Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
Glurp
7587 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3547

Subscriber

  Reply # 1886917 20-Oct-2017 13:22
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

No, because I am not stupid, not stubborn, not fixed in my ideas, and I care about what my voters want, which is, a say, which I can't say if I a) don't make it to Parliment, or b) am so neutered whilst I am there, either in opposition, or as a completely powerless silent parter in a coalition.

 

 

Everything you say completely contradicts this. It astounds me that you cannot see that.

 

My understanding of the Green position, which admittedly may not be correct (I don't presume to speak for them), is that they rule out talking to National because they are diametrically opposed to some fundamental National policies and ideas. What is the point of negotiating with someone when there is nothing to negotiate about? This is the point you don't seem to get. 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


17280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4940

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1886919 20-Oct-2017 13:23
Send private message

elpenguino:

 

TBH it's totally the point. He signalled what the greens were going to do to the electorate well ahead. Votes are given with that knowledge.

 

To then go ahead and negotiate a deal with national would be scumbaggery of the highest order. You might expect that from other politicians but the greens like to take the moral high ground.

 

I'd say they're enjoying the view up there today !

 

 

 

 

 

 

They campaigned for a change in Goverment. A more Green friendly National Government would have been a great change, do you not agree?

 

The shortsightedness of the leadership of the Greens to say they would rather be in opposition and achieve NOTHING rather than sit down and have a frank conversation with National, is why I can't respect them.

 

Whatever was proposed still had to be ratified by the Board, and Delegates, so they had plenty of chances to kill it dead, but instead, they didn't even bother. It's sort of worked out for them, though I'd suggest they won't get much if anything out of this coalition.

 

 


Glurp
7587 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3547

Subscriber

  Reply # 1886931 20-Oct-2017 13:29
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

It's sort of worked out for them, though I'd suggest they won't get much if anything out of this coalition.

 

 

They have three ministries, which is more than they ever had before. I would say they already have quite a bit from this coalition.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


17280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4940

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1886933 20-Oct-2017 13:31
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

No, because I am not stupid, not stubborn, not fixed in my ideas, and I care about what my voters want, which is, a say, which I can't say if I a) don't make it to Parliment, or b) am so neutered whilst I am there, either in opposition, or as a completely powerless silent parter in a coalition.

 

 

Everything you say completely contradicts this. It astounds me that you cannot see that.

 

My understanding of the Green position, which admittedly may not be correct (I don't presume to speak for them), is that they rule out talking to National because they are diametrically opposed to some fundamental National policies and ideas. What is the point of negotiating with someone when there is nothing to negotiate about? This is the point you don't seem to get. 

 

 

 

 

Wow, nice. I kinda knew I'd set myself up for it, but unsurprisingly, you couldn't resist the urge to be insulting yet again. Since you can't be civil, how about you don't reply to my posts?

 

The problem is that the Greens don't really understand compromise. They would rather achieve nothing and sit with a smug look on their faces about "principles" than work hard at compromise. Lots of political parties work together who have fundamental differences. If the the benefit is strong enough, almost all sorts of people can work together. If you can't, in my opinion, you are an extremist, and you have no business in politics. National also probably completely disagree with the Greens and would have to hold their nose, but for the greater good, they may well have tried to find common ground.


602 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 220


  Reply # 1886934 20-Oct-2017 13:35
Send private message

Why aren't you saying the same thing about National?

 

National are going to spend their next 3 years in opposition. Why didn't they have a conversation with labour? Sure, national would have had to change all their policies and accept certain conditions but at least they would be achieving something? right?

 

The reason parties do this is partly because they have founding charters or constitutions that point them in a certain direction. Another reason is marketing. You need to be distinct from others in the arena.

 

Even if greens didn't have those concerns, ss I've said earlier, national has just killed its' partners. Greens would be so silly to drink the same poison.

 

 


17280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4940

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1886939 20-Oct-2017 13:44
Send private message

elpenguino:

 

Why aren't you saying the same thing about National?

 

National are going to spend their next 3 years in opposition. Why didn't they have a conversation with labour? Sure, national would have had to change all their policies and accept certain conditions but at least they would be achieving something? right?

 

The reason parties do this is partly because they have founding charters or constitutions that point them in a certain direction. Another reason is marketing. You need to be distinct from others in the arena.

 

Even if greens didn't have those concerns, ss I've said earlier, national has just killed its' partners. Greens would be so silly to drink the same poison.

 

 

 

 

I am not sure if you are being serious, Labour and National in Coalition? I don't think there has ever been a coalition between the two largest parties in MMP, if another option has been available? National was willing to talk to every one of the smaller groups as I understand it. 

 

There is a big difference to being a small party in opposition by choice and being a large party in opposition because the other parties have managed to get an agreement which you can't prevent. National has extended olive branches to the Maori party even when it didn't "need the numbers" in order to try and heal the gap.

 

Not sure what you mean by killing off it's partners?

 

 

 

 


602 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 220


  Reply # 1886945 20-Oct-2017 13:51
Send private message

you're the one who started it :-)

 

I mean, really. greens and national in coalition. fat chance.

 

I also don't understand your rage. If you are so in favour of doing better to the environment but don't want to vote for the greens you could become active in the national party and agitate to get their direction changed.

 

(PS good luck with that!)

 

 


158 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 77


  Reply # 1886948 20-Oct-2017 13:56
One person supports this post
Send private message

Killing off their partners? Like UF, Act and Maori party are all effectively dead as National has either absorbed their support or driven them off in the case of Maori party.

 

As for this moaning about the Green party not talking to National. Despite all of the whining in the media about it. Bill English never reached out to them. James Shaw even said he would take the call if he did. He said the cost for support would probably not be palatable to the National party but he was open to talk at least.


17280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4940

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1886956 20-Oct-2017 14:09
Send private message

elpenguino:

 

you're the one who started it :-)

 

I mean, really. greens and national in coalition. fat chance.

 

I also don't understand your rage. If you are so in favour of doing better to the environment but don't want to vote for the greens you could become active in the national party and agitate to get their direction changed.

 

(PS good luck with that!)

 

 

 

 

Rage? There isn't any rage. Not sure why you'd think that.

 

There is a fundamental reason why today there can't be a Greens National Coalition, that's because of attitudes like yours. Once upon a time, Blacks and Whites together on a bus was seen the same way. 

 

 

 

 


602 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 220


  Reply # 1886958 20-Oct-2017 14:13
Send private message

networkn:

 

 

 

National has extended olive branches to the Maori party even when it didn't "need the numbers" in order to try and heal the gap.

 

 

That's a naïve view of the situation. The reason national engaged all those minor parties was to make it easier to play the minor parties off against each other.

 

With the 3 coalition partners, any one minor party could have walked away and national still had a majority which made it just about impossible for national to be held to ransom on important issues.


17280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4940

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1886960 20-Oct-2017 14:14
Send private message

Varkk:

 

Killing off their partners? Like UF, Act and Maori party are all effectively dead as National has either absorbed their support or driven them off in the case of Maori party.

 

 

UF leader retired, how did National drive out the Maori party? Seems to me Labour took all those seats.

 

 

 

 

As for this moaning about the Green party not talking to National. Despite all of the whining in the media about it. Bill English never reached out to them. James Shaw even said he would take the call if he did. He said the cost for support would probably not be palatable to the National party but he was open to talk at least.

 

 

As far as I know the same in reverse, no call from Shaw to National. Hardly a good starting position to a discussion when it starts with "the price of support won't be palatable, but sure, give us a call". That wasn't a genuine attempt at starting negotiations. He also made it very clear many times that his board would draw and quarter him.

 

 


17280 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4940

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1886962 20-Oct-2017 14:17
Send private message

elpenguino:

 

networkn:

 

 

 

National has extended olive branches to the Maori party even when it didn't "need the numbers" in order to try and heal the gap.

 

 

That's a naïve view of the situation. The reason national engaged all those minor parties was to make it easier to play the minor parties off against each other.

 

With the 3 coalition partners, any one minor party could have walked away and national still had a majority which made it just about impossible for national to be held to ransom on important issues.

 

 

Well, you can view things from any position if you try hard enough I guess. Even if that was a motivating factor (which is smart if you want a stable government, which National was), you are still offering something in exchange for something else. The Maori party got something out of the relationship one presumes, otherwise, why would they do it? I imagine the Maori party had to hold their noses, but they did it, because it was in the best interest of their members and voters. Something Greens to date seem unwilling to do.


Glurp
7587 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3547

Subscriber

  Reply # 1886963 20-Oct-2017 14:17
Send private message

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

No, because I am not stupid, not stubborn, not fixed in my ideas, and I care about what my voters want, which is, a say, which I can't say if I a) don't make it to Parliment, or b) am so neutered whilst I am there, either in opposition, or as a completely powerless silent parter in a coalition.

 

 

Everything you say completely contradicts this. It astounds me that you cannot see that.

 

My understanding of the Green position, which admittedly may not be correct (I don't presume to speak for them), is that they rule out talking to National because they are diametrically opposed to some fundamental National policies and ideas. What is the point of negotiating with someone when there is nothing to negotiate about? This is the point you don't seem to get. 

 

 

 

 

Wow, nice. I kinda knew I'd set myself up for it, but unsurprisingly, you couldn't resist the urge to be insulting yet again. Since you can't be civil, how about you don't reply to my posts?

 

The problem is that the Greens don't really understand compromise. They would rather achieve nothing and sit with a smug look on their faces about "principles" than work hard at compromise. Lots of political parties work together who have fundamental differences. If the the benefit is strong enough, almost all sorts of people can work together. If you can't, in my opinion, you are an extremist, and you have no business in politics. National also probably completely disagree with the Greens and would have to hold their nose, but for the greater good, they may well have tried to find common ground.

 

 

Sorry, I don't get this. How am I being insulting or uncivil? I just said I find it astounding that you can't see the contradictions in your different statements. That seems well  within the parameters of a discussion of this nature.

 

I don't see anything wrong with standing on principles. In fact, I consider that rather important. Clearly we disagree about this, but it is hardly a basis for labelling those like the Greens who do extremists.

 

 

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


Glurp
7587 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3547

Subscriber

  Reply # 1886965 20-Oct-2017 14:19
Send private message

networkn:

 

There is a fundamental reason why today there can't be a Greens National Coalition, that's because of attitudes like yours. Once upon a time, Blacks and Whites together on a bus was seen the same way. 

 

 

 

That is way over the line. If you don't know why, I will be glad to explain it.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


602 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 220


  Reply # 1886966 20-Oct-2017 14:20
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

networkn:

 

No, because I am not stupid, not stubborn, not fixed in my ideas, and I care about what my voters want, which is, a say, which I can't say if I a) don't make it to Parliment, or b) am so neutered whilst I am there, either in opposition, or as a completely powerless silent parter in a coalition.

 

 

Everything you say completely contradicts this. It astounds me that you cannot see that.

 

My understanding of the Green position, which admittedly may not be correct (I don't presume to speak for them), is that they rule out talking to National because they are diametrically opposed to some fundamental National policies and ideas. What is the point of negotiating with someone when there is nothing to negotiate about? This is the point you don't seem to get. 

 

 

 

 

Wow, nice. I kinda knew I'd set myself up for it, but unsurprisingly, you couldn't resist the urge to be insulting yet again. Since you can't be civil, how about you don't reply to my posts?

 

The problem is that the Greens don't really understand compromise. They would rather achieve nothing and sit with a smug look on their faces about "principles" than work hard at compromise. Lots of political parties work together who have fundamental differences. If the the benefit is strong enough, almost all sorts of people can work together. If you can't, in my opinion, you are an extremist, and you have no business in politics. National also probably completely disagree with the Greens and would have to hold their nose, but for the greater good, they may well have tried to find common ground.

 

 

I don't understand your point.

 

Lets look at the current situation and reconcile that with this post. Greens are in government with nzf and labour. I am guessing they had to make some compromises (1). They are in government so they are probably going to achieve something (2).

 

I think mostly you are annoyed national didn't win. Is that your point?


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

Hawaiki Transpacific cable ready-for-service
Posted 20-Jul-2018 11:29


Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central launches
Posted 10-Jul-2018 10:40


Spark completes first milestone in voice platform upgrade
Posted 10-Jul-2018 09:36


Microsoft ices heated developers
Posted 6-Jul-2018 20:16


PB Technologies charged for its extended warranties and warned for bait advertising
Posted 3-Jul-2018 15:45


Almost 20,000 people claim credits from Spark
Posted 29-Jun-2018 10:40


Cove sells NZ's first insurance policy via chatbot
Posted 25-Jun-2018 10:04


N4L helping TAKA Trust bridge the digital divide for Lower Hutt students
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:08


Winners Announced for 2018 CIO Awards
Posted 18-Jun-2018 13:03


Logitech Rally sets new standard for USB-connected video conference cameras
Posted 18-Jun-2018 09:27


Russell Stanners steps down as Vodafone NZ CEO
Posted 12-Jun-2018 09:13


Intergen recognised as 2018 Microsoft Country Partner of the Year for New Zealand
Posted 12-Jun-2018 08:00


Finalists Announced For Microsoft NZ Partner Awards
Posted 6-Jun-2018 15:12


Vocus Group and Vodafone announce joint venture to accelerate fibre innovation
Posted 5-Jun-2018 10:52


Kogan.com to launch Kogan Mobile in New Zealand
Posted 4-Jun-2018 14:34



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.