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.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | ... | 268
Glurp
8239 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3791

Subscriber

  Reply # 1915655 9-Dec-2017 13:29
2 people support this post
Send private message

Does a PM work fixed hours? Is there an allotment for time off? Maybe she is doing this in her time off, in which it is no-one else's business. Or maybe she is just doing such a great job that she has time for it anyway.

 

 





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


18317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5246

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1915691 9-Dec-2017 15:49
One person supports this post
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Or maybe she is just doing such a great job that she has time for it anyway.

 

 

 

 

The evidence overwhelmingly speaks to the opposite. 

 

 


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915806 9-Dec-2017 20:58
One person supports this post
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

It could just be me, but I find it totally hypocritical that she has time in the first 100 days to do photo shoots for Vogue, when according to her things in NZ are in such a bad way. So sad....

 

 

If Bill or John were younger and female it would be the same. Blame the media, but whats an hour here or there? While I respect your posts, this seems more like looking for something to pick on than a political issue. Vogue or DIY Monthly, its not important, apart for Stuff


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915807 9-Dec-2017 21:10
Send private message

networkn:

 

Rikkitic:

 

Or maybe she is just doing such a great job that she has time for it anyway.

 

 

 

 

The evidence overwhelmingly speaks to the opposite. 

 

 

 

 

Im keen to see that evidence. Her and they have not been in office long. Her and they can pick holes in Nationals legacy which has happened by her and them and others, thats normal post election behaviour. The only evidence that matters is where we are at in 3 years. The rest is speculation or Pro Labour or Pro National utterings, nothing more. 

 

One example. Health is in a very poor state. We all know that, way under funded. Thats how surpluses are created. The Minister was asked for the position, not given. Asked again, not given. Now, its clear, many DHB's have gone further into the red in a matter of months. Off course, it was election time, best to hold that back, but while Labour is not perfect, a sensible discussion can only be had by being non partisan. Me, I have almost always voted National. This year I voted Labour/Labour, it was to be Labour/NZF but I changed my mind at the literal last minute. I didnt actually vote Labour, I voted against my normal vote due to dissatisfaction, and a fresh approach, given that both parties are centrist.In many if not all way I am not biased, I dont care about National or Labour, I care about NZ. Should Labour be dismal, we are no worse off IMHO


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 1915835 9-Dec-2017 21:45
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Pumpedd:

 

It could just be me, but I find it totally hypocritical that she has time in the first 100 days to do photo shoots for Vogue, when according to her things in NZ are in such a bad way. So sad....

 

 

If Bill or John were younger and female it would be the same. Blame the media, but whats an hour here or there? While I respect your posts, this seems more like looking for something to pick on than a political issue. Vogue or DIY Monthly, its not important, apart for Stuff

 

 

My issue is that she has been PM about a month and things are not that great. IMO its is in bad taste to do photo shoot so soon after an election and where they have so much work to do....

 

It shows me she is far more self obsessed than I thought she was. Not a great publicity move imo.


18317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5246

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1915836 9-Dec-2017 21:46
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Me, I have almost always voted National. This year I voted Labour/Labour, it was to be Labour/NZF but I changed my mind at the literal last minute. I didnt actually vote Labour, I voted against my normal vote due to dissatisfaction, and a fresh approach, given that both parties are centrist.In many if not all way I am not biased, I dont care about National or Labour, I care about NZ. Should Labour be dismal, we are no worse off IMHO

 

 

Fresh approach? Really?!

 

If Labour is dismal we most certainly will be worse off. We will have spent a bunch of money and achieved not a lot or gone backwards. I'm still waiting for them to explain how they are going to magic up 100K of houses which is 27 Houses every single day including xmas day, all weekends and public holidays. This is on top of the houses being built privately or by NZ housing already. That's 27 houses on top. Top house builders in the country are keen to know how they plan on doing this. Also, they are 5 weeks behind schedule since they didn't start day 1.

 

SMB Employers (In fact almost all employers) will be worse off regardless of how "well" they do. 

 

There is plenty of scope for things to be WAY worse.

 

For the record, the evidence is the absence of stuff actually getting done (except some carefully worded statements indicating an intention to back peddle, lots of public appearances, selfies and self congratulatory, or National slamming speeches). If they spent as much time getting on with it, as looking for excuses by way of National NOT to get on with it, they might be making progress. The housing market is cooling, I am sure they will try and take credit for that, despite the fact it was already happening before they won the election. Stats show less kids in "poverty" than before, also happening before they took office. 

 

Perhaps instead of a photo shoot and awards ceremonies, she could be writing up a proper plan for how her Government will be fixing child "poverty", which by her own admission is the reason she got into politics, and her "primary" concern. Strangely, she didn't have a plan before the election, none during the debates, and nothing since. Maybe it's a next election cycle plan. 

 

 


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915840 9-Dec-2017 21:59
One person supports this post
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

tdgeek:

 

Pumpedd:

 

It could just be me, but I find it totally hypocritical that she has time in the first 100 days to do photo shoots for Vogue, when according to her things in NZ are in such a bad way. So sad....

 

 

If Bill or John were younger and female it would be the same. Blame the media, but whats an hour here or there? While I respect your posts, this seems more like looking for something to pick on than a political issue. Vogue or DIY Monthly, its not important, apart for Stuff

 

 

My issue is that she has been PM about a month and things are not that great. IMO its is in bad taste to do photo shoot so soon after an election and where they have so much work to do....

 

It shows me she is far more self obsessed than I thought she was. Not a great publicity move imo.

 

 

Do you expect the 3 year term to be condensed into a month? They do have much work to do, a photo shoot is a red herring. How long was it? An hour, two hours or 8 months? Its a bit silly IMHO


18317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5246

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1915841 9-Dec-2017 22:09
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Do you expect the 3 year term to be condensed into a month? They do have much work to do, a photo shoot is a red herring. How long was it? An hour, two hours or 8 months? Its a bit silly IMHO

 

 

No-one expects that, however, Labour have been in opposition 9 years. Labour were exceptionally critical of National and have said "everythings a mess". People are looking for the leadership and indications of change that was promised, and it's a good look to be nose down and tail up for at least the first 6 months IMO. That isn't happening for my money.  Those were points made by pro Labour supporters I met this past weekend. To give a good impression she should look like she is working *really* hard (fail), and deliver on the leadership (fail by making poor staff/portfolio choices from day 1).

 

You might be prepared to wait 3 years before making any assessment on how they are doing, but I was always taught to start, how you intend to continue.

 

Perception is important after you promise the world, if I was JA I would wait till I had something to crow about in terms of achievements before appearing on a magazine cover. Surely she could have waited 6 months, 12? 


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915843 9-Dec-2017 22:17
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

Me, I have almost always voted National. This year I voted Labour/Labour, it was to be Labour/NZF but I changed my mind at the literal last minute. I didnt actually vote Labour, I voted against my normal vote due to dissatisfaction, and a fresh approach, given that both parties are centrist.In many if not all way I am not biased, I dont care about National or Labour, I care about NZ. Should Labour be dismal, we are no worse off IMHO

 

 

Fresh approach? Really?!

 

Yes. The National approach was poor. Forego spending and show a surplus. I can do that by letting my house and car rot. It will cost more when I have to front up and fix them, thats the issue now 

 

If Labour is dismal we most certainly will be worse off. We will have spent a bunch of money and achieved not a lot or gone backwards. They do need to spend a bunch of money, to catch up on National foregoing spending. As has been shown just now, DHB's are so much worse off in just the last 4 months. That info was available by Jonathan Coleman, but kept aside. I'm still waiting for them to explain how they are going to magic up 100K of houses which is 27 Houses every single day including xmas day, all weekends and public holidays. This is on top of the houses being built privately or by NZ housing already. That's 27 houses on top. Top house builders in the country are keen to know how they plan on doing this. Also, they are 5 weeks behind schedule since they didn't start day 1.

 

SMB Employers (In fact almost all employers) will be worse off regardless of how "well" they do. 

 

There is plenty of scope for things to be WAY worse.

 

For the record, the evidence is the absence of stuff actually getting done How long have they been in power? (except some carefully worded statements indicating an intention to back peddle, lots of public appearances, selfies and self congratulatory, or National slamming speeches). The election was full of National slamming speeches and Labour slamming speeches. Post election that is what happens, that is common knowledge. Its politics. If they spent as much time getting on with it, as looking for excuses by way of National NOT to get on with it, they might be making progress. How long have they been in power? You make it sound like 2 years. The housing market is cooling, I am sure they will try and take credit for that, despite the fact it was already happening before they won the election. There is no evidence of that. An election cools the market. Winter cools the market. Change in Govt, people wait. LVR is to be dropped from 20% to 15%. People who bought in the hot period are already home owners. Bill said there is no housing crisis. Stats show less kids in "poverty" than before, also happening before they took office. Correct. Increases were given to beneficiaries, they have to work after kids are a certain age, good moves. Its no secret that is a National move. I think Duncan Garner said that just today, so she has to at least keep pace with that

 

Perhaps instead of a photo shoot and awards ceremonies, she could be writing up a proper plan for how her Government will be fixing child "poverty", which by her own admission is the reason she got into politics, and her "primary" concern. Strangely, she didn't have a plan before the election, none during the debates, and nothing since. Maybe it's a next election cycle plan. LOL, ok

 

 

 

 

Reading between the lines, there is a need to bash her and them, thats ok, its a political thread, thats all that happens. This thread and the Trump thread shows that. But, if we are down to bashing a boring, short, photo shoot, that tells me that the ideas are running out. And, that given they are just in power, its quite a stretch to expect everything will be fixed by now. When 18 months has gone by, thats a better guide. End of the day, we can all comment on what has been good and what has been bad. Thats easy for National as the good and not so good has happened. For the new lot, it hasnt started


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915845 9-Dec-2017 22:28
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

Do you expect the 3 year term to be condensed into a month? They do have much work to do, a photo shoot is a red herring. How long was it? An hour, two hours or 8 months? Its a bit silly IMHO

 

 

No-one expects that, You do, you have already said that however, Labour have been in opposition 9 years. Labour were exceptionally critical of National and have said "everythings a mess". People are looking for the leadership and indications of change that was promised, and it's a good look to be nose down and tail up for at least the first 6 months IMO. I agree. Its been a month, she's been away, she had an 2 hour photo shoot. That isn't happening for my money.  Same here, you say the first 6 months but you are criticising  the first month not matching the first 6 months.Those were points made by pro Labour supporters I met this past weekend. To give a good impression she should look like she is working *really* hard (fail) Your opinion, get back in 6 months , and deliver on the leadership (fail by making poor staff/portfolio choices from day 1).

 

You might be prepared to wait 3 years before making any assessment on how they are doing, didnt I say 18 months? (I cant backspace from here) but I was always taught to start, how you intend to continue. Fair, but you talk 6 months, its been one month, that equates to a measurement of 3 years? Not withstanding taking over new reins, getting the eal detail from the ministries? Such as the today's DHB detail of debt that was known but not disclosed. 1. Get the data. 2. Plan 3. Implement

 

Perception is important after you promise the world, if I was JA I would wait till I had something to crow about in terms of achievements before appearing on a magazine cover. Surely she could have waited 6 months, 12? 

 

 

Magazine cover is a red herring, its nothing. Last week she was part of some list of important females, I dont know the detail as I didnt read it, unimportant.


18317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5246

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1915846 9-Dec-2017 22:31
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

 

 

Reading between the lines, there is a need to bash her and them, thats ok, its a political thread, thats all that happens. This thread and the Trump thread shows that. But, if we are down to bashing a boring, short, photo shoot, that tells me that the ideas are running out. And, that given they are just in power, its quite a stretch to expect everything will be fixed by now. When 18 months has gone by, thats a better guide. End of the day, we can all comment on what has been good and what has been bad. Thats easy for National as the good and not so good has happened. For the new lot, it hasnt started

 

 

The photo shoot is just an indication of how I think she is as a leader. I wouldn't (much) care about it, but it's a culmination of that and everything else. 

 

The education policy actually stands to benefit me, and I *still* think it's an appalling idea.

 

Labour doesn't have any fresh ideas, they are just throwing money around like it's going out of fashion, National could have made themselves more popular by doing the same in the past 3 terms, but they chose to take a financially conservative view esp given there was a GFC and 4 Massive Natural disasters to worry about. Do you think Labour would have been throwing money around like they are now at the same time as managing all those issues? 

 

It's easy to be cavalier about how Labour goes in the next 3 years, when by your own admission you don't have anything to lose. 

 

 

 

 


18317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5246

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1915847 9-Dec-2017 22:33
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

Do you expect the 3 year term to be condensed into a month? They do have much work to do, a photo shoot is a red herring. How long was it? An hour, two hours or 8 months? Its a bit silly IMHO

 

 

No-one expects that, You do, you have already said that however, Labour have been in opposition 9 years. Labour were exceptionally critical of National and have said "everythings a mess". People are looking for the leadership and indications of change that was promised, and it's a good look to be nose down and tail up for at least the first 6 months IMO. I agree. Its been a month, she's been away, she had an 2 hour photo shoot. That isn't happening for my money.  Same here, you say the first 6 months but you are criticising  the first month not matching the first 6 months.Those were points made by pro Labour supporters I met this past weekend. To give a good impression she should look like she is working *really* hard (fail) Your opinion, get back in 6 months , and deliver on the leadership (fail by making poor staff/portfolio choices from day 1).

 

You might be prepared to wait 3 years before making any assessment on how they are doing, didnt I say 18 months? (I cant backspace from here) but I was always taught to start, how you intend to continue. Fair, but you talk 6 months, its been one month, that equates to a measurement of 3 years? Not withstanding taking over new reins, getting the eal detail from the ministries? Such as the today's DHB detail of debt that was known but not disclosed. 1. Get the data. 2. Plan 3. Implement

 

Perception is important after you promise the world, if I was JA I would wait till I had something to crow about in terms of achievements before appearing on a magazine cover. Surely she could have waited 6 months, 12? 

 

 

Magazine cover is a red herring, its nothing. Last week she was part of some list of important females, I dont know the detail as I didnt read it, unimportant.

 

 

 

 

The way you choose to quote makes it difficult to reply back to you, so I am not going to. Needless to say however, I disagree. 

 

 


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915851 9-Dec-2017 23:07
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

 

 

Reading between the lines, there is a need to bash her and them, thats ok, its a political thread, thats all that happens. This thread and the Trump thread shows that. But, if we are down to bashing a boring, short, photo shoot, that tells me that the ideas are running out. And, that given they are just in power, its quite a stretch to expect everything will be fixed by now. When 18 months has gone by, thats a better guide. End of the day, we can all comment on what has been good and what has been bad. Thats easy for National as the good and not so good has happened. For the new lot, it hasnt started

 

 

The photo shoot is just an indication of how I think she is as a leader. I wouldn't (much) care about it, but it's a culmination of that and everything else. 

 

The education policy actually stands to benefit me, and I *still* think it's an appalling idea.

 

Labour doesn't have any fresh ideas, they are just throwing money around like it's going out of fashion, National could have made themselves more popular by doing the same in the past 3 terms, but they chose to take a financially conservative view esp given there was a GFC and 4 Massive Natural disasters to worry about. Do you think Labour would have been throwing money around like they are now at the same time as managing all those issues? 

 

It's easy to be cavalier about how Labour goes in the next 3 years, when by your own admission you don't have anything to lose. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Im not being cavalier. I care about NZ, not myself nor National, nor Labour. Maybe I am lucky that I can think like that. 

 

Education, I think its a generally good idea as many cant afford that, but it does need rules for sure. I dont however subscribe to the posts where kids will take free education to have a year off and party. Id rather get a base paying job and party.

 

Throwing money around, ok, you have got my attention. :-)  Why did I not vote National? I will, tell you why. They underfunded many crucial areas and turned that into surpluses. Any idiot can do that, whether it be an individual, family, or company. Thats a temporary artificial situation. It will always bite you back. Had National stated that we cant live in our means, we have to borrow, or increases taxe as what has to be done we cannot afford, then I would have no issue. But they didnt, they created surpluses by underfunding health and infrastructure. I can't forgive that. GFC. yes, that affected us, but far and away MUCH less than other countries as our banking system leaves us much less exposed. EQ. EQC, formerly the Earthquake and War Damage Commission has been building finds for decades. JK said there is plenty left well into Feb 22. Where was that money? Its Reserves. But in reality its spent on many ventures, as its dead money, not likely to be required in the short term, but it is there. Accounting wise it is not a cost, it is an asset.

 

In 3 years time, the books will be sad, election fodder for National and the Maori Party. Why? As someone needs either to A) spend the money that has been withheld, or bank it, get a surplus, and crow about it, while the existing ministries cry out for funds. Plus the NZF finds which would have applied to either Govt, and in the greater scheme of things is not life damaging, and can, and no doubt will be spread over time.

 

Analogy. Individual, earns an income, lives on it, pays the bills, saves some, takes care of required maintenance. Thats not NZ, National or Labour. We cannot do all of that, all of the time. That is the reality. We have few natural resources, and a low population. We cannot escape that. I agree on a number of your issues, but I cannot agree that National gave us stewardship.   

 

 


13430 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1915852 9-Dec-2017 23:08
Send private message

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

networkn:

 

tdgeek:

 

Do you expect the 3 year term to be condensed into a month? They do have much work to do, a photo shoot is a red herring. How long was it? An hour, two hours or 8 months? Its a bit silly IMHO

 

 

No-one expects that, You do, you have already said that however, Labour have been in opposition 9 years. Labour were exceptionally critical of National and have said "everythings a mess". People are looking for the leadership and indications of change that was promised, and it's a good look to be nose down and tail up for at least the first 6 months IMO. I agree. Its been a month, she's been away, she had an 2 hour photo shoot. That isn't happening for my money.  Same here, you say the first 6 months but you are criticising  the first month not matching the first 6 months.Those were points made by pro Labour supporters I met this past weekend. To give a good impression she should look like she is working *really* hard (fail) Your opinion, get back in 6 months , and deliver on the leadership (fail by making poor staff/portfolio choices from day 1).

 

You might be prepared to wait 3 years before making any assessment on how they are doing, didnt I say 18 months? (I cant backspace from here) but I was always taught to start, how you intend to continue. Fair, but you talk 6 months, its been one month, that equates to a measurement of 3 years? Not withstanding taking over new reins, getting the eal detail from the ministries? Such as the today's DHB detail of debt that was known but not disclosed. 1. Get the data. 2. Plan 3. Implement

 

Perception is important after you promise the world, if I was JA I would wait till I had something to crow about in terms of achievements before appearing on a magazine cover. Surely she could have waited 6 months, 12? 

 

 

Magazine cover is a red herring, its nothing. Last week she was part of some list of important females, I dont know the detail as I didnt read it, unimportant.

 

 

 

 

The way you choose to quote makes it difficult to reply back to you, so I am not going to. Needless to say however, I disagree. 

 

 

 

 

Ok. I felt is easier to bold my comments where they relate to, than give a listing, but thats ok, understood.


18317 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5246

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1915855 9-Dec-2017 23:29
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Ok. I felt is easier to bold my comments where they relate to, than give a listing, but thats ok, understood.

 

 

For the record, I never said I expected JA to fix everything in a month. Show me where I did? What I expect her to do is show leadership from day one, and set an example on how she expects to run her Government. She has done a lot of talking (Both talking up her Cabinet and it's plans and then backpeddling). She left KD in charge when she was overseas, a huge mistake, he clearly doesn't have a clue, which was obviously to a fair number of people well before he proved it beyond doubt. She gave Andrew Little the Small Business role, stupid stupid decision, she has already has had to explain her ministers not singing from the same Hymm Sheet (as one example they can't decide on the name and intent on work for the dole which was another parties idea they foo foo'd a few years back).

 

They should all be noses to the grindstone, showing they deserve to be there and can at least try hard to make things better. 

 

None of those things is the Photoshoot, I couldn't really care less, however, add it to all these other things and the other points I have made and it starts to create a picture. I can understand you not wanting to see it, but I am not alone in my perception.

 

 

 

 


1 | ... | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | ... | 268
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer 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:



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.