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 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
Departed
10034 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4200

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1721124 16-Feb-2017 11:47
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

SaltyNZ:

 

MikeB4:

 

Every politician has influence outside their constituency........ it's called Parliament.

 

 

 

 

I believe what @Rikkitic is getting at is that his influence is disproportionate. If the locals really want Peter Dunne personally then it wouldn't matter if he joined the National Party. If he joined the National Party, he'd be a back bencher. But because he has his own political party, National give him the proverbial baubles in order to secure his vote.

 

Therefore, he is only in Parliament because of very local popularity (if it were not so, his party vote would be bigger, yes?) but his influence far exceeds the influence of any other local MP. Although it is not unfair in the sense that no rules have been broken, it certainly breaks the spirit of MMP in the sense that the opinions of those living in one single electorate disproportionately overrule every other, thanks merely to a technicality.

 

 

THANK YOU! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanking it does not make it right  

 

Again Every politician has influence outside their constituency........ it's called Parliament. 





Mike
IT Management Consultant, Freelance money spender
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


1385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 294


  Reply # 1721180 16-Feb-2017 12:35
Send private message

Reading this topic leads me to think that "Shameless voters" should be added to the title. I have similar thoughts about Peter Dunne, United Future, MMP, etc. There are so many examples of our thinking which appear to be just as "shameful" as the politicians' thinking.

 

But what is more concerning to me is that some points are based on rules of thumb, adages, etc. that don't start with analysing the current situation and choosing the best option. Here's one example:

 

MikeB4: three terms is enough for a government

 

If might be true that the best option is not to have a National-led coalition in government but I wouldn't rely on a personal axiom that "three terms is enough".


 
 
 
 


2543 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 872


  Reply # 1721236 16-Feb-2017 13:20
Send private message

Hammerer:

 

Reading this topic leads me to think that "Shameless voters" should be added to the title. I have similar thoughts about Peter Dunne, United Future, MMP, etc. There are so many examples of our thinking which appear to be just as "shameful" as the politicians' thinking.

 

But what is more concerning to me is that some points are based on rules of thumb, adages, etc. that don't start with analysing the current situation and choosing the best option. Here's one example:

 

MikeB4: three terms is enough for a government

 

If might be true that the best option is not to have a National-led coalition in government but I wouldn't rely on a personal axiom that "three terms is enough".

 

 

The voters get to decide that anyway.  If sufficient voters think three terms is enough and vote accordingly, there will be a change of govt.

 

 





Mike

Departed
10034 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4200

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1721278 16-Feb-2017 14:16
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

Hammerer:

 

Reading this topic leads me to think that "Shameless voters" should be added to the title. I have similar thoughts about Peter Dunne, United Future, MMP, etc. There are so many examples of our thinking which appear to be just as "shameful" as the politicians' thinking.

 

But what is more concerning to me is that some points are based on rules of thumb, adages, etc. that don't start with analysing the current situation and choosing the best option. Here's one example:

 

MikeB4: three terms is enough for a government

 

If might be true that the best option is not to have a National-led coalition in government but I wouldn't rely on a personal axiom that "three terms is enough".

 

 

The voters get to decide that anyway.  If sufficient voters think three terms is enough and vote accordingly, there will be a change of govt.

 

 

 

 

I sure as heck do not want to see a legislative restriction place on how many consecutive terms a government can do, that is not how democracy works. I just feel that after a three term period a refresh is needed but that has a caveat, if the alternative is god awful then please noooooooo. Currently I don't think the alternative is god awful.

 

When it comes to how long a party or an individual can stay that is down to the electorate to decide.

 

 





Mike
IT Management Consultant, Freelance money spender
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


2220 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 418


  Reply # 1721647 17-Feb-2017 06:52
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

MikeAqua:

 

Hammerer:

 

Reading this topic leads me to think that "Shameless voters" should be added to the title. I have similar thoughts about Peter Dunne, United Future, MMP, etc. There are so many examples of our thinking which appear to be just as "shameful" as the politicians' thinking.

 

But what is more concerning to me is that some points are based on rules of thumb, adages, etc. that don't start with analysing the current situation and choosing the best option. Here's one example:

 

MikeB4: three terms is enough for a government

 

If might be true that the best option is not to have a National-led coalition in government but I wouldn't rely on a personal axiom that "three terms is enough".

 

 

The voters get to decide that anyway.  If sufficient voters think three terms is enough and vote accordingly, there will be a change of govt.

 

 

 

 

I sure as heck do not want to see a legislative restriction place on how many consecutive terms a government can do, that is not how democracy works. I just feel that after a three term period a refresh is needed but that has a caveat, if the alternative is god awful then please noooooooo. Currently I don't think the alternative is god awful.

 

When it comes to how long a party or an individual can stay that is down to the electorate to decide.

 

 

 

 

The government needs replacing when either its policies don't work, are irrelevant or there is a better option. The thought that 3 terms is long enough is dangerous, or even, hey lets give the other guy a go. Labour has yet to stand a candidate for PM that is remotely reasonable or that actually represents the working class.

 

Also more shameful is Winston Peters who pipes up when an election is near or he can get his name in the papers, doesn't commit to a stance until it benefits him personally and can flitter between left and right even though his views are right wing.

 

Dunne may do the same and that too is shameful, but until he is voted out democracy is working.





I know a little more than nothing but not much...

gzt

8683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1105


  Reply # 1721865 17-Feb-2017 15:07
Send private message

Rikkitic:

SaltyNZ:


MikeB4:


Every politician has influence outside their constituency........ it's called Parliament.



 


I believe what @Rikkitic is getting at is that his influence is disproportionate. If the locals really want Peter Dunne personally then it wouldn't matter if he joined the National Party. If he joined the National Party, he'd be a back bencher. But because he has his own political party, National give him the proverbial baubles in order to secure his vote.


Therefore, he is only in Parliament because of very local popularity (if it were not so, his party vote would be bigger, yes?) but his influence far exceeds the influence of any other local MP. Although it is not unfair in the sense that no rules have been broken, it certainly breaks the spirit of MMP in the sense that the opinions of those living in one single electorate disproportionately overrule every other, thanks merely to a technicality.



THANK YOU! 


One again (unless you wish to assassinate Peter Dunne) it appears that you object to the provisions in law that provide for this scenario. At least now you have a sensible question to ask of your preferred candidate. I assume if your preferred candidate or party does not support the change as you do, then you will select another candidate or party.



4684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2100

Subscriber

  Reply # 1721883 17-Feb-2017 15:28
Send private message

gzt:

 

One again (unless you wish to assassinate Peter Dunne) it appears that you object to the provisions in law that provide for this scenario. At least now you have a sensible question to ask of your preferred candidate. I assume if your preferred candidate or party does not support the change as you do, then you will select another candidate or party.

 

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but I object to comments, even in jest, about assassinating politicians or anyone else. I said nothing to suggest such a thing and I do not want any such inference being made.

 

 

 

 





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


501 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 200


  Reply # 1721907 17-Feb-2017 16:18
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

gzt:

 

One again (unless you wish to assassinate Peter Dunne) it appears that you object to the provisions in law that provide for this scenario. At least now you have a sensible question to ask of your preferred candidate. I assume if your preferred candidate or party does not support the change as you do, then you will select another candidate or party.

 

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but I object to comments, even in jest, about assassinating politicians or anyone else. I said nothing to suggest such a thing and I do not want any such inference being made.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are calling them shameless...




4684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2100

Subscriber

  Reply # 1721926 17-Feb-2017 16:26
Send private message

What does that have to do with it? Either make your point or go somewhere else.

 

 





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


gzt

8683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1105


  Reply # 1721992 17-Feb-2017 19:51
Send private message

Rikkitic:

gzt:


One again (unless you wish to assassinate Peter Dunne) it appears that you object to the provisions in law that provide for this scenario. At least now you have a sensible question to ask of your preferred candidate. I assume if your preferred candidate or party does not support the change as you do, then you will select another candidate or party.


I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but I object to comments, even in jest, about assassinating politicians or anyone else. I said nothing to suggest such a thing and I do not want any such inference being made.


Yep. Very bad choice on my part. I apologise for that. You have said nothing like that. Here's the thing: it seems you object way more to Peter Dunne than the electoral provisions which is he is subject to.

You really need to ask your preferred candidate or party about those provisions.



4684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2100

Subscriber

  Reply # 1722002 17-Feb-2017 20:50
Send private message

gzt:

 


Yep. Very bad choice on my part. I apologise for that. You have said nothing like that. Here's the thing: it seems you object way more to Peter Dunne than the electoral provisions which is he is subject to.

 

You really need to ask your preferred candidate or party about those provisions.

 

Thanks for clarifying. We all make bad word choices sometimes.

 

The reason why I thanked SaltyNZ for his post was that I felt he actually understood what I was trying to say (maybe the first poster who did) and he did a better job of explaining it than I had been able to do. Anyone who wants to understand my points should just read his post. I think our MMP system is flawed and should be replaced, but if not that, at least fixed. I think politicians like Peter Dunne (but not only him) exploit and abuse these flaws and I object to that. I think there ought to be a limit on the number of terms a politician can serve. This will not prevent good people from contributing, because good people will always find other ways to do so. There are a lot of other changes I would also like to see, but these are a good place to start.

 

 

 

  





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


gzt

8683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1105


  Reply # 1722010 17-Feb-2017 21:19
Send private message

There's no way I'm going back to FPP. The country swung around like a demented yoyo toy.

gzt

8683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1105


  Reply # 1722013 17-Feb-2017 21:21
Send private message

I'm unsure if the stability of our MMP system is down to the parameters we selected for MMP or that we just got lucky with the quality of our politicians. Probably a bit of both.



4684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2100

Subscriber

  Reply # 1722043 17-Feb-2017 21:54
Send private message

My own preference is for STV. In my perfect world political parties wouldn't exist at all. There would always be political groups and clubs, of course, but they wouldn't have any legal status. When you have parties you have cliques and elites and patronage and maneuvering and back-room deals and all the crap that characterises politics. I prefer individual candidates who get voted for on the basis of their ideas and policies and represent their electorates and work together for the common good without all the adversarial BS. I don't see the need for ideologies. You can have candidates with progressive views and social conservatives and libertarians and environmentalists and whatever and they can still all work together and find common ground. No-one has a monopoly on the truth. The Westminister Parliamentary model with one group in power and a so-called 'loyal opposition' backbiting everything they do is nonsense. There are good and bad ideas all across the political spectrum. I would rather vote for those than some nebulous party political 'philosophy'. I have never found any political party that I agree with or that adequately represents my views. But there are plenty of good ideas out there worth voting for.

 

Anyone who thinks this is a crackpot notion might want to reflect on the disengagement with the political process that is currently felt by many voters, and the declining voter turnout every election.  





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


gzt

8683 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1105


  Reply # 1722068 17-Feb-2017 22:12
Send private message

Rikkitc: When you have parties you have cliques and elites and patronage and maneuvering and back-room deals and all the crap that characterises politics.

Without parties you would get all that just the same.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
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:





News »

Red Hat unveils production-ready open source hyperconverged infrastructure
Posted 23-Jun-2017 22:10


Whatever ailed Vodafone broadband … seems to be fixed
Posted 23-Jun-2017 14:10


VMware NSX Meets Stringent Government Security Standards with Common Criteria Certification
Posted 22-Jun-2017 19:05


Brother launches next-generation colour laser printers and all-in- ones for business
Posted 22-Jun-2017 18:56


Intel and IOC announce partnership
Posted 22-Jun-2017 18:50


Samsung Galaxy Tab S3: Best Android tablet
Posted 21-Jun-2017 12:05


Wellington-based company helping secure Microsoft browsers
Posted 20-Jun-2017 20:51


Endace delivers high performance with new 1/10/40 Gbps packet capture card
Posted 20-Jun-2017 20:50


You can now integrate SMX security into Microsoft Office 365, Google and other cloud email platforms
Posted 20-Jun-2017 20:47


Ravensdown launches new decision-making tool HawkEye
Posted 19-Jun-2017 15:38


Spark planning to take on direct management of all consumer stores
Posted 19-Jun-2017 10:03


Qrious acquires Ubiquity
Posted 14-Jun-2017 12:21


Spark New Zealand prepares for 5G with Nokia
Posted 14-Jun-2017 12:16


The future-proof 10.5-inch iPad Pro
Posted 13-Jun-2017 18:16


Mandatory data breach reporting in Australia
Posted 13-Jun-2017 11:30



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.