br />Thanks! This is exactly the list I remember having seen somewhere before! I've put your great efort on my favourites to peruse in more detail later.<br /><br />You have done a lot of good work here but I don't understand a lot of your thrust or how it might work practically. For example, I cannot agree that we don't need any sort of state education or health or any local government councils and I can't imagine who would be stupid enough to buy something like the Accounting Standards Review Board or the Earthquake Commission; how would they be a good buy for anybody?<br /><br />OK, so allowing that we might disagree on some important details, I think your basic premise is still very sound.<br /><br />Roughly what percentage of government expenditure goes on the organisations on your 'Gone by lunchtime' and your 'gone ASAP' lists do you think? Obviously you would need a lot of research to make this an exact figure..... but can you give us a reasonably accurate approximation?Dave Mannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15264331694328629975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-6145230143241399852010-05-20T13:50:26.485+12:002010-05-20T13:50:26.485+12:00Hi Dave,
It is worth noting that we are not total...Hi Dave,<br /><br />It is worth noting that we are not totally anti-government. We want some parts of the state to be stronger and better funded (justice, law-and-order, defence).<br /><br />Here's the list of government departments, ministries and QUANGOs; we call it the 'gone by lunchtime' list.<br /><br /><a href="http://pacificempire.org.nz/2008/10/08/how-big-is-big-government/" rel="nofollow">Gone By Lunchtime List</a><br /><br />I have already started working on a giant spreadsheet with the budget of each department (and how many full-time equivalent workers they employ). This is, however, a mammoth (and boring) task. Any help would be appreciated.Luke Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09929408708481681826noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-77183530749618451972010-05-20T13:34:52.723+12:002010-05-20T13:34:52.723+12:00@ PC:
Didn't you publish a list some time ago...@ PC:<br /><br />Didn't you publish a list some time ago of all the useless nannying government departments and organisations?<br /><br />I wonder if one could list them all along with their budgets and come up with a reasonable concensus of your general readership would call 'core functions of government'?<br /><br />I realise of course that you and Richard would probably settle on NIL (hahahaha OK I exaggerate!)..... but it would be an interesting excecise would it not?<br /><br />I bet New ealand could effectively scrap two thirds of its government expenditure, put half the savings into boosting the really important core functions and give the other half back to the citizens and we would end up living in a really worthwhile society.Dave Mannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15264331694328629975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-90149800677595923682010-05-20T13:22:35.225+12:002010-05-20T13:22:35.225+12:00Dave, it is also a moral issue. In fact it is ONLY...Dave, it is also a moral issue. In fact it is ONLY a moral issue. <br />Civilised people do not use force upon one another. <br /><br />Libertarianz (and Libertarians) know this, and will not compromise those morals.<br /><br />To do so, to 'water down' the only right way forward would be deceit.<br /><br />New Zealand deserves and can do so much better.Shane Pleasancehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06144367923437327037noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-37839911927173577032010-05-20T13:22:09.818+12:002010-05-20T13:22:09.818+12:00@ Richard
Your slavery illustration was rather an...@ Richard<br /><br />Your slavery illustration was rather an unfortunate one and altogether counter to your argument.<br /><br />Often held up as a tax free utopia, Dubai is almost entirely tax free, but it is dependent on a slave class of immigrant Indians, Fillipinos and others who do all the menial work like road building, construction work and domestic service for subsistance wages. These slaves are denied even the basic services of health and schooling let alone any of the benefits of belonging to society proper like citizenship. Their masters (employers in modern jargon) are the private corporations which secure government contracts through bribery and finacial fiddles to build their houses, literally, on sand.<br /><br />I would much rather have a government which is properly answerable to the citizens than a cabal of private corporations running on slave labour.Dave Mannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15264331694328629975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-35293337449409105772010-05-20T12:52:51.356+12:002010-05-20T12:52:51.356+12:00@ Richard:
Of course "monstrous bureaucracie...@ Richard:<br /><br />Of course "monstrous bureaucracies like the Soviet Union and China failed, and starved or murdered tens of millions of people in the process". I am not contesting that simple fact, nor am I asserting that we should have such a monstrous bureaucracy.<br /><br />What I am contesting, however, is that governments per se are by their nature incapable of acting for the good of the citizens. It is obviously ridiculous to expect every minor clerk to make individual decisions by consulting with each individual taxpaying New Zealander and nobody with any intelligence would expect government to operate this way. You are being disingenuous to suggest that this is my position.<br /><br />What I am suggesting however is that if government interference and nannying were severely curtailed and the focus redirected into core areas instead of wasted on bullshit we could have world-leading education, public infrastructure, health, superannuation, military, justice and police. And this could all be achieved on lower taxes too, if only the stupid fucking parliamentarians had the intelligence and courage to cut out the waste and corruption which currently consumes our taxes.<br /><br />I haven't done the research (sorry), but my gut feeling is that if we focused properly we could improve all the above areas while spending a third less, simply by deleting crap like Womens Affairs, the Families Commission, the Department of Conservation, OSH, the Childrens Commissioner, Human Rights and all the other non-productive nannying bullshit.<br /><br />Believe me, you are not doing yourself any political favours by sticking so closed-mindedly to your extremist anti-government stance. <br /><br />Your policies remind me of the idiots who, 15 or so years ago, when faced with inefficiency and patient abuse in the mental health service decided to shut all the bloody hospitals and turn the patients out on the street rather than do the obvious thing which would have been to fix the problems and make the mental health services better.<br /><br />Can't you see that you are advocating throwing the baby out with the bathwater and that the electorate won't buy that?<br /><br />You write extremely well in many other areas and you either have a PhD or a medical degree so you must be intelligent with a capacity for hard work and application..... but why do you deliberately seek to hobble your political chances with unworkable dogma at the expense of plain everyday commonsense?Dave Mannhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15264331694328629975noreply@blogger.com