| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 145355 | 2017-10-09 05:02:00 | Well what is the consensus of what the new Government will look like? | B.M. (505) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1440394 | 2017-10-09 21:46:00 | Ahh ... I didn't know it needed fixing. I stand by my original post #23. By all means stand by the inaccurate. |
KarameaDave (15222) | ||
| 1440395 | 2017-10-09 22:15:00 | We get election bribes every 3 years, not whats best for NZ, but bribe the masses just to get into power The sad part about election bribes is that the Briber is actually bribing the recipient of the bribe with their own money. Very few people are awake to the basic truth; The Government has no money, it is the people's money. Excessive government expenditure is directly proportion to excessive levels of taxation. As we do not have a closed economy, and businesses and wealthy people can shift their capital and businesses internationally to more benevolent economies, excessive taxation and bleeding the rich is a simple way to force economic activity out of the country, to the detriment of employment. Government, by it's structure and administrative processes, is a very slow and inefficient way to drive economic activity. Government's function should be to create an environment where economic activity can grow and generate jobs and additional even more activity, not to regulate activity into stagnation. Unfortunately, a concept that is alien to traditional socialists. Soialists fail to recognise human nature and human inclination to selfishness, people act in their own best interests, not for the best social outcome when it runs contrary to their self interest. It is of interest, that here in Australia, the worst examples of corruption in public office have been by politicians who identify as socialist Labor. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 1440396 | 2017-10-09 22:27:00 | No the objectionable thing is the double bite of the cherry that allows electorate MPs to also run on the party list, it should be one or the other. But what if a standing MP has no hope of winning an electorate - I have lived in 2 such vastly different classes of electorate (Business-like Howick/Pakuranga - always National vs Working or "no class" Mangere - always Labour) - yet that MP may have good/unique ideas that can be contributed to his/her party if as a entered list MP. Or if there is little difference in vote counts (e.g. say within 10%), for an electorate - this surely indicates that the 2nd candidate ought to be in as a list MP -since his/her voters think o too. For example, Peters - who has no seat - wants to ramp up the Super/Gold card - which I think is a good idea - Now that idea might be from a list MP? |
kahawai chaser (3545) | ||
| 1440397 | 2017-10-09 23:12:00 | Forgive me for having an opinion :eek::eek: Oh I had no idea it was just an opinion, It was written as a Categorical Fact. You should start your posts “In my humble opinion...........” in future to save confusion. :D |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1440398 | 2017-10-10 00:38:00 | Oh I had no idea it was just an opinion, It was written as a Categorical Fact.You should start your posts “In my humble opinion...........” in future to save confusion. :DYea, yea, yea :p | Nick G (16709) | ||
| 1440399 | 2017-10-10 02:54:00 | H e will with National. | Cicero (40) | ||
| 1440400 | 2017-10-10 06:49:00 | H e will with National. I reckon he will go with the commies. |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 1440401 | 2017-10-10 08:00:00 | If a current electorate MP has no chance of winning his seat, then he opts for list only - no problem with that. Under MMP all MPs are theoretically equal, be they list or electorate. The original concept was that THE PM and senior cabinet ministers would be list MPs as the workload associated with their portfolios precludes them from giving the necessary attention to their constituents. In this English is doing the right thing - he is top of the party list, so he will get back into parliament unless the party suffers a total wipe out, and if that is the case, as party leader he shouldn't get back under any circumstances. One should beware of politicians and parties that think they own ome's vote - and the arrogant bastards actually believe they do. New Zealand follows the UK in the practice of "Tribal Voting", namely blindly voting for the party ones family or social class has always supported, irrespective of the quality of the candidate or the policies of the party. In the UK is delivers over 60% of MPs consistently returned in safe seats although most of them have minority voter support in their electorates, and in the case of the 2010 election the Conservatives won with a safe working majority with a lousy 36.9 % of the vote.(ie 63.1 % of the voters didn't want them to win) Fortunately New Zealand got away from the unfair and undemocratic First Past the Post. Frankly I believe the Australian Hare Clarke system of Preferential Voting is superior to MMP - the voter has a single transferrable vote and ranks the candidates in order of preference, and after preference are allocated the winner is the candidate with a minimum of 50% plus one vote. If Aussies can understand it, then it shouldn't be too hard for Kiwis. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 1440402 | 2017-10-10 08:08:00 | "I’m starting to think that the old adage that "A Benevolent Dictator is the best form of Government" may have some truth in it. Democracy, the majority decision of 10 wise men and 11 idiots. |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 1440403 | 2017-10-10 19:25:00 | Can't we just wait until he decides, then ***** about the choice? | pctek (84) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 | |||||