Posts by Kyle Matthews
-
If I can just run a counter-factual here: If Bill English had gone on Alt TV and said that if National loses, he would be in the running for leadership, do people here think the media should have ignored it?
That's not an equivalent question.
Driver asked, if Labour loses, and Helen Clark resigns as leader, would you...
I think if John Key resigned at leader of the National Party, then the news that Bill English (deputy leader) would be in the running for leader should be non-news.
-
I kind of disagree, in that even though Labour has some iffy thirdwayishness about them, there is a kind of vague 'hey, poor peeps, here's something that helps you not starve to death!' quality to their policies. So you can say they stand for *something*. I still don't have any idea what National's general brief actually is. 'We're not Labour! But we won't sell everything off (yet)! Or cut benefits! Or do anything that might conceivably be associated with the new right reforms! We'll just... be better!' Um, OK...
Yeah, but if you're looking at Rogernomics/new right, neither party traditionally has stood for that, but both picked it up and ran with it, particularly Labour.
If you were to compare mid-80s Labour with today Labour government, you'd have trouble believing they were the same party.
National will find itself again, I just think that it hasn't needed to for this election. It's looking like it's going to win barring a disaster, they don't need to clearly define the party, leadership, or even policy so far. They've just been given a 27% lead. Not standing for much is rewarding them really well.
-
It's *gross*, but I don't think it's strange. If you have a many-centuries-long history of being chattel, your measurements are going to continue to be be part of the pop-cultural deal, even after you become a 'person'...
Well I wasn't so much commenting on society in general (though I agree), more just the practicality of how it enters the public arena.
I guess with models it might be information that is released publicly. It just seems irrelevantly wrong though.
-
But... if they don't stand for economic reform a la Roger Douglas, with the privatising and the freemarketeering and the tax cuts yadda yadda yadda, what exactly do they stand for then? I am confused.
To be honest, you could say the same for Labour and their traditional base.
I think both parties stand for 1. winning the election, followed by 2. everything else.
-
Irradiated Rogergnomes Under The Bed
Now that would give me nightmares. Sitting there all night muttering about flat tax and asset sales.
-
"There is no question about leadership at the moment," he said yesterday when questioned about his pre-recorded television interview.
A seasoned politician who wanted to end discussion about leadership would usually give such an answer unconditionally, without qualifications such as "at the moment".
It really is a stupid game the media and the politicians play around this.
If we take this argument to its logical conclusion, Goff should have left it at "no question about leadership", and the Labour Party should wait around for Helen to die before it becomes a question "of the moment'.
Don't these reporters have useful things to do with their time?
-
Anyway, prediction: if Labour loses, she'll not only vacate the leadership an an orderly fashion, but also step down as MP for Mt Albert, and Phil Twyford will win the subsequent by-election.
I wonder what she'll do 'afterwards'. She hasn't ever struck me as wanting to be an international figure, despite being relatively successful overseas, a la Don McKinnon/Mike Moore. Yet I think she might find she's 'too big' for New Zealand if that makes sense. Chancellor of a university, ambassador at a major embassy would seem like too big a step down.
-
If you actually look at Kate Moss's size and stats (size 4 US 34 1/2-26-34) she is not very thin compared to fashion icons of the past. Kate Moss's waist at 26 inches is 5 inches bigger than Katherine Hepburn's was, 6 inches bigger than Audrey Hepburn's.
I find it very strange that this information is publicly available.
-
So my next question is: what price would you pay for 50/20Mbit/s service? With, say 100GB of data.
As someone else has noted, that data cap would start to become a problem. Currently I have a 20 GB data cap for low quality video. Once the speed goes up to that, I'm going to be downloading 5GB files.
I'd be happy to pay up to $100/month which is about what I pay now for phone line and internet, as long as the connection could take care of my phone as well.
-
Isn't pork barrel politics, basically by definition what politics is all about?
I think the phrase has a lot more useful meaning when put in America or someone else, where politicians votes are much more up-for-grabs, and they still run a FPP electoral system.
So Senator X will vote for umpteen billion of military contracts as long as one of those contracts goes to Company Y who happens to employ 20,000 people in his state.
Craig, part of Cullen's point is that Key is pulling numbers out of his arse without having seen the Treasury books. Bandying around figures like $50/week without actually know if that can be done without requiring service cuts. We have a contracting economy and shrinking tax take, but Key's quite happy to quote numbers that aren't based on informed judgment.
I'm pretty 'meh' on this. Yes he is pulling numbers out of the air, but he's not releasing detailed policy, he's signalling in response to Cullen's signals about the tax cuts in the budget, where national will lie - and in particular, indicating the difference.
It might be bad policy, and it won't be something I'll vote for, but it's just political talk, they've have a more detailed policy on it in the lead-up to the election I'm sure.