Two contrasting links http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the
next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them:: http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

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

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the
next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless and
have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling of tea towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It screams volumes that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's next? Printed mugs?
Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and umbrellas.

In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a plan
and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the state via taxation.
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.

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

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:00:10 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the
next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless and >have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling of tea >towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It screams volumes >that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's next? Printed mugs?
Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and umbrellas.

In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a plan >and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the state via >taxation.

First Allistar the teatowel has more content in it than the entire
National Party response to housing - a policy which was needed all
those years ago and is now needed again.

Now read:
http://www.labour.org.nz/housing
for an idea of what real commitment to action looks like.

Regarding taxation, you are exactly the sort of person that John Key
knows will be happy with empty promises - in reality he now admits
that increasing GST hit the poor harder than high income earners, and
he also knows that Treasury projections are the best estimates of the
future that he has. He is disingenuous in saying that the numbers
cannot be believed; and they show that he cannot continue and meet the
stated goals of the government (which include reducing borowing to 20%
of GDP, without increasing taxes or doing a u-turn on spending
promises - the biggest of which is his unwillingness to even discuss
changes to NZ Superannuation. But his useful idiots will be
sufficiently bouyed up by his just raising the issue to continue to
support their policies - he only wants support until the next
election. The detail of what he actually foreshadowed is a greater
subsidy to businesses through adjustments to Working for Family that
even he says will only affect some people - do you think subsidies for
business are the right way to go, Allistar?

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

Rich80105 wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:00:10 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the
next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless and >>have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling of tea >>towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It screams volumes >>that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's next? Printed mugs? >>Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and umbrellas.

In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a plan >>and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the state via >>taxation.

First Allistar the teatowel has more content in it than the entire
National Party response to housing - a policy which was needed all
those years ago and is now needed again.

Now read:
http://www.labour.org.nz/housing
for an idea of what real commitment to action looks like.

No thanks.

Regarding taxation, you are exactly the sort of person that John Key
knows will be happy with empty promises - in reality he now admits
that increasing GST hit the poor harder than high income earners,

And yet they were still better off when you take into account the lowering
of income tax. In absolute dollar terms as well as as a proportion of
spending the GST increased hit the poorer less hard.

I can't be arsed reading the rest. Your well known history of personal abuse and outright lying means my eyeballs will dismiss your thoughts in favour of those with more credibility.
--
"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."
creates the incentive to minimize your abilities and maximize your needs.

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

On 30/11/2016 3:06 p.m., Rich80105 wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:00:10 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the
next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless and
have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling of tea
towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It screams volumes
that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's next? Printed mugs?
Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and umbrellas.

In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a plan >> and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the state via
taxation.

First Allistar the teatowel has more content in it than the entire
National Party response to housing - a policy which was needed all
those years ago and is now needed again.

Now read:
http://www.labour.org.nz/housing
for an idea of what real commitment to action looks like.

Vague promises on he off chance that angry liddle Andy can get his and
Labours act together Rich. In the unlikely possibility they can watch
how fast it gets put on the back burner because as is so typical of
Labour and you, they never think things through and don't give a damn
about future generations as long as they can get hold of the reigns of
power and turn New Zealand into another marxist paradise like North
Korea, Zimbabwe or Cuba!

Regarding taxation, you are exactly the sort of person that John Key
knows will be happy with empty promises - in reality he now admits
that increasing GST hit the poor harder than high income earners, and
he also knows that Treasury projections are the best estimates of the
future that he has. He is disingenuous in saying that the numbers
cannot be believed; and they show that he cannot continue and meet the
stated goals of the government (which include reducing borowing to 20%
of GDP, without increasing taxes or doing a u-turn on spending
promises - the biggest of which is his unwillingness to even discuss
changes to NZ Superannuation. But his useful idiots will be
sufficiently bouyed up by his just raising the issue to continue to
support their policies - he only wants support until the next
election. The detail of what he actually foreshadowed is a greater
subsidy to businesses through adjustments to Working for Family that
even he says will only affect some people - do you think subsidies for business are the right way to go, Allistar?

Of course it hit those on lower salaries more than on Labours rich
pricks Rich! however nowhere near as hard as it would have if National
hadn't given them tax cuts. Remember Labour taught National this trick
when the they instigated GST and then quickly increased it from 10% to
12.5%. And yup Labour did lower personal tax but anyone who understood
maths could figure everybody was actually worse off because the total
tax payable by everyone was then MORE than before GST was introduced. So
much for Labour thinking of anything apart from how to tax the shit out
of everyone while supposedly only fleecing those on higher incomes to
pay for their unaffordable pipe dreams!

btw when it comes to useful idiots you and those who blindly praise the
left are them.

Pooh

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

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 09:09:20 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:00:10 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the
next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless and >>>have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling of tea >>>towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It screams volumes >>>that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's next? Printed mugs? >>>Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and umbrellas.

In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a plan >>>and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the state via >>>taxation.

First Allistar the teatowel has more content in it than the entire
National Party response to housing - a policy which was needed all
those years ago and is now needed again.

Now read:
http://www.labour.org.nz/housing
for an idea of what real commitment to action looks like.

No thanks.

So yu have a closed mind?

Regarding taxation, you are exactly the sort of person that John Key
knows will be happy with empty promises - in reality he now admits
that increasing GST hit the poor harder than high income earners,

And yet they were still better off when you take into account the lowering
of income tax. In absolute dollar terms as well as as a proportion of >spending the GST increased hit the poorer less hard.

Actually no, they aren't - for example poverty among low wage workers
has increased, not fallen under National - that is of course due to
National keeping wages low through the wage subsidies to business
(WFF) and immigration (70,000 vs norm around 12,000) and rental
increases as well as their tax changes which may have averaged neutral
but for many low income earners resulted in lower spending power -
which has also suppressed domestic spending as many small businesses
are aware . . .

I can't be arsed reading the rest. Your well known history of personal abuse >and outright lying means my eyeballs will dismiss your thoughts in favour of >those with more credibility.

No argument, just slurs - you are catching the habit of spin - abuse
from the Nat-trolls, Allistar - and there I thought you were making at
least an attempt to be principled . . .

"Keeping more of your own money" is of course another way of saying
borrow and spend (with higher costs long term, and reduce services.
See: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/319329/police-burglary-focus-'robbing-peter-to-pay-paul'

Not much point in a small tax cut if your safety is reduced, or you
get burgled . . .

And under related stories: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/314581/assaults-and-burglaries-on-the-rise
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/319436/northland-mps-back-call-for-more-police
and http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/315590/labour-pledges-to-beef-up-police-numbers

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

On 2/12/2016 1:27 p.m., Rich80105 wrote:

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 09:09:20 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:00:10 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state-house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the >>>>> next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop?utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for-All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless and >>>> have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling of tea >>>> towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It screams volumes >>>> that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's next? Printed mugs? >>>> Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and umbrellas. >>>>
In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a plan >>>> and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the state via >>>> taxation.

First Allistar the teatowel has more content in it than the entire
National Party response to housing - a policy which was needed all
those years ago and is now needed again.

Now read:
http://www.labour.org.nz/housing
for an idea of what real commitment to action looks like.

No thanks.

So yu have a closed mind?

The closed minds are useful idiots like you Rich who blindly post links
to Labours obvious pipe dreams. None of Labours current policy's are
affordable without increases in taxation or making government debt
spiral upwards even faster than their policy's have caused while
National is in power.

Regarding taxation, you are exactly the sort of person that John Key
knows will be happy with empty promises - in reality he now admits
that increasing GST hit the poor harder than high income earners,

And yet they were still better off when you take into account the lowering >> of income tax. In absolute dollar terms as well as as a proportion of
spending the GST increased hit the poorer less hard.

Actually no, they aren't - for example poverty among low wage workers
has increased, not fallen under National - that is of course due to
National keeping wages low through the wage subsidies to business
(WFF) and immigration (70,000 vs norm around 12,000) and rental
increases as well as their tax changes which may have averaged neutral
but for many low income earners resulted in lower spending power -
which has also suppressed domestic spending as many small businesses
are aware . . .

WFF is a Labour policy to subsidised an increase in babies that makes
life harder for the fuckwits who who don't understand that good parents
only have the children they can afford! Subsidies to business where good
for employment. Something a useless idiot like you is incapable of comprehension. As to immigration: Many were Kiwis coming home. An
inconvenient fact you've been ignoring for months!

I can't be arsed reading the rest. Your well known history of personal abuse >> and outright lying means my eyeballs will dismiss your thoughts in favour of >> those with more credibility.

No argument, just slurs - you are catching the habit of spin - abuse
from the Nat-trolls, Allistar - and there I thought you were making at
least an attempt to be principled . . .

"Keeping more of your own money" is of course another way of saying
borrow and spend (with higher costs long term, and reduce services.
See: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/319329/police-burglary-focus-'robbing-peter-to-pay-paul'

No Rich. Yet another comprehension fail from you Rich. It means the
government (unlike Labour led governments) is forced to live within it's budget. The borrowing being done to pay for Labours unaffordable
election bribe (WFF) is not the fault of National as your to blind to comprehend.

Not much point in a small tax cut if your safety is reduced, or you
get burgled . . .

And under related stories: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/314581/assaults-and-burglaries-on-the-rise
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/319436/northland-mps-back-call-for-more-police
and http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/315590/labour-pledges-to-beef-up-police-numbers

Is this in contrast to the increases in crime when Labour was government
Rich or just you being thankful crime is climbing back to the levels we
had when Labour were dictating to the country?

Pooh

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

On Fri, 02 Dec 2016 13:27:14 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 09:09:20 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 11:00:10 +1300, Allistar <me@hiddenaddress.com>
wrote:

Rich80105 wrote:

Two contrasting links
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/86875557/editorial-state- house-sales-a-failed-scheme

National are "Ashpirational" - under them it turns to ashes for the >>>>> next generation

Compare to Labour - not just aspirational but with plans to achieve
them::

http://www.labour.org.nz/shop? utm_campaign=161129_sale&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nzlabour#!/Homes-for- All-Tea-Towel/p/64028333/category=21687288

They had plans in 1957, sure. How about in 2016? They are ruddlerless >>>>and have been for nearly a decade. Or are you referring to the selling >>>>of tea towels as "aspirational" for the current Labour party? It >>>>screams volumes that's considered "aspirational" for Labour. What's >>>>next? Printed mugs?
Maybe in 2018 they will have branched out to beach towels and >>>>umbrellas.

In the mean time I'll continue to support a party that actually has a >>>>plan and whose first policy isn't to increase the harm caused by the >>>>state via taxation.

First Allistar the teatowel has more content in it than the entire
National Party response to housing - a policy which was needed all
those years ago and is now needed again.

Now read:
http://www.labour.org.nz/housing for an idea of what real commitment
to action looks like.

No thanks.

So yu have a closed mind?

Maybe so; but then, on the same scale, yours is closed, padlocked and triple-bolted.

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