Do you want the flag to stay as it is?

Forums › Off topic › Do you want the flag to stay as it is?

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23

10912 posts

Uber Geek

# 1519935 26-Mar-2016 09:07

tdgeek:
MaxLV:

jeffnz:

MaxLV: The Union Jack won because of all that it stands for to the majority of us New Zealanders that voted to keep it as part of our flag, who recognised it's part in New Zealand's history, and because it represents what New Zealand is today.

Unless you know everyone that voted for the current flag you are just guessing.

So I would guess that an "amount" voted because it was a John Key initiative (on both sides of the political spectrum)

The union jack doesn't represent who we are today nor did it properly represent how we started when it was instigated in 1902.

Its fine to want to keep the current flag so no need for ill informed comments

No I'm not. No more than you are when you say you know why people voted for or against changing the flag. And there is nothing wrong voting against changing the flag because John Key made it a political choice by supporting the alternative.

I can't believe anyone would say that. Your saying that our national flag is unimportant as I'd rather vote against John Key than our national flag. And if you preferred the new flag, you would vote against it, wow. Democracy isn't perfect. It would ALWAYS be a political issue as a politician would take it onboard. Politicians would talk about it.

And the Union Jack does represent what New Zealand is today. It is part of our history as a nation, and that history defines what New Zealand is today. That's why so many of us voted to keep the Union Jack as part of our flag.

BTW if you want to get 'personal' then you're the one making ill informed comments about why the current flag has been voted for by the majority of voters. IOW you're the one who is 'just guessing'.

You've already stated that some voted against the new flag because of John Key. Its also human psyche to resist change. And there will be some, that genuinely want the old flag. Those that vote for the new flag can only do so if they feel it better represents NZ.

If someone genuinely felt the old flag was better at representing NZ, for the right reasons, I have no issue, but its clear that many voted for reasons that had nothing to do with what better represents NZ

Agree. The association of the process with one politician was not particularly helpful.

jmh

458 posts

Ultimate Geek

Subscriber

# 1519936 26-Mar-2016 09:24

One person supports this post

gzt:
tdgeek:

MaxLV:

jeffnz:

MaxLV: The Union Jack won because of all that it stands for to the majority of us New Zealanders that voted to keep it as part of our flag, who recognised it's part in New Zealand's history, and because it represents what New Zealand is today.

Unless you know everyone that voted for the current flag you are just guessing.

So I would guess that an "amount" voted because it was a John Key initiative (on both sides of the political spectrum)

The union jack doesn't represent who we are today nor did it properly represent how we started when it was instigated in 1902.

Its fine to want to keep the current flag so no need for ill informed comments

No I'm not. No more than you are when you say you know why people voted for or against changing the flag. And there is nothing wrong voting against changing the flag because John Key made it a political choice by supporting the alternative.

I can't believe anyone would say that. Your saying that our national flag is unimportant as I'd rather vote against John Key than our national flag. And if you preferred the new flag, you would vote against it, wow. Democracy isn't perfect. It would ALWAYS be a political issue as a politician would take it onboard. Politicians would talk about it.

And the Union Jack does represent what New Zealand is today. It is part of our history as a nation, and that history defines what New Zealand is today. That's why so many of us voted to keep the Union Jack as part of our flag.

BTW if you want to get 'personal' then you're the one making ill informed comments about why the current flag has been voted for by the majority of voters. IOW you're the one who is 'just guessing'.

You've already stated that some voted against the new flag because of John Key. Its also human psyche to resist change. And there will be some, that genuinely want the old flag. Those that vote for the new flag can only do so if they feel it better represents NZ.

If someone genuinely felt the old flag was better at representing NZ, for the right reasons, I have no issue, but its clear that many voted for reasons that had nothing to do with what better represents NZ

Agree. The association of the process with one politician was not particularly helpful.

John Key is the most popular politician in the country so surely his backing should led to victory for the new flag. That's what he was counting on. Maybe people voted for other reasons, like, oh I don't know, that they didn't like it.

gzt

10912 posts

Uber Geek

# 1519937 26-Mar-2016 09:40

Popular politician initiates popularity contest. What could possibly go wrong? ; ).

Aaroona

Human
2934 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

# 1519957 26-Mar-2016 10:45

My main reason for voting against the new flag was because it wasn't the choice I wanted.

I much preferred the red version of it- I understand why the black was selected, given our association with that for sports teams etc, but it just didn't look as nice to me, compared to the red version.

My other reasoning originally, which turned out to be flawed, was my want for them to spend the money elsewhere on Education or another sector that could use attention. But given it cost as much as it did just for the referendum, my thinking was flawed. I was led to believe that the $26 million was the cost of having to change the flag, not the cost of running the referendum. But even knowing that, I still stick by my other reason, of not liking the flag choice.

EDIT: I still don't think the flag I liked (The red version of the finalist) was the best either. I agree with other comments that the choices were quite weak.

-A

TeaLeaf

3343 posts

Uber Geek

# 1519959 26-Mar-2016 10:55

One person supports this post

i agree it was a waste of money, that money is sorely needed in a failing health system. we cant get access to public funded drugs or tests that are just common place in australia or most developed countries. so that was one reason for me.

the other was simply the flags looked like gif files from word. even to have a flag that looks good enough is not a good enough reason to change it. it has to have meaning. like my white green and black flag which took all of 5 mins to think of meaning behind it, no not trying to say mines better, i just mean they really needed designers not people making flags that "look nice". of course a well designed flag that looks nice would be wonderful.

3rdly i was suspicious of the timing of why we needed a flag referendum all of a sudden, given what else is going on.

lastly im happy with the current flag.

maybe when the country is in a better financial position and is looking after bread and butter public services we can then have another go but use some hired designers and not give so many flakey choices. we will hopefully be around to see that happen.

Hammerer

2005 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

# 1519963 26-Mar-2016 11:07

2 people support this post

tdgeek:

Take this approach. Why would people vote for each?

Old Flag:

1. Im used got it, don't want change. Humans don't like change. Poor reason. Many take this stand

2. It represents NZ. Poor reason it doesnt. Union Jack can be anyone, four red stars, whose heard of the Southern Cross outside of South Pacific and astronomers? Few take this stand, or if they did, it was misinformed and "don't really want change, thanks"

3. It represents our past heritage. Union Jack does, but how is this flag seen as a NZ flag? Nothing on it points to New Zealand. Many take this stand

New Flag:

1. It represents NZ. It does. Everyone took this stand.

IMHO, it all comes down to I don't want change. Canadians didn't either they did not like the new flag, but the Govt chose it, it wasn't a referendum, it was debated in the Govt space. Now they all love it. Beach towel was mentioned then too.

Design:

Many say its a poor design. They did in Canada too, beach towel. Silver fern is a sporting logo. LOL, that is funny. Sports people want a logo that represents NZ, so its a Kiwi or a Silver Fern. What design would you all like? Canada style, with a Kiwi or Silver fern? Union Jack style with a Silver Fern? Black base? No, can't have that as black is a sporting thing.

I see the 56/44 vote as close. Given the many invalid reasons why people would vote for the old flag, and why they would vote for the new flag, its a win for the new flag.

It is amazing if you actually believe these comments. They clearly represent your own views and are little use in understanding what actually happened. I've highlighted in bold some of the most unreliable statements which simply show your strong bias against the existing flag.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
64690 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

# 1519978 26-Mar-2016 11:39

Agreed and I think we all know you wanted a change tdgeek and all your reasons are against the outcome. So it is clear now.

My technology disclosure | Digital Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Data Insights, Business Intelligence and Advanced Analytics

tdgeek

18147 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

# 1519992 26-Mar-2016 12:29

Hammerer:

tdgeek:

Take this approach. Why would people vote for each?

Old Flag:

1. Im used got it, don't want change. Humans don't like change. Poor reason. Many take this stand

2. It represents NZ. Poor reason it doesnt. Union Jack can be anyone, four red stars, whose heard of the Southern Cross outside of South Pacific and astronomers? Few take this stand, or if they did, it was misinformed and "don't really want change, thanks"

3. It represents our past heritage. Union Jack does, but how is this flag seen as a NZ flag? Nothing on it points to New Zealand. Many take this stand

New Flag:

1. It represents NZ. It does. Everyone took this stand.

IMHO, it all comes down to I don't want change. Canadians didn't either they did not like the new flag, but the Govt chose it, it wasn't a referendum, it was debated in the Govt space. Now they all love it. Beach towel was mentioned then too.

Design:

Many say its a poor design. They did in Canada too, beach towel. Silver fern is a sporting logo. LOL, that is funny. Sports people want a logo that represents NZ, so its a Kiwi or a Silver Fern. What design would you all like? Canada style, with a Kiwi or Silver fern? Union Jack style with a Silver Fern? Black base? No, can't have that as black is a sporting thing.

I see the 56/44 vote as close. Given the many invalid reasons why people would vote for the old flag, and why they would vote for the new flag, its a win for the new flag.

It is amazing if you actually believe these comments. They clearly represent your own views and are little use in understanding what actually happened. I've highlighted in bold some of the most unreliable statements which simply show your strong bias against the existing flag.

Not amazing. Yes I have my view and preference. So? The old flag doesn't represent anything.

nakedmolerat

4538 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1519993 26-Mar-2016 12:33

Aaroona:
My main reason for voting against the new flag was because it wasn't the choice I wanted.

I much preferred the red version of it- I understand why the black was selected, given our association with that for sports teams etc, but it just didn't look as nice to me, compared to the red version.

My other reasoning originally, which turned out to be flawed, was my want for them to spend the money elsewhere on Education or another sector that could use attention. But given it cost as much as it did just for the referendum, my thinking was flawed. I was led to believe that the $26 million was the cost of having to change the flag, not the cost of running the referendum. But even knowing that, I still stick by my other reason, of not liking the flag choice.

EDIT: I still don't think the flag I liked (The red version of the finalist) was the best either. I agree with other comments that the choices were quite weak.

-A

Actually there will be few more millions needed to spend if we have a new flag. Estimates was put close to another 20 millions.

I would have voted for the kiwi with laser coming out from the eye.

Dratsab

3440 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1519998 26-Mar-2016 13:01

nakedmolerat: I would have voted for the kiwi with laser coming out from the eye.

"Fire the Lazar" by James Gray, Akl. Not sure why he settled on that spelling... I think this image is set to become part of Kiwi culture whether people like it or not. Mr Vintage has the t-shirts if you feel like parting with $40.

floydbloke

2004 posts

Uber Geek

# 1520009 26-Mar-2016 13:57

One person supports this post

The whole "what a waste of money" argument that so many, mostly anti-Jonh Key, people are putting forward is rather weak in my view. Particularly given the fairly close result.

The NZ, democratically elected, government decided that a flag change may be in order. It then decided that a binding public referendum was the best, and again democratic, way to go about this and it allocated money for this.

I don't see how it's different from any other government at any time having to spend money to implement a piece of legislation , even though it may well be unpopular by many.

To keep some perspective, $26M equals about 0.16% of the annual health vote, or about one third of what is spent every day on social welfare.

"I have noticed even people who claim everything is predestined, and that we can do nothing to change it, look before they cross the road." - Stephen Hawking

gzt

10912 posts

Uber Geek

# 1520010 26-Mar-2016 14:13

Part of that $26m was the travelling roadshow flag consultation process. I think the idea was people would go along and talk about it. It was empty rooms most of the way as I recall from the network news at the time. Maybe there is an official report of the output of that somewhere.

Edit: adding to post > that was a very small part >

First referendum - $10.3m
Second - $7m
public consultation period - $6.7m =
- website $800K
- public meetings $200K
- communications and engagement $5.7m (derived remainder)

Source

tdgeek

18147 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

# 1520014 26-Mar-2016 14:27

floydbloke:
The whole "what a waste of money" argument that so many, mostly anti-Jonh Key, people are putting forward is rather weak in my view. Particularly given the fairly close result.

The NZ, democratically elected, government decided that a flag change may be in order. It then decided that a binding public referendum was the best, and again democratic, way to go about this and it allocated money for this.

I don't see how it's different from any other government at any time having to spend money to implement a piece of legislation , even though it may well unpopular by many.

To keep some perspective, $26M equals about 0.16% of the annual health vote, or about one third of what is spent every day on social welfare.

Agree fully. It was an important topic, and for those that voted pro John Key or anti John Key that's a bit sad. His statement was that it's a choice to find a flag that better represents modern day NZ. The people have spoken, they see a Union Jack and Souhtern Cross as better representing NZ to the world, so it's done, and decided. The amount spent is nothing, that's just another tick box for anti new flag people. it won't happen again for decades. But I might buy one for myself actually, I stil think its a great NZ flag. A Canada design with middle being black with silver fern and two other colors being green as we are s'posed to be a green country, and blue as we are an island nation would also be cool. If it was a kiwi, also cool, maybe more cool. Or a Qantas flag with a kiwi instead of kangaroo, not bad.

nakedmolerat

4538 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1520024 26-Mar-2016 14:48

Dratsab:
nakedmolerat: I would have voted for the kiwi with laser coming out from the eye.

"Fire the Lazar" by James Gray, Akl. Not sure why he settled on that spelling... I think this image is set to become part of Kiwi culture whether people like it or not. Mr Vintage has the t-shirts if you feel like parting with $40.

Thank you! Googled and bought one!

That would have been the best flag and actually represent all NZer!

SJB

1426 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

# 1520028 26-Mar-2016 15:01

tdgeek:

jeffnz:

SJB:

When the Queen dies we should become a republic. When we become a republic we get a new flag.

End of story. Pretty well everybody would vote for change then.

whilst I'm against the Union Jack on the flag i'm not,yet, convinced there is any benefit for us going to a republic but that is for another thread to discuss.

Same. What benefits could we get from being a Republic. UK has no direct effect on us, we are fully independent. The Queen signs off the Royal Assent on new laws, but she always will, that is a mere custom now. Unless there is an economic or social benefit, I can't see the point. There are probably things that we might lose from the UK if we chose to be a republic. I see us as a Republic anyway. We control our destiny 100%. Republic or Independent State, same thing pretty much

Isn't there a contradiction in wanting to get rid of the Union Jack but happy to keep the Queen as head of state.

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23