Comments on: National open up massive lead

By: molly67

molly67 — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:49:41 +0000

Bryce, you originally said: “Instead of saying anything at all about the regressive Working for Families or the KiwiSaver con, the Greens concentrated their firepower on the fact that Labour didn’t do much for the environment. Is that all your party cares about?”

However, you’ve now admitted that the Greens did in fact comment on the regressive impact of Kiwisaver – perhaps not as much as you would have liked, but basically you were misrepresenting the facts.

You might also want to have a look at the speeches the leaders gave to the conference over the weekend.

If your analysis of climate change policy is simply that if there is any use of a market at all then it’s all the same to you, and you don’t care how permits are allocated, where a cap is set, which sectors are included, and how the negative impacts are ameliorated, and you’re providing no alternative at the moment, then I guess we don’t have much to discuss, because I think all those things really matter.

Molly

By: Stu Donovan

Stu Donovan — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 12:33:57 +0000

Phil - no need to get personal about the auckland greens. I can honestly say that people (including Mr you know who) still speak fondly of your previous involvement.

Basically, just wanted to communicate to you that progressive politics requires progressive organisations that can see past individual differences. I believe you will find the auckland greens to be such an organisation …

Ka kite ano.

By: phil u

phil u — Thu, 31 May 2007 18:41:43 +0000

i think obdurate is the word you are grasping in the dark for there..dear heart..

(however wide of the mark you may be..)

kevyn with a ‘y’..how quaint..are you from alabama..?..trailer-trash..?

there’s a bit of that hanging around the auckland greens..eh..?

(yours in attempted literacy..)

phil(whoar.co.nz)

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Thu, 31 May 2007 10:59:46 +0000

phil u, bigot - noun - a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices (Merriam-Webster).

If this is your idea of constructive debate then its not surprising that you are not exactly flavour of themonth with your local Greens.

By: phil u

phil u — Thu, 31 May 2007 08:06:16 +0000

‘bigotry’..?

oh..!..i thought we were talking about roading funding..

(silly me..!..eh..?..)

btw..how many angels do you think could fit on a pinhead..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Thu, 31 May 2007 06:07:10 +0000

phil, I’m sure Galileo and Einstein will be laughing themselves silly at your comment. Their devil ..is that facts beat bigotry everytime!

By: phil u

phil u — Thu, 31 May 2007 05:58:59 +0000

stat-heads are a different breed..aren’t they..?

their devil..is the detail..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

By: Bryce

Bryce — Thu, 31 May 2007 04:22:51 +0000

Free Public Transport is a policy that is normally adopted by progressive political organisations. It’s actually a very sensible idea. I’m very surprised that the Greens can’t even bring themselves to adopt this. Geez, market-economics must be of a much stronger influence in the leadership than I realised. For what it’s worth, below are some useful arguments and discussions about the need for free public transport:

Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-fare
A radical idea - The Age newspaper:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/a-radical-idea/2006/03/04/11411 91889553.html
Indymedia Melbourne
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2006/03/107902.php
Scottish Socialist Party:
http://www.ssp-election-2007.org.uk/free-public-transport/
Green Left Weekly:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/668/6658
Green Lefts:
http://greenlefts.blogspot.com/search/label/Free%20Public%20Transport

By: Kevyn

Kevyn — Thu, 31 May 2007 03:58:12 +0000

phil, sometimes you can be as thick as a Totara.

The crosses beside North Island roads are the trees, the whole country is the forest, and the stats are the satelite that let us see the whole picture.

Your thinking on this issue resembles the US Agriculture department’s thinking on insect control in the 1950s and we all know that their total focus on one aspect of the insect “problem” led to Silent Spring (a ground breaking book still well worth reading).

P.S. Are you seriously advocating spending 95% of roading revenue on roads?

By: phil u

phil u — Thu, 31 May 2007 02:54:21 +0000

kevyn..you can play with numbers all you like..

the basic fact is that many north island roads are death-traps..

that is where the money is needed..

and maybe 95% of the tax take for a few years would do it…?

but something needs to done..eh..?

no matter what yr stats may tell you about current weightings..eh..?

see..yr stats are the trees..

and the actual state of those death-trap roads..is the forest..

capiche..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)