Survey from the National Party

Forums › Off topic › Survey from the National Party

Brendan

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#106238 20-Jul-2012 00:38

My partner recently received a survey from the National Party in the mail box.

It's a curious thing on closer inspection - it wants you to tick the three issues that are important to you, and provides a list.

All of the options are pretty clearly stated, and clear in their meaning. Except one.

Selling minority shares in four energy SOEs and Air New Zealand

Now, the thing I note about this one 'issue' is how ambiguously it is worded. It is worded so that it can be interpreted in two mutually exclusive ways:
1. it's important to sell the assets, and I am interested in this.
2. the selling is important because it shouldn't happen.

Is national trying to 'game' the survey such that the results can be interpreted in any way they wish? Imagine all the people who might interpret it as (2) above and these are counted as 'support' for the sale.

Why are they ramming it through - there is no doubt it not wanted? Why this ambiguous 'survey'? Why a survey now, at all (timing)?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 9

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#658805 20-Jul-2012 00:55

Actually I think that whilst it wasn't the desired outcome for a lot of people, they voted National in, after National fully disclosed it's intention to sell the assets. It's a partial sell down and I think a lot of people don't understand that. Labour and Greens as usual want to get as much press out of this and they are twisting it to suit them, instead of focusing attention on things which will help NZ'rs.

GeoffisPure

459 posts

Ultimate Geek

#658806 20-Jul-2012 00:59

I agree with you, Brendan. It's very ambiguous, and any result could be taken as a win by both sides of that argument.

Brendan

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#658812 20-Jul-2012 02:58

networkn: Actually I think that whilst it wasn't the desired outcome for a lot of people, they voted National in, after National fully disclosed it's intention to sell the assets.

Yes and No.

While I agree that NZ should not have voted them in when they disclosed they were going to sell the assets, they did. And why they did that puzzled me a lot because clearly the majority do not want this.

So I arrived at this: People are stupid.

Specifically, I think the voter believed National would never actually do it. It'd be stopped somehow. But then, if that's true, why vote National at all? It's not like they have any new ideas they didn't have during the 1990's. It's all rehashed.

(Mind you, I have yet to see any politician have a truly good idea from any party; seems they just are not capable).

It's a partial sell down and I think a lot of people don't understand that.

They DO understand it. They just do not accept the arguments it will leave us with enough control or NOT result in higher power prices. And I doubt you can show the opposite yourself.

And the reason is simple: it will disadvantage us in the long run. It is not complicated or difficult.

Labour and Greens as usual want to get as much press out of this and they are twisting it to suit them, instead of focusing attention on things which will help NZ'rs.

Selling these assets will not help NZ, and it is a tortured piece of economic sorcery to say it will. Labour did not invent the controversy.

If you want to help the NZ economy, one of the easiest things would be to fund some of our better inventors instead of forcing them to go to Australia and make the aussies rich.

And I don't know why you seem so happy about the asset sales: your power bill will be going up just like mine.

No one buys a power station without expecting it to quickly pay for itself. The net result is worse than no profit (for NZ) - it's negative profit.

It's a stupid idea.
And it really shows the low quality of leadership this country has suffered for decades. It's not complicated, there is no hidden secret benefit for you and me. It'll go out of your pocket and into their's at a greater rate than before. Never doubt that.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#658829 20-Jul-2012 07:21

I disagree Brandon.

Asset sales do work, Labour and the Greens just want you to believe they don't, they refer to Queensland rail as their example but completely forget Tesltra, SEC (State Electricity Commision in Victoria), QANTAS and a number of other companies in Australia.

I voted for National on the selling off of these assets in the election and pulled my vote from Act to try and seal it.

National creamed Labour in the election so I would suggest the protests etc against asset sales are the loud majority as the silent majority are busy at work!

johnr

19282 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#658832 20-Jul-2012 07:27

Brendan are you calling the people that voted for national stupid?

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#658833 20-Jul-2012 07:29

Brendan: While I agree that NZ should not have voted them in when they disclosed they were going to sell the assets, they did. And why they did that puzzled me a lot because clearly the majority do not want this.

In the first term National was moderated by the balance of power in parliament and Key's own sensible strategy of not relying on Act so as not to be identified with their policies. Some voters may have half-expected another half-agreement with the Greens and continued coalition with the Maori party like last time. This time around the Maori party is a more reliable National support partner without Harawira. Another big factor - a fair number of usually Labour supporting voters not voting at all this time around.

ajw

1932 posts

Uber Geek

#658857 20-Jul-2012 08:27

What gets me is the 800,000 or so lazy people who didn't bother to get off their complacent backsides and vote at the last election but are now moaning about asset sales. I am against asset sales and voted at the last election.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

SaltyNZ

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#658889 20-Jul-2012 09:14

The one we received asked what was the most important *local* issue. Being a Rodney resident, I replied 'The fact that your government endorses a dawn raid by police armed with automatic weapons in helicopters to arrest a man accused of helping other people copy DVDs.'

Honestly, if that s*** doesn't scare you...

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

keewee01

1737 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#658890 20-Jul-2012 09:16

johnr: Brendan are you calling the people that voted for national stupid?

I think a more accurate statement would be that those who strongly opposed asset sales, but still voted National were foolish.

Now that would make an interesting straw poll... curious to see how it stacks up.

keewee01

1737 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#658892 20-Jul-2012 09:17

ajw: What gets me is the 800,000 or so lazy people who didn't bother to get off their complacent backsides and vote at the last election but are now moaning about asset sales. I am against asset sales and voted at the last election.

THIS!

Zeon

3916 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#658894 20-Jul-2012 09:22

Can someone tell me why the government should be involved in a sector that has many competitors and relatively low barriers to entry? They should all be completely sold and no more of the government demanding big dividends which is probably a major driver in pushing up prices and not letting the companies be competitive.

Speedtest 2019-10-14

keewee01

1737 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#658899 20-Jul-2012 09:30

Zeon: Can someone tell me why the government should be involved in a sector that has many competitors and relatively low barriers to entry? They should all be completely sold and no more of the government demanding big dividends which is probably a major driver in pushing up prices and not letting the companies be competitive.

And THAT there is the problem seen by many people. If they are all completely sold off then there is one lump sum of money on to Government and then nothing more! At the moment the dividends are adding money into coffers and therefore helping keep taxes, etc lower.

And as we can already see with them supposed being self regulated (or have I got that wrong?) they will happily raise prices on a whim. There would be nothing to stop new owners (with real shareholders wanting a decent return) doubling the price of electricity overnight! Selling them will not make them more competitive and keep pricing under control - it will do the opposite! (IMO)

Oh - and why should the government be involved in this sector - because electricity generation is critical to the country. That is why. Look at the lack of investment in Telecom when it was first sold off. The lack of investment in NZ Rail when it was sold off. Yet both those companies still made lots of money for their shareholders/owners.

lucky015

743 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#658900 20-Jul-2012 09:33

ajw: What gets me is the 800,000 or so lazy people who didn't bother to get off their complacent backsides and vote at the last election but are now moaning about asset sales. I am against asset sales and voted at the last election.

I'd be more inclined to think that the ones complaining are often Labour voters who now don't even want to vote for their own party but still have a stick up their behind about National.

SaltyNZ: The one we received asked what was the most important *local* issue. Being a Rodney resident, I replied 'The fact that your government endorses a dawn raid by police armed with automatic weapons in helicopters to arrest a man accused of helping other people copy DVDs.'

Honestly, if that s*** doesn't scare you...

To be honest I don't imagine there is any political party who would not have sold out in that position, National where just in the position to do it at the time.

Luckily it seems everyone was too incompetent to work together so it may come down to no harm no foul depending on how it all turns out, If Megaupload makes its back online the publicity will have made it unstoppable.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#658901 20-Jul-2012 09:33

Zeon: Can someone tell me why the government should be involved in a sector that has many competitors and relatively low barriers to entry? They should all be completely sold and no more of the government demanding big dividends which is probably a major driver in pushing up prices and not letting the companies be competitive.

I agree wholeheartedly with this post, but as I had my morning brain engaged I couldn't think of how to put it!

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#658905 20-Jul-2012 09:40

Brendan: My partner recently received a survey from the National Party in the mail box.

It's a curious thing on closer inspection - it wants you to tick the three issues that are important to you, and provides a list.

All of the options are pretty clearly stated, and clear in their meaning. Except one.

Selling minority shares in four energy SOEs and Air New Zealand

Now, the thing I note about this one 'issue' is how ambiguously it is worded. It is worded so that it can be interpreted in two mutually exclusive ways:
1. it's important to sell the assets, and I am interested in this.
2. the selling is important because it shouldn't happen.

Is national trying to 'game' the survey such that the results can be interpreted in any way they wish? Imagine all the people who might interpret it as (2) above and these are counted as 'support' for the sale.

Why are they ramming it through - there is no doubt it not wanted? Why this ambiguous 'survey'? Why a survey now, at all (timing)?

The question seems perfectly clear to me. Is selling the shares an important issue for you or not? If your partner thinks the same as you do, and it is hard to imagine that they would not else life would be hell in your household, then the issue is important to them. So the answer is "Yes".

Now from your view point I can understand your suspicion due to the far left's dependance on indoctination, guided democracy, distortions, misrepresentations, tricking of the gullible, etc, but I think your suspicion in the above case is completely misguided.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 9