Site Meter

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

61 thieves

Armchair Critic lets loose.

41 comments:

Shunda barunda said...

An extremely poorly written ideological rant is what I would call it.

Dictators? please, the government was elected on this platform, and whether we like it or not they did this completely above board.

At the end of the day, 30 people turned up outside parliament yesterday, that's all, it is clear that a lot of NZers are not really all that concerned about partial asset sales.

A better reflection would be on why NZers would rather have asset sales than another left wing govt, but, of course, no one on the left is yet humble enough to do so.

This is how democracy works unfortunately (fortunately?)

robertguyton said...

"A better reflection would be on why NZers would rather have asset sales than another left wing govt"

A more honest 'reflection' would be to ask New Zealanders at this time if they do or don't want asset sales.
Your implication that the 30 people outside of Parliament are representative of the number of New Zealanders who oppose the sales is quite wrong, and will be shown to be wrong by the results of the referendum, I believe.
You'll have noted, Shunda, how slim the majority at the election, and how slim the vote in the House yesterday - 60 - 61. Hardly a clear win for the sales. Had Dunne grown a brain...

Armchair Critic said...

Looks like you are not part of my target audience, shunda.

Towack said...

You have never done a post on how many assets Labour sold in their time RG, come on, I dear you to.

Shunda barunda said...

Looks like you are not part of my target audience, shunda.

I guess not, being lied to, ideological blindness and rabble rousing garbage aren't really my thing.

Shunda barunda said...

Your implication that the 30 people outside of Parliament are representative of the number of New Zealanders who oppose the sales is quite wrong, and will be shown to be wrong by the results of the referendum, I believe.

The referendum is a pointless action, as has already been established.

I will not participate in such hypocrisy.

The political left in this country are every bit as destructive as the right, and it would seem that is not about to change any thin soon.

Shunda barunda said...

thin = time

robertguyton said...

Towack, my dare, those asset sales by Labour were as bad as these, if not worse. Had I been a blogger then, I'd have done the same thing as I'm doing now. Looking back it seems to me that Labour were in the thrall of some Act Party people who had somehow infiltrated the Labour Party and were doing the very same thing this present Government is doing - privatizing the hell out of the country.It was a stupid thing to do then, it's a stupid thing to be doing now. That said, in the unofficial self-appointed role of 'opposition', that I am in, I'm bound to speak out about what's happening now, and so I do. The Labour/Act Party of old was a travesty that stole from New Zealanders' futures. The present National Party is doing the very same thing. It disgusts me.

robertguyton said...

Shunda - the referendum is far from pointless. A referendum gives the public a chance to show very clearly what they think about a certain issue. That a Government chooses to ignore that collective voice doesn't make a referendum pointless, in fact, it gives it validity and power, especially in terms of other actions taken that align with the public opinion, and with the election, where people will vote according to the confidence they feel they have in one party or another. The Greens are inviting the public to say what they think and have that 'say' recorded and presented in an official way. What frightens you about that?

robertguyton said...

Shunda - a quiet word, I've met Armchair Critic face to face and your opinion of him is well off the truth.
Well off.

Armchair Critic said...

thanks Robert.
Shunda, I attribute the style of my writing to my technical training and background. :)

Shunda barunda said...

What frightens you about that?

Their true intentions and feigned authority.

Shunda barunda said...

It's striking how they've done it in a similar manner to thieving dictators all around the world, throughout recorded history.

That, Robert, is a bloody lie and that makes your buddy "well off the truth" in my opinion.

It is one thing to not like the current government, it is quite another to lie through your teeth in a fit of self delusion.

Asset sales is about 2 things, Political capital, and a woeful left.

It really is as simple as that.

My message to the left:

Do your bloody job properly and this stuff won't happen.

No credible opposition = time to spend political capital.

Towack said...

"It's striking how they've done it in a similar manner to thieving dictators all around the world, throughout recorded history"

This is a raving looney sort of comment, much like Labour’s Wigram MP, Megan Woods when she said yesterday that “Hitler had a pretty clear manifesto that he campaigned and won on" when she was commenting on the new asset sales bill.

robertguyton said...

Shunda - what do you take AC's ,
"It's striking how they've done it in a similar manner to thieving dictators all around the world, throughout recorded history" to mean?

robertguyton said...

Towack - it's not 'much like' Wood's comment. She's been busted for using 'Hitler' in he statement. That's in a class of its own and invites automatic disqualification.

robertguyton said...

"It's striking how they've done it in a similar manner..."
The key phrase, Towack and Shunda.
AC is correct.

Armchair Critic said...

For goodness sake, if I'd wanted to compare National to the Nazis, I would have done so. I do not want to compare National to the Nazis, because I find such comparisons distasteful, and because in this instance the is no valid comparison. Your take on my comments says as much about your own assumptions and prejudices as it says about mine.
Also, of the three parties that supported the MOM Bill, the only one I've never voted for is ACT. Guess that could make me a right-winger.

Armchair Critic said...

"...there is no valid comparison."

Shunda barunda said...

But they haven't Robert. That's the problem with losing an election, you have to learn how to eat tuff bickies when people pass legislation you don't like.

I don't like asset sales, but I don't accept for a second that it is happening due to dictatorial decree.

It was all laid out before the last election, and NZers decided they would rather have that than another left wing government.

Shunda barunda said...

Your take on my comments says as much about your own assumptions and prejudices as it says about mine.

No, actually, it says you wrote a very poorly written rant and are now blaming your readers for your lack of communication skills.

What a joke.

robertguyton said...

"That's the problem with losing an election, you have to learn how to eat tuff bickies when people pass legislation you don't like."

Shunda. If you aren't being a hypocrite, you declare here and now that you didn't sign the anti-smacking referendum, nor did you promote it, argue for it or otherwise support that referendum. You accepted, without complaint, the decision of the elected Government.
Yes?

Shunda barunda said...

No!!

I voted specifically to remove one government and got exactly that.

And as bad as National may be, I shudder with fear at where we would be at right now with the other lot.

My choice was: bad, or unbearable, the rest is history.

robertguyton said...

You didn't oppose the smacking bill as the Government worked its way through implementing it?

Shunda barunda said...

Robert, we digress, the issue is not about opposing government policy, it is about whether or not the process was illegitimate as Armchair critic has claimed.

robertguyton said...

You claim we shouldn't protest or initiate a referendum, just take what the Government of the day proscribes. I'm testing to see if you act the way you claim, by asking if you accepted Labour's smacking legislation without protest, or if you signed a referendum, protested against it and so on.
Did you?

Shunda barunda said...

You claim we shouldn't protest or initiate a referendum, just take what the Government of the day proscribes.

No I don't, you aren't listening Robert.

I like the idea of referenda, but unfortunately that idea has been all but destroyed as useful in NZ politics.

And you don't have to take anything from the government of the day, but don't distort the truth about how that reality came to pass.
Armchair critic is distorting reality in his anger, thus ensuring his energy is wasted and of no use to bring meaningful change.

I notice a lot of that on the left, "John Key is the devil" and all that.

Actually, this isn't about good vs evil, it is about a clash of political ideology, both sides are evil! ;)

You need converting Robert! ;)

Shunda barunda said...

....to the 'third' side............

Armchair Critic said...

just for you shunda, I'll have another go at writing the post.

Armchair Critic said...

Right, redux to 61 Thieves written. Publishing now.

Towack said...

THE PROBLEM WITH THE DICTATOR COMPARISON, whoops I'm shouting, the problem is that dictators take with no consent, you imply no consent however the facts stand in the way of you being proven correct. Labour campaigned on the asset sales, they had nothing else left to talk about, even the Greens had a poke at them and both parties lost, Labout lost more than the Greens.
National were given a clear mandate on the day.
Now if they backed down RG, would that not be a flip flop like you claimed over the lifejackets.
They are sticking to their economic plan.
And I signed the anti smacking stuff knowing full well that it would make no difference

robertguyton said...

Your view of what a dictator is, Towack, could be out of whack. I suspect that AC was meaning that the more subtle techniques used by leaders who's dictatorial behaviour wasn't immediately obvious to the public, used methods of coercion and deceit in order to achieve their political aims and that the manoeuvrings around asset sales by Key and his Government are of that more subtle sort. AC can see them, you cannot. This is my take on AC's use of the term. You'll note he has rewritten his post so as not to inflame the easily inflamed.
You signed the anti-smacking 'stuff'?
You'll support the right of New Zealanders who oppose the asset sales to sign this one then?

Armchair Critic said...

do you believe consent can be withdrawn, towack? As a general principle, at this stage.
I'd planned on writing on the subject, but it was out of the scope of the rewrite. Before I write anything, I am genuinely interested in your thoughts on the subject.
AC

Towack said...

RG: T think the main difference between the two referendums is timing, Anti smacking one was before the legislation came in, whereas the greens effort, whilst they have literally had years to present this option are now attempting to do it afterwards. Kmowing that the current governemtn will not change their views and also knowing that everyones money is tight, why waste money on a fruitless exercise. Unless of course, you have nothing else to gain you headlines except a deaf woman that your own party refuses to support.

AC: Consent is interesting. The government is in one of those situations where you are damned both ways.
Take the school changes that were mooted. People kicked up a stink (even I penned letters to my mp) and they changed tack, first they were sconed for the plans, then they were sconed for their apparent back step.
Frankly, whilst consent can be withdrawn, why do it when you believe that what you are doing is right.
Emotive talk from the dissenters is so easy to do, but the reality is, National had a plan, National are working the plan.
Interesting that a fair chunk of those against the sales are keen to buy shares. Almost hypocrisy but not quite

robertguyton said...

Towack - why continue with the referendum? You say doing that will be 'fruitless', but I don't agree. There are a number of potentially worthwhile outcomes, I believe, not the least being the feeling of inclusion New Zealanders will get as a result of signing, at a time when Big Government that Ignores the People, is rife. The Greens stand to benefit from the ongoing exposure and from being seen, quite rightly, as the party that fights for the ordinary person, against Big Brother Government. There are other up-sides' too, but I don't want to give away all the strategies.
Your snipe at 'a deaf woman' is spiteful and petty, imho.

Shunda barunda said...

The problem with the dictator comparison is that it is stupid, ignorant, and blatantly untrue.

For a start, dictators don't sell assets, they nationalise them which in itself makes this comparison moronic beyond belief.

Perhaps if National were seizing privately owned businesses Armchair would have a leg to stand on!!.
There is no sophistication to his post or deeper meaning to be gained, it is just a shallow rant about likening something not liked to something not liked, which is fine, just don't lie about it.

Armchair Critic said...

thanks towack.
Consent is such an interesting subject, and as I understand it, one of the fundamentals of libertarianism. I'll have to carefully consider what I write.

Armchair Critic said...

No shunda, that's untrue. Augusto Jose Ramon Pinochet Ugarte is but one example of a dictator who sold his country's assets.

robertguyton said...

"first they were sconed(sic) for the plans, then they were sconed(sic) for their apparent back step"

I thought they were rightly scorned for their plans, but were grudgingly congratulated for reversing them. We must have read different reports.
And what do you mean, 'apparent'?
They seem to me to have folded completely :-)

Towack said...

Apparent - some saw it as a back step, others saw it as making sense.

Your snipe at 'a deaf woman' is spiteful and petty, imho.
I'm not sniping the deaf lady, I'm sniping the party that has nothing decent to get it headline coverage, they are the ones using her disability as headline fodder

robertguyton said...

The Greens, Toack, have been in the headlines time and time again since the 'Mojo' incident, mostly commenting intelligently on economic matters, where Labour has failed to grasp the opportunity and where National have shown themselves to be without a clue. For the first time in history, the Greens have not wanted for publicity. Your claim, therefore, is bunkum :-)