Who should I vote for?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Who should I vote for?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 21

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1834748 1-Aug-2017 10:01

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Geektastic:

It's simply that I dislike socialism of all persuasions. I prefer autocratic approaches to government based on sound economics and money, not wishy washy touch feely stuff. I believe in low taxation small government that enables economic success, not tax and spend and regulate governments. I believe that simply robbing those who do well to hand it to people who do not is not an answer to anything. Additionally I won't ever vote for the party that will cost me the most money personally.

What about the Scandinavian socialism?

Funny that all those countries have the highest tax rates. It would be a vote to pay more tax.

We (wife and I) would be happy to pay more tax if it helps ease homelessness and poverty. You should have read about those counties, they are orders of magnitude ahead of us and ranked high on surveys.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1834750 1-Aug-2017 10:02

MikeB4:

Geektastic:

It's simply that I dislike socialism of all persuasions. I prefer autocratic approaches to government based on sound economics and money, not wishy washy touch feely stuff. I believe in low taxation small government that enables economic success, not tax and spend and regulate governments. I believe that simply robbing those who do well to hand it to people who do not is not an answer to anything. Additionally I won't ever vote for the party that will cost me the most money personally.

What about the Scandinavian socialism?

Define?

If we were prepared to search for and exploit geological wealth to fund it, then sure. If it just means I pay more tax then no thanks.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1834752 1-Aug-2017 10:04

tdgeek:

Calm down your defence outrage. I mistakenly took "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama." to mean "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama."

The polls are guesses? the margin of error usually about 3%. So their 15% is probably actually 5%?

You should discuss and take those tinted glasses off.

Now you lost me. Tinted glasses?

Anyway, as mentioned already, if the polls are correct all they are proving is that the Greens have scored some labour votes. Woopy.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1834754 1-Aug-2017 10:06

Little is Goneburger as predicted

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1834758 1-Aug-2017 10:07

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

Calm down your defence outrage. I mistakenly took "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama." to mean "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama."

The polls are guesses? the margin of error usually about 3%. So their 15% is probably actually 5%?

You should discuss and take those tinted glasses off.

Now you lost me. Tinted glasses?

Anyway, as mentioned already, if the polls are correct all they are proving is that the Greens have scored some labour votes. Woopy.

Are you open to not responding to me and me not responding to you? I prefer to discuss matters, than read a political campaign dressed up as a forum post

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1834760 1-Aug-2017 10:11

"rumoured Jacinda Ardern and Kelvin Davis could be on a new leadership ticket."

I can see that. Two. Female and Maori. If they get stuck in, be interesting

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1834762 1-Aug-2017 10:16

tdgeek:

"rumoured Jacinda Ardern and Kelvin Davis could be on a new leadership ticket."

I can see that. Two. Female and Maori. If they get stuck in, be interesting

If they make this choice or Grant Robertson as Deputy I will relook at Labour. I am not comfortable with National doing a fourth term I do not think it is good for a country. However I don't believe in change for change sake.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1834763 1-Aug-2017 10:17

MikeB4:

We (wife and I) would be happy to pay more tax if it helps ease homelessness and poverty. You should have read about those counties, they are orders of magnitude ahead of us and ranked high on surveys.

I prefer having the choice of where I donate any my extra income. Instead of a government taking it via tax, I will like to give to charities of my own choice. I give to World Vision as I believe my money goes a lot further helping people living in real poverty, opposed to it going to people here in NZ just to fund a better lifestyle. Sure there are some instances where it will benefit people in NZ, but personally I would rather have the choice to see my money go where it has the most benefit. Our tax should be tenough just for a safety net, to cover the very basics of housing/food etc. Nothing more, and I think we currently at the right place with our current tax rate.

Saying that, I would be quiet happy to pay more tax if it was going to benefit people in real poverty. I support this kind of initiative in African countries etc.. Not in NZ.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1834774 1-Aug-2017 10:21

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

We (wife and I) would be happy to pay more tax if it helps ease homelessness and poverty. You should have read about those counties, they are orders of magnitude ahead of us and ranked high on surveys.

I prefer having the choice of where I donate any my extra income. Instead of a government taking it via tax, I will like to give to charities of my own choice. I give to World Vision as I believe my money goes a lot further helping people living in real poverty, opposed to it going to people here in NZ just to fund a better lifestyle. Sure there are some instances where it will benefit people in NZ, but personally I would rather have the choice to see my money go where it has the most benefit.

Saying that, I would be quiet happy to pay more tax if it was going to benefit people in real poverty. I support this kind of initiative in African countries etc.. Not in NZ.

Charity begins at home and I really don't want to engage on this but YES poverty does exist in NZ

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1834775 1-Aug-2017 10:25

MikeB4:

Charity begins at home and I really don't want to engage on this but YES poverty does exist in NZ

"Poverty" will always exist in new Zealand, because of its very definition. The solution you describe above will not get rid of "poverty"

"Poverty as defined in New Zealand are the households that make less than 60 per cent of the median disposable income."

So think about that. It means no matter how rich the country is and no matter how high the median household we will always have a class of people that are described as living in poverty.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1834776 1-Aug-2017 10:28

tdgeek:

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

Calm down your defence outrage. I mistakenly took "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama." to mean "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama."

The polls are guesses? the margin of error usually about 3%. So their 15% is probably actually 5%?

You should discuss and take those tinted glasses off.

Now you lost me. Tinted glasses?

Anyway, as mentioned already, if the polls are correct all they are proving is that the Greens have scored some labour votes. Woopy.

Are you open to not responding to me and me not responding to you? I prefer to discuss matters, than read a political campaign dressed up as a forum post

Happy to continue the discussion, but dont know what you meant by this. You lost me. Care to explain?

tdgeek:

Calm down your defence outrage. I mistakenly took "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama." to mean "The Greens have blown it by keeping Metiria Turei and all her drama."

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1834777 1-Aug-2017 10:30

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

Charity begins at home and I really don't want to engage on this but YES poverty does exist in NZ

"Poverty" will always exist in new Zealand, because of its very definition. The solution you describe above will not get rid of "poverty"

"Poverty as defined in New Zealand are the households that make less than 60 per cent of the median disposable income."

So think about that. It means no matter how rich the country is and no matter how high the median household we will always have a class of people that are described as living in poverty.

I worked for over a quarter of a century in social services YOU cannot tell me what poverty is in NZ. You are wrong!

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1834780 1-Aug-2017 10:36

MikeB4:

I worked for over a quarter of a century in social services YOU cannot tell me what poverty is in NZ. You are wrong!

What is your definition poverty?

Its pointless having this discussion if you not going to tell me what your definition of poverty is.

I have already quoted the NZ definition, do you agree with it or not? IMO our definition of poverty is an insult to people who live in absolute poverty and is a term that politicians love to throw around to score votes.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16315

Lifetime subscriber

#1834781 1-Aug-2017 10:40

Wiggum:

You do realize that the greens are going to need labour to have any path into a government?

I also take it that as you have voted labor off your list, there is still some chance you may give your vote to national/Act/United Future/Conservatives etc?

The point I am trying to make is that you not doing yourself or any of the parties on the left any favors by saying you not going to support labor. A vote for labor is a vote for the greens, and a vote for the greens is a vote for labor.

I suggest you re analyze your strategy, sometimes its best to vote strategically, even if it means voting for the party you can't handle. Maybe ask yourself the question, who are the absolute worst parties you don't want in government, then vote strategically to prevent that from happening, even if its means a vote for labor.

Your strategy would work for FPP, not MMP.

I hear what you are saying but it is just not my style. First, I disagree with your proposition that a vote for Labour or the Greens is just a vote for the other. From your perspective it may seem like that but I see it very differently. Second, I detest tactical voting as a matter of principle. It is a cynical ploy that undermines the spirit of our democracy and I don't like it regardless of whether it comes from National or the Greens or anyone else. If you believe National has the best policy then vote for National, not for United Future or Act.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1834785 1-Aug-2017 10:45

Wiggum:

MikeB4:

I worked for over a quarter of a century in social services YOU cannot tell me what poverty is in NZ. You are wrong!

What is your definition poverty?

Its pointless having this discussion if you not going to tell me what your definition of poverty is.

I have already quoted the NZ definition, do you agree with it or not? IMO our definition of poverty is an insult to people who live in absolute poverty and is a term that politicians love to throw around to score votes.

Easy my definition is what I have experienced first hand. What I saw every day for a very long time and what I still see now. I didn't read it on the internet or a text book. When you go into homes with black mould in all the rooms, no heating and empty fridges, if in fact the fridge is working.

Children going to school hungry without warm dry clothing, kids with rheumatic fever, Rickets etc and malnutrition. Get the picture? And before you say it is not self inflicted. I will admit I would cry some nights after getting home from work.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 21