On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 14:55:47 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 16:29:00 -0700 (PDT), morrisseybreen@gmail.com
wrote:

Here�s a Horribly Hilary-ous Cavalcade of Cowards
Or does their failure to fight make them heroes and patriots?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGit_tZDqs

Max Blumenthal: Why are you not fighting them over there?
Hero No. 1: Why am I not fighting over there? Because I�m in college right now.
Max Bumenthal: Do you plan to enlist?
Hero No. 1: I haven�t ruled it out.

Max Blumenthal: Are YOU gonna serve?
Hero No. 2: I�ve thought about it, thought about it. I�m undecided.
Max Blumenthal: �Undecided.� Why aren�t you serving currently?
Hero No. 2: Well, I�m a new graduate right now and I have a scholarship for Fulbright Futures and I just didn�t have any strong urge�

Hero No. 3: Why am I not serving? I dunno, I mean, I really support this country strongly and I, ah, I didn�t enlist. I mean, there�s not much else I can say. I don�t think you can�t talk about this issue if you�re not serving. >>
Hero No.4: What would convince me NOT to join is if somehow I become a like a

really good speaker and stuff like that.That�s what would convince me NOT to join. But what would convince me to join is if something, like, even BIGGER happened.

Max Blumenthal: If you support the war, why are you not serving?
Hero No. 5 (Josh Bellis, Wabash �08): I�m in school. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! >>
ad nauseam.....

It is fairly typical poor journalism - false dichotomy pretending to
be "journalism> Ironic that it is directed to those htat use the
tactic for their own ends - we are all aware of those vapid wanna-be >neo-liberal National supporters who routinely parrot misconceptions
such as:
* all poor people need to do better is work harder or get a better job

I don't recall anyone posting here who has said this. I would
personally advocate for self-improvement though - the path for anyone
who considers their wealth to be inadequate is to upskill to achieve a
higher income. Simple to say but very hard to do.

* there is no need for labour laws - employment contracts make sure
that workers and employers meet on a level playing field

Who has said this Rich? Remember that we are a nation of small
businesses so many of us are self-employed.

* all beneficiaries have made poor decisions, and do not deserve
support

Who has said this Rich? NZ Super is a benefit, as is the various income-support benefits which seems to be where your claim is
targeted. I know several beneficiaries on various forms of income
support - unemployment benefits and the DPB. All of them are there
because of poor decisions they have made. All of them need support to transition into stable full-time employment with adequate pay and all
of them except one are unwilling to do what is needed to help
themselves to get off there.

* charities would be better than government in providing for people in
need

Correct. Charities raise money that is willingly and voluntarily
given to advance their goals, but are therefore constrained by that
funding model. Government departments have vastly more resources than charities do because they are funded through compulsory contributions
from taxpayers. So what is your point here?
<snip>


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 16:50:11 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 14:55:47 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 16:29:00 -0700 (PDT), morrisseybreen@gmail.com
wrote:

Here�s a Horribly Hilary-ous Cavalcade of Cowards
Or does their failure to fight make them heroes and patriots?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGit_tZDqs

Max Blumenthal: Why are you not fighting them over there?
Hero No. 1: Why am I not fighting over there? Because I�m in college right now.
Max Bumenthal: Do you plan to enlist?
Hero No. 1: I haven�t ruled it out.

Max Blumenthal: Are YOU gonna serve?
Hero No. 2: I�ve thought about it, thought about it. I�m undecided.
Max Blumenthal: �Undecided.� Why aren�t you serving currently?
Hero No. 2: Well, I�m a new graduate right now and I have a scholarship for Fulbright Futures and I just didn�t have any strong urge�

Hero No. 3: Why am I not serving? I dunno, I mean, I really support this country strongly and I, ah, I didn�t enlist. I mean, there�s not much else I can say. I don�t think you can�t talk about this issue if you�re not serving. >>>
Hero No.4: What would convince me NOT to join is if somehow I become a like a really good speaker and stuff like that.That�s what would convince me NOT to join. But what would convince me to join is if something, like, even BIGGER happened.

Max Blumenthal: If you support the war, why are you not serving?
Hero No. 5 (Josh Bellis, Wabash �08): I�m in school. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

ad nauseam.....

It is fairly typical poor journalism - false dichotomy pretending to
be "journalism> Ironic that it is directed to those htat use the
tactic for their own ends - we are all aware of those vapid wanna-be >>neo-liberal National supporters who routinely parrot misconceptions
such as:
* all poor people need to do better is work harder or get a better job

I don't recall anyone posting here who has said this. I would
personally advocate for self-improvement though - the path for anyone
who considers their wealth to be inadequate is to upskill to achieve a
higher income. Simple to say but very hard to do.

* there is no need for labour laws - employment contracts make sure
that workers and employers meet on a level playing field

Who has said this Rich? Remember that we are a nation of small
businesses so many of us are self-employed.

* all beneficiaries have made poor decisions, and do not deserve
support

Who has said this Rich? NZ Super is a benefit, as is the various >income-support benefits which seems to be where your claim is
targeted. I know several beneficiaries on various forms of income
support - unemployment benefits and the DPB. All of them are there
because of poor decisions they have made. All of them need support to >transition into stable full-time employment with adequate pay and all
of them except one are unwilling to do what is needed to help
themselves to get off there.

* charities would be better than government in providing for people in
need

Correct. Charities raise money that is willingly and voluntarily
given to advance their goals, but are therefore constrained by that
funding model. Government departments have vastly more resources than >charities do because they are funded through compulsory contributions
from taxpayers. So what is your point here?
<snip>

Charities are as you say constrained by theor funding. Governments are
better able to provide consistent support durng tough times as well as
times of relative prosperity - at present many charities are unable to
provide assistant to all who p-resent to them in dire need - and then
there are some that are in danger of closing because they actually
rely on government funding which has been removed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 19:03:05 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 16:50:11 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:

On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 14:55:47 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:

On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 16:29:00 -0700 (PDT), morrisseybreen@gmail.com
wrote:

Here�s a Horribly Hilary-ous Cavalcade of Cowards
Or does their failure to fight make them heroes and patriots?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFGit_tZDqs

Max Blumenthal: Why are you not fighting them over there?
Hero No. 1: Why am I not fighting over there? Because I�m in college right now.
Max Bumenthal: Do you plan to enlist?
Hero No. 1: I haven�t ruled it out.

Max Blumenthal: Are YOU gonna serve?
Hero No. 2: I�ve thought about it, thought about it. I�m undecided.
Max Blumenthal: �Undecided.� Why aren�t you serving currently?
Hero No. 2: Well, I�m a new graduate right now and I have a scholarship for

Fulbright Futures and I just didn�t have any strong urge�

Hero No. 3: Why am I not serving? I dunno, I mean, I really support this country strongly and I, ah, I didn�t enlist. I mean, there�s not much else I can say. I don�t think you can�t talk about this issue if you�re not serving. >>>>
Hero No.4: What would convince me NOT to join is if somehow I become a like

a really good speaker and stuff like that.That�s what would convince me NOT to join. But what would convince me to join is if something, like, even BIGGER happened.

Max Blumenthal: If you support the war, why are you not serving?
Hero No. 5 (Josh Bellis, Wabash �08): I�m in school. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

ad nauseam.....

It is fairly typical poor journalism - false dichotomy pretending to
be "journalism> Ironic that it is directed to those htat use the
tactic for their own ends - we are all aware of those vapid wanna-be >>>neo-liberal National supporters who routinely parrot misconceptions
such as:
* all poor people need to do better is work harder or get a better job

I don't recall anyone posting here who has said this. I would
personally advocate for self-improvement though - the path for anyone
who considers their wealth to be inadequate is to upskill to achieve a >>higher income. Simple to say but very hard to do.

* there is no need for labour laws - employment contracts make sure
that workers and employers meet on a level playing field

Who has said this Rich? Remember that we are a nation of small
businesses so many of us are self-employed.

* all beneficiaries have made poor decisions, and do not deserve
support

Who has said this Rich? NZ Super is a benefit, as is the various >>income-support benefits which seems to be where your claim is
targeted. I know several beneficiaries on various forms of income
support - unemployment benefits and the DPB. All of them are there
because of poor decisions they have made. All of them need support to >>transition into stable full-time employment with adequate pay and all
of them except one are unwilling to do what is needed to help
themselves to get off there.

* charities would be better than government in providing for people in >>>need

Correct. Charities raise money that is willingly and voluntarily
given to advance their goals, but are therefore constrained by that
funding model. Government departments have vastly more resources than >>charities do because they are funded through compulsory contributions
from taxpayers. So what is your point here?
<snip>

Charities are as you say constrained by theor funding. Governments are
better able to provide consistent support durng tough times as well as
times of relative prosperity - at present many charities are unable to >provide assistant to all who p-resent to them in dire need - and then
there are some that are in danger of closing because they actually
rely on government funding which has been removed.

You state the obvious - governments have a funding model driven by
compulsory funds acquisition through taxation. Has it occurred to you
that some charities are constrained by the fact that regardless of the
need they see they cannot convince enough voluntary contributors to
donate to support their cause? Other charities are able to convince
donors to contribute substantial sums and have done so for many years.

Has it occurred to you that 'people in dire need' have been found by governments of both stripes to unworthy of support? Can you deny that
the current National government increased some benefits beyond an
increase generated by inflation (don't bother trotting out your usual
GST increase and its effect on 'the poor' - after all GST is a labour innovation)? Can you point to any Labour Government in the last 40
years that has done this? My point is that whatever the government
does to support income-deprived citizens it can never be enough.


--
Crash McBash

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)