"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainable >gains in living standards is not encouraging.What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether there is a viable alternative.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be >voting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor >oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >environmental standards.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404 Totally missing the point again Keith?
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainable >>gains in living standards is not encouraging.What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether there
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be >>voting for continuing economic stagnation.
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor >>oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>environmental standards.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 >>
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404 >Totally missing the point again Keith?
is a viable alternative.
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:23:23 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netsustainable
dot nz> wrote:
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any
begains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely
poorvoting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those
thereoppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>environmental standards.Totally missing the point again Keith?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether
is a viable alternative.
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >latter!
Correct. The Brian Fellow article identifies a problem but no
solution. The Rachel Stewart article is an opinion piece on farmers
as a political target.
The lack of solutions renders both articles as pointless.
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainable >>gains in living standards is not encouraging.What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether there
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be >>voting for continuing economic stagnation.
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor >>oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>environmental standards.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 >>
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404 >Totally missing the point again Keith?
is a viable alternative.
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainablegains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."voting for continuing economic stagnation.
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's environmental standards.
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:23:23 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainableTotally missing the point again Keith?
gains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be
voting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor
oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>> environmental standards.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether there
is a viable alternative.
You are being left behind in your unwillingness to do your own
research, Tony - I found these n just a few minutes of searching.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96756247/is-national-really-better-than-labour-with-the-government-books-well-not-really
and http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 and https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10154988458126452&id=337477311451
Yet Labour achieved bugger all during nine years (well eight) of boomIf there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >> latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:23:23 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netWell good for you, but they are just as off the point as the ones that Keith posted.
dot nz> wrote:
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainable >>>gains in living standards is not encouraging.Totally missing the point again Keith?
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be >>>voting for continuing economic stagnation.
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor >>>oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>>environmental standards.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 >>>
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether >>there
is a viable alternative.
You are being left behind in your unwillingness to do your own
research, Tony - I found these n just a few minutes of searching.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96756247/is-national-really-better-than-labour-with-the-government-books-well-not-really
and >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 Why have you reposted this, Keith already posted it - what were you saying about reseacrh???
and >https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10154988458126452&id=337477311451
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >>latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You apppeared not to have read it - so here is another one just for
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:23:23 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netWell good for you, but they are just as off the point as the ones that Keith >posted.
dot nz> wrote:
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainableTotally missing the point again Keith?
gains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be
voting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor
oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>>>environmental standards.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether >>>there
is a viable alternative.
You are being left behind in your unwillingness to do your own
research, Tony - I found these n just a few minutes of searching.
and >>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 >Why have you reposted this, Keith already posted it - what were you saying >about reseacrh???https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96756247/is-national-really-better-than-labour-with-the-government-books-well-not-really
and >>https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10154988458126452&id=337477311451 >>
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >>>latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
Tony
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any sustainable
gains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely be
voting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those poor
oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >environmental standards.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404Totally missing the point again Keith?
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whetherthere is a viable alternative.
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 14:33:23 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netApperances can be deceptive and you are notoriously comfortable with deception. Just another irrelevant link.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You apppeared not to have read it - so here is another one just for
On Tue, 12 Sep 2017 23:23:23 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netWell good for you, but they are just as off the point as the ones that Keith >>posted.
dot nz> wrote:
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of any >>>>>sustainableTotally missing the point again Keith?
gains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely >>>>>be
voting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those >>>>>poor
oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's >>>>>environmental standards.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether >>>>there
is a viable alternative.
You are being left behind in your unwillingness to do your own
research, Tony - I found these n just a few minutes of searching.
and >>>http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921 >>Why have you reposted this, Keith already posted it - what were you saying >>about reseacrh???https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/96756247/is-national-really-better-than-labour-with-the-government-books-well-not-really
you
https://www.pundit.co.nz/content/pressures-to-be-selfish
and >>>https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10154988458126452&id=337477311451
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >>>>latter!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
Tony
Tony
jmschristophers@gmail.com wrote:
"Zero growth over four years in what has to be foundation of anyTotally missing the point again Keith?
sustainable
gains in living standards is not encouraging.
"Nor is it a record the Government can boast about."
In other words, vote for National yet again and, yet again, you'll surely >> >be
voting for continuing economic stagnation.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11901921
Then this and, as you read it, prepare to shed a dutiful tear for those
poor
oppressed and deprived victims of the stroppy guardians of New Zealand's
environmental standards.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11921404
That point according to you being...?Sorry that it has eluded you, but actually it is very simple. We have little choice but to cope with what we have. I wish it were different and that there was a strong and vibrant party that could challenge the incumbent government but that is sadly not the case. Therefore we choose the best that is on offer, everything else is a waste of breath.
What you are suggesting may be true but the only real question is whether >>there is a viable alternative.
If a viable alternative can not be identified then that implies that at the >current state of play, stagnation is the only option.Not necessarily, maybe the incoming government will do as good a job as the outgoing one in coping with national tragedies like the Christchurch earthquakes (hopefully that will not be necessary) and leading this country through an international economic downturn with less resultant damage than most countries (once more hopefully not necessary) - or perhaps you ignore those achievements like others do.
And if the numbers are right, that seems to be the case because, as Fallow >intimates, National's own dismal stats show real per-worker productivity and >incomes going negative - the very stuff of stagnation. And that is the death >knell for any capitalist economy such as New Zealand's.Again you miss the point which is that they have done better than most governments around the world - such a simple concept which often leads me to wonder how people can miss it!
So, is this the Brighter Future you're going to vote for, Tony?None of your business, who will you be voting for Keith? Show me yours and I may show you mine (no guarantee)!
If there is one they are somewhere between invisible and dim. I prefer the >> latter!
OK, so Dim is your personal comfort zone, but there's really no need to keep >reminding us.Even being insulting is a challenge for you is it not, after all you are arguably the most negative "contributor" to this newsgroup? Feel free to continue to try!
Moving to another country would solve your problem of course.
So you say, but what a shame it could never provide a solution to yours.I require no solutions that I cannot provide for myself with ease but thank you for caring!
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 188:03:16 |
| Calls: | 2,081 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 11,137 |
| Messages: | 947,658 |