Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

But the current mob are so shy

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/2009/05/obama-we-are-out-of-m oney.html

http://www.jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

8/10..?

douglas looked like a total buffoon..

and cunnliffe seemed to spend half his time agreeing with norman..

all in all a good showing for the greens..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

Like or Dislike: 2  0 (+2)

However, that poses a problem. In order to show up the policies of the other parties, it might be necessary to play in the same ball park. I just hope that the green leaders certainly don’t imagine that our economy will be based on agricultural exports and tourism for much longer.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Like or Dislike: 1  0 (+1)

phil(whoar.co.nz)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

BJ

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

this is just really a series of one-liners/slogans..slung together..

I think it’s a piss-take of Bill English’s recent ad which was done in that style

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

He does better without the suit IMHO, and instead of the delivery of piecemeal message fragments, he ought to work up a proper “rant” form of this complete with the appropriate mockery of National’s abandonment of market principles in their quest to totally gut the ETS.

There’s so much in the message that it almost has to be scripted just to remember all the points in order. We get told we don’t have a cohesive alternative policy.

That may be in part a problem with our delivery. When we deliver the opposition has to be left looking for the truck that just ran over them. When they come up with a one-point argument we have to hit them with ALL of it together.

Some people argue that X won’t fix ALL the problems. The lunacy of thinking that 20 years developing structural malinvestment incentives can be corrected with a single silver bullet is patently obvious to me, but what I VERY often see is an argument based on a false premise that we should not accept but miss its inclusion, and we then wind up arguing details, usually with difficulty, against a backdrop of that flawed assumption. We should ever let our opponents dictate the grounds of the argument without at least considering what alternative assumptions might be appropriate.

The ETS changes are easy meat.

The argument against the CGT says the US has a CGT but still had a bubble. That plays games with the truth. The CGT in the USA is 15% while the top tax rate for income is 35%. The US has a small CGT. It also has a Federal Funds rate that is not distinguishable from zero. One can’t ever assume that the assertions from which the opposition argues are correct, instead one has to recognize that for them to even argue one of our points, they have to be either misinformed or simply lying in their teeth.

That is almost always the case, and it pays to take the moment or two of reflection that allows us to identify the point of false information.

respectfully
BJ

Like or Dislike: 8  0 (+8)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

i clicked hoping for a coherent explanation of sorts..

(and was going to post it on whoar..)

but this is just really a series of one-liners/slogans..slung together..

and..you russel..are guilty of what you accuse national/key of being..

namely..you are working from the assumption ‘thing will remain the same’..(c.f..yr ‘primary-produce’(meat)-themed exhortation..)

with the inference we just need to give the ‘clean/green’ badge a bit of a polish..

and..she’ll be right..!

carry on as before..

and i can only assume yr diet-blinkers stop you seeing that the whole ‘meat-industry’..

for a variety of reasons/factors..

will not be here/be greatly minimised within decades..

(just the rise of cruelty/pesticide-free/w.h.y-flavoured factory-grown meat will see to that..)

you are going to have to get a grasp of this wholesale change coming up..

before you can hope to present any form of coherent alternative economic-model..

(‘badge-polishing’ just won’t ‘cut it’..eh..?..)

this vid really is a first draft..eh..?

why don’t you pull it..and have another ‘go’..eh..?

there was one ray of light..

that is the final line..

‘no environment..!..no economy..!’..

if i were you ..i’d get that on t-shirts/billboards(?)asap..

as far as a good slogan is concerned..(i.e..an effective idea-distillate..)

that one definitely works..

(always try to end on an ‘up note’..i say..)

phil(whoar.co.nz)

Like or Dislike: 1  6 (-5)

Despite the fact that it is widely acknowledged that GDP is a deeply flawed tool for measuring of growth or progress as it only caputres the amount of economic acitvity happening without any analysis of the quality of this acitivity or its impact on people lives or the environment.

Ultimately, people’s wellbeing and the economy are dependant on the environment and we urgently need a ecomonic model that reflects this.

Like or Dislike: 9  2 (+7)

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)