Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Poverty.
44 views
Skip to first unread message
Pooh
Jan 16, 2015, 12:12:47 AM1/16/15
to
Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
2. How can poverty be stopped?
Pooh
1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
2. How can poverty be stopped?
Pooh
Crash
Jan 16, 2015, 10:27:53 PM1/16/15
to
On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:13:34 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>
>1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>
Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>
>1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>
>2. How can poverty be stopped?
--
Crash McBash
victor
Jan 16, 2015, 10:42:38 PM1/16/15
to
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10535794/Child-poverty-on-Key-agenda
Pooh
Jan 16, 2015, 11:47:24 PM1/16/15
to
"Crash" <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote in message
news:iiljba5hpq1va0d03...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:13:34 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>
>>Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>>
>>1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>>
> Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>
Crash you no doubt have a good definition of poverty. I'm after what the
>
>>Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>>
>>1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>>
> Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>
three posters listed think it invovles.
>>2. How can poverty be stopped?
>
> Make it illegal so the Police can catch the perpetrators ;-)
>
>
> --
> Crash McBash
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 16, 2015, 11:49:50 PM1/16/15
to
"victor" <us...@example.net> wrote in message
news:m9clnb$pck$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
another monumental comprehension fail from a marxist muppet.
Pooh
Crash
Jan 17, 2015, 3:45:55 AM1/17/15
to
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 17:47:56 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>
>"Crash" <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote in message
>news:iiljba5hpq1va0d03...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:13:34 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>>
>>>Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>>>
>>>1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>>>
>> Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>>
>
>Crash you no doubt have a good definition of poverty. I'm after what the
>three posters listed think it invovles.
So far some have responded to me but not to your perfectly valid
>
>"Crash" <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote in message
>news:iiljba5hpq1va0d03...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:13:34 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>>
>>>Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>>>
>>>1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>>>
>> Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>>
>
>Crash you no doubt have a good definition of poverty. I'm after what the
>three posters listed think it invovles.
question.
>
>>>2. How can poverty be stopped?
>>
>> Make it illegal so the Police can catch the perpetrators ;-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Crash McBash
>
>lol
Yep - responses to date involve only humour.
>>>2. How can poverty be stopped?
>>
>> Make it illegal so the Police can catch the perpetrators ;-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Crash McBash
>
>lol
--
Crash McBash
geopelia
Jan 17, 2015, 7:22:09 AM1/17/15
to
"Crash" wrote in message news:b18kbadk4s89iik4a...@4ax.com...
I suppose poverty is whatever people think it is.
Not enough money for necessities, I suppose.
But people have different ideas as to what are necessities!
victor
Jan 17, 2015, 4:29:00 PM1/17/15
to
Setting the level low enough to claim it doesn't exist.
So if you couldn't afford the basics, ho ho ho there's someone poorer
than you on the street in India, you aren't poor.
Your pensions are set relative to that limit.
George and Poonochio the liar want to pretend child poverty doesn't
exist because it is an embarrassment to the National government.
Pooh
Jan 17, 2015, 4:54:54 PM1/17/15
to
news:m9ek6m$pu5$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Once again the lies and total lack of comprehension are yours Vacuos Vic. I
asked (for the second) time a simple question and the only answer you have
is a lying smear. Your just like dickhead, a lying myopic dickhead who
blindly attacks anyone who doesn't swallow your bullshit.
Pooh
asked (for the second) time a simple question and the only answer you have
is a lying smear. Your just like dickhead, a lying myopic dickhead who
blindly attacks anyone who doesn't swallow your bullshit.
Pooh
george152
Jan 17, 2015, 5:41:34 PM1/17/15
to
On 18/01/2015 10:28 a.m., victor wrote:
> George and Poonochio the liar want to pretend child poverty doesn't
> exist because it is an embarrassment to the National government.
Okay. Define child poverty and explain as to why it doesn't affect all
> George and Poonochio the liar want to pretend child poverty doesn't
> exist because it is an embarrassment to the National government.
those you define as living in poverty.
And nothing to do with any government. It was (if it exists) rife when
Liebor were in power
geopelia
Jan 17, 2015, 5:42:30 PM1/17/15
to
"victor" wrote in message news:m9ek6m$pu5$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
The married pension is 66% of the average wage (on one income). 33% each.
I suppose that was set in the days when most retired people were in their
own homes and had paid off the mortgage,
and before most couples were earning two incomes.
We had our own home, and found the pension quite good. I am still living on
the single pension.
But anyone still renting or paying a mortgage would have a big problem.
Finding the Auckland rates is becoming increasingly hard.
But being a percentage, the pension falls behind in real money as the
average wage increases. The gap increases.
But living costs stay the same.
No doubt the government hopes we can't do the arithmetic.
Perhaps in these days of New Maths people can't!
victor
Jan 17, 2015, 5:50:10 PM1/17/15
to
Labour was in government ?
What is John Key using as his definition in his lofty pronouncements to
the party faithful ?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10535794/Child-poverty-on-Key-agenda
Enkidu
Jan 17, 2015, 7:51:06 PM1/17/15
to
On 17/01/15 21:45, Crash wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 17:47:56 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Crash" <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:iiljba5hpq1va0d03...@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:13:34 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>>>>
>>>> 1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>>>>
>>> Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>>>
>>
Wikipedia has a pretty good definition :
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 17:47:56 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Crash" <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:iiljba5hpq1va0d03...@4ax.com...
>>> On Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:13:34 +1300, "Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Two questions for the loopy lefty loons Dickhead, Victor and Pratsy:
>>>>
>>>> 1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
>>>>
>>> Look in the dictionary. Everyone else knows what it means ;-)
>>>
>>
Absolute poverty or destitution refers to the deprivation of basic human
needs, which commonly includes food, water, sanitation, clothing,
shelter, health care and education. Relative poverty is defined
contextually as economic inequality in the location or society in which
people live.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty
Cheers,
Cliff
george152
Jan 17, 2015, 10:46:32 PM1/17/15
to
On 18/01/2015 11:50 a.m., victor wrote:
> On 18/01/2015 11:41 a.m., george152 wrote:
>> On 18/01/2015 10:28 a.m., victor wrote:
>>
>>> George and Poonochio the liar want to pretend child poverty doesn't
>>> exist because it is an embarrassment to the National government.
>>
>> Okay. Define child poverty and explain as to why it doesn't affect all
>> those you define as living in poverty.
>> And nothing to do with any government. It was (if it exists) rife when
>> Liebor were in power
>
>
> So what was your definition of the child poverty that was rife when
> Labour was in government ?
It doesn't exist outside the lefts current mantra.
> On 18/01/2015 11:41 a.m., george152 wrote:
>> On 18/01/2015 10:28 a.m., victor wrote:
>>
>>> George and Poonochio the liar want to pretend child poverty doesn't
>>> exist because it is an embarrassment to the National government.
>>
>> Okay. Define child poverty and explain as to why it doesn't affect all
>> those you define as living in poverty.
>> And nothing to do with any government. It was (if it exists) rife when
>> Liebor were in power
>
>
> So what was your definition of the child poverty that was rife when
> Labour was in government ?
Rich80105
Jan 17, 2015, 11:34:06 PM1/17/15
to
On Sat, 17 Jan 2015 21:45:49 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
I thought your response said all that needed to be said, Crash. Other
responses on the subject indicate a determination to set a rigid
definition that proscribes assistance being given unless people are
demonstrably worse of than <name a country where large numbers of
people are in what most people in New Zealand would agree is "abject
poverty"> Such responses demonstrate the paucity of community spirit
and a level of paucity of compassion and community spirit that is
quite sad. .
The far right clearly understand that poverty is an issue in New
Zealand, but their extreme "me first, me only" attitude leads them to
a new "politically correct" stance of dissemble (there is no poverty",
deny "we can't agree a precise definition, therefore it doesn't
exist") denigrate (its all their own fault for poor decisions; they
need to be responsible for their own actions, so a lack of charity is
for their own good") and distract "lets change the flag!"
The question Pooh is trying to avoiud the the obvious one of just when
governmetn should intervene and provide assistance. That is a
perfectly valid question for any government, and whatever is decided,
it is desirable that the effectiveness of those decisions is measured
by valid measurement and reporting. Nobody wants money to be wasted,
neither do most people want any New Zealander to die from starvation.
Instead of addressing the issue however, National is pretending to
continue support while progressively reducing support, and
consistently refusing to measure anything that may be able to be used
to determine the effect of their programmes. There are however other
indicators. Inequality is worsening - the wealthy are wealthier, the
poor poorer in real terms. And health can be another worthwhile
measure"
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/65072550/rheumatic-fever-syphilis-cases-rise
"A report by crown research unit ESR (Environmental Science and
Research) shows a "significant increase" in cases of the disease in
the year to September, with 235 notified acute cases, up 75 on the
previous 12 months."
and
"Labour's health spokeswoman Annette King said the Government was
failing with rates of the disease rising in the last three years.
One child a week, with a heart badly damaged by the fever, underwent
surgery at Starship children's hospital in Auckland, she said.
Estimates put 140 adult deaths a year down to the illness.
"As former health minister Tony Ryall himself said: 'We are the only
developed country in the world with levels of rheumatic fever you
would see in the third world'," King said.
She wanted the Government to tackle the causes. "
wrote:
responses on the subject indicate a determination to set a rigid
definition that proscribes assistance being given unless people are
demonstrably worse of than <name a country where large numbers of
people are in what most people in New Zealand would agree is "abject
poverty"> Such responses demonstrate the paucity of community spirit
and a level of paucity of compassion and community spirit that is
quite sad. .
The far right clearly understand that poverty is an issue in New
Zealand, but their extreme "me first, me only" attitude leads them to
a new "politically correct" stance of dissemble (there is no poverty",
deny "we can't agree a precise definition, therefore it doesn't
exist") denigrate (its all their own fault for poor decisions; they
need to be responsible for their own actions, so a lack of charity is
for their own good") and distract "lets change the flag!"
The question Pooh is trying to avoiud the the obvious one of just when
governmetn should intervene and provide assistance. That is a
perfectly valid question for any government, and whatever is decided,
it is desirable that the effectiveness of those decisions is measured
by valid measurement and reporting. Nobody wants money to be wasted,
neither do most people want any New Zealander to die from starvation.
Instead of addressing the issue however, National is pretending to
continue support while progressively reducing support, and
consistently refusing to measure anything that may be able to be used
to determine the effect of their programmes. There are however other
indicators. Inequality is worsening - the wealthy are wealthier, the
poor poorer in real terms. And health can be another worthwhile
measure"
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/65072550/rheumatic-fever-syphilis-cases-rise
"A report by crown research unit ESR (Environmental Science and
Research) shows a "significant increase" in cases of the disease in
the year to September, with 235 notified acute cases, up 75 on the
previous 12 months."
and
"Labour's health spokeswoman Annette King said the Government was
failing with rates of the disease rising in the last three years.
One child a week, with a heart badly damaged by the fever, underwent
surgery at Starship children's hospital in Auckland, she said.
Estimates put 140 adult deaths a year down to the illness.
"As former health minister Tony Ryall himself said: 'We are the only
developed country in the world with levels of rheumatic fever you
would see in the third world'," King said.
She wanted the Government to tackle the causes. "
Crash
Jan 18, 2015, 3:40:32 AM1/18/15
to
On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 17:33:53 +1300, Rich80105<rich...@hotmail.com>
You espouse the need to address poverty but in doing so you attack
only the current National government - almost your entire post is in
this vein. In doing so poverty to you (and Annette King) is a means
of politically-motivated attack rather than a cause in its own right
requiring remedial action regardless of which political party is in
government.
--
Crash McBash
only the current National government - almost your entire post is in
this vein. In doing so poverty to you (and Annette King) is a means
of politically-motivated attack rather than a cause in its own right
requiring remedial action regardless of which political party is in
government.
--
Crash McBash
Pooh
Jan 18, 2015, 10:59:40 PM1/18/15
to
news:m9eour$bet$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Still waiting for you to give me YOUR definition of poverty Vacuos Vic.
While your at it can you point out where Liebor/Green define their
definition of poverty? Given you two links to help you.
http://campaign.labour.org.nz/ https://www.greens.org.nz/ Or don't you have
the balls or comprehension to answer two simple questions?
Pooh
While your at it can you point out where Liebor/Green define their
definition of poverty? Given you two links to help you.
http://campaign.labour.org.nz/ https://www.greens.org.nz/ Or don't you have
the balls or comprehension to answer two simple questions?
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 18, 2015, 11:04:10 PM1/18/15
to
"Rich80105" <rich...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:imglba1p1j62lun58...@4ax.com...
ignore the Labour partys use of 'poverty' as a catch phase to sucker
mindless appologist like you in Dickhead.
Now instead of yet another paid political broadcast try using your solitary
damaged brain cell and answer the questions. That is of course if you have
the comprehension and balls to do it.
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 18, 2015, 11:05:26 PM1/18/15
to
"Crash" <nog...@dontbother.invalid> wrote in message
chance of comprehending anything except: National bad, Labour good.
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 21, 2015, 5:15:59 PM1/21/15
to
"Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote in message
news:m9hvmr$l31$1...@dont-email.me...
find what Liebor/Green consider poverty OR just to damn stupid to understand
the questions?
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 22, 2015, 8:05:17 AM1/22/15
to
"Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote in message
happy to live in your own personal little lie for the rest of your days?
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 22, 2015, 6:14:57 PM1/22/15
to
"Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote in message
anything that makes him come up with an idea that hasn't been fed him by the
loopy lefty blogs.
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 22, 2015, 7:48:06 PM1/22/15
to
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11390477
Rising costs tipped to spur some struggling families to keep their
children home from school.
JohnO
Jan 22, 2015, 8:06:46 PM1/22/15
to
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11362667
Laughably, the "do-gooder" lefty principal down the road is against the new player helping poor families out!
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2015, 1:01:34 AM1/23/15
to
On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:06:44 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
". . .Millions of dollars will be spent on new charter or
"partnership" schools despite hundreds of spare places at surrounding
state options.
However, the Government says the schools, which open next year, will
offer parents a new model of education, and population growth means
impact on existing schools will be minimal.
That has not stopped disquiet from one principal who says it is unfair
to expect lower decile schools to compete with charter schools.
offering free uniforms, stationery and no donations. . . ."
So, JohnO, he was not complaining about helping poor families out, but
about unfair competition - the government is funding the Charter
schools at a much greater level than other schools, enabling htem to
offer those benefits as well as making profits for the owners.
But then you just hate fair competition, don't you John0 - to you all
is good with the government socialsing the losses and privatising the
profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
to friends of the Nats . . .
wrote:
"partnership" schools despite hundreds of spare places at surrounding
state options.
However, the Government says the schools, which open next year, will
offer parents a new model of education, and population growth means
impact on existing schools will be minimal.
That has not stopped disquiet from one principal who says it is unfair
to expect lower decile schools to compete with charter schools.
offering free uniforms, stationery and no donations. . . ."
So, JohnO, he was not complaining about helping poor families out, but
about unfair competition - the government is funding the Charter
schools at a much greater level than other schools, enabling htem to
offer those benefits as well as making profits for the owners.
But then you just hate fair competition, don't you John0 - to you all
is good with the government socialsing the losses and privatising the
profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
to friends of the Nats . . .
Pooh
Jan 23, 2015, 7:23:12 AM1/23/15
to
news:1g63cah0ti5hpsqg8...@4ax.com...
FFS dumbo. What's your problem with answering a simple bloody question?
Party not govong you a clearance to make an even bigger dick of yourself
than you already have? Or just to bloody stupid to be able to come up with
answers?
Pooh
Party not govong you a clearance to make an even bigger dick of yourself
than you already have? Or just to bloody stupid to be able to come up with
answers?
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 23, 2015, 7:26:41 AM1/23/15
to
news:1no3cahp0uvs30aja...@4ax.com...
ONE fucking principle doesn't want it! Well whoop de fucking doo Dickhead.
How about the academics who're happy with it. I suppose they don't count
because they're going agains Labour and the unions who in your tiny mind
know what's best for all of us.
Now stop fucking around like the typical moribund marxist muppet you come
across as and answer my two simple questions if the party that brought your
tiny soul will let you.
Pooh
How about the academics who're happy with it. I suppose they don't count
because they're going agains Labour and the unions who in your tiny mind
know what's best for all of us.
Now stop fucking around like the typical moribund marxist muppet you come
across as and answer my two simple questions if the party that brought your
tiny soul will let you.
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2015, 2:41:23 PM1/23/15
to
So you said:
"Laughably, the "do-gooder" lefty principal down the road is against
the new player helping poor families out!"
Perhaps you should actually read the article you were referring to,
"Laughably, the "do-gooder" lefty principal down the road is against
the new player helping poor families out!"
Poo. Instead you jump to conclusions based on your own fantasies.
>How about the academics who're happy with it.
being happy with paying commercial schools far more than state
schools?
>I suppose they don't count
>because they're going agains Labour and the unions who in your tiny mind
>know what's best for all of us.
>Now stop fucking around like the typical moribund marxist muppet you come
>across as and answer my two simple questions if the party that brought your
>tiny soul will let you.
false accusations - any questions are so long past I suspect you don't
know what they are! If you have a question, Google is useful Poo - or
do you lack the necessary technical skills?
>Pooh
>
Pooh
Jan 23, 2015, 6:02:19 PM1/23/15
to
news:gm85cal6pa5l3i8t9...@4ax.com...
LIAR! Once again you atribute something JohnO said to me. What's wrong
Dickhead? Roy Morgan poll and Ratana warning to Labour finally getting you
worried about the viability of your grubby Labour party?
> Perhaps you should actually read the article you were referring to,
> Poo. Instead you jump to conclusions based on your own fantasies.
>
Not my fantasys Dickhead. Leave fantasys to you and your Labour/Green mates.
>>How about the academics who're happy with it.
> Well what about them, Poo - do you have any references to academics
> being happy with paying commercial schools far more than state
> schools?
>
Not talking about money fool. Talking about the possible results from
schools that don't follow the rules of the marxist teacher unions.
>>I suppose they don't count
>>because they're going agains Labour and the unions who in your tiny mind
>>know what's best for all of us.
> You haven't referred to any, so how would we know?
>
FFS arn't you keeping up with the news Rich? You need to get away from the
loopy lefty blogs and branch out.
>>Now stop fucking around like the typical moribund marxist muppet you come
>>across as and answer my two simple questions if the party that brought
>>your
>>tiny soul will let you.
>
> What question is that, Poo? You ost it in the mire of your simple
> false accusations - any questions are so long past I suspect you don't
> know what they are! If you have a question, Google is useful Poo - or
> do you lack the necessary technical skills?
>
Lying toad! YOU lost it when you failed to with your 'technical skills'.
Apart from which you've read them about ten times dumbo. Nice to see that
google is something else you're bloody useless at using even when all you
have to do is scroll back (another 'technical skill' you obviously fail at)
to the first post in this thread.
But just for any other stupid bastards like you who lack 'technical skills'.
Here are the questions you've been avoiding for the last week:
1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
have an original thought Dickhead.
Pooh
Dickhead? Roy Morgan poll and Ratana warning to Labour finally getting you
worried about the viability of your grubby Labour party?
> Perhaps you should actually read the article you were referring to,
> Poo. Instead you jump to conclusions based on your own fantasies.
>
>>How about the academics who're happy with it.
> Well what about them, Poo - do you have any references to academics
> being happy with paying commercial schools far more than state
> schools?
>
schools that don't follow the rules of the marxist teacher unions.
>>I suppose they don't count
>>because they're going agains Labour and the unions who in your tiny mind
>>know what's best for all of us.
> You haven't referred to any, so how would we know?
>
loopy lefty blogs and branch out.
>>Now stop fucking around like the typical moribund marxist muppet you come
>>across as and answer my two simple questions if the party that brought
>>your
>>tiny soul will let you.
>
> What question is that, Poo? You ost it in the mire of your simple
> false accusations - any questions are so long past I suspect you don't
> know what they are! If you have a question, Google is useful Poo - or
> do you lack the necessary technical skills?
>
Apart from which you've read them about ten times dumbo. Nice to see that
google is something else you're bloody useless at using even when all you
have to do is scroll back (another 'technical skill' you obviously fail at)
to the first post in this thread.
But just for any other stupid bastards like you who lack 'technical skills'.
Here are the questions you've been avoiding for the last week:
1. What exactly in your own words is poverty?
2. How can poverty be stopped?
Betting you'll still be fulminating about crap for another week rather than
have an original thought Dickhead.
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2015, 9:15:16 PM1/23/15
to
your head.
JohnO
Jan 23, 2015, 9:36:56 PM1/23/15
to
> - to you all
> is good with the government socialsing the losses and privatising the
> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
> to friends of the Nats . . .
Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2015, 10:23:40 PM1/23/15
to
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 18:36:55 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
So are you happy with the government providing significantly higher
funding for Charter Schools than for other private and stateschools,
JohnO?
>Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>
>> - to you all
>> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising the
companies, JohnO?
>Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
all schools?
funding for Charter Schools than for other private and stateschools,
JohnO?
>Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>
>> - to you all
>> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>> to friends of the Nats . . .
>
>What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>> to friends of the Nats . . .
>
>What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
companies, JohnO?
>Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
all schools?
Pooh
Jan 23, 2015, 10:29:02 PM1/23/15
to
news:l006ca5iebdqkqnf6...@4ax.com...
Lying bastard! You've only ever bleated about poverty. You've never ever
given an opinion of what it actually is!
Pooh
given an opinion of what it actually is!
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 23, 2015, 10:30:07 PM1/23/15
to
"JohnO" <john...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:192ae33a-be0d-4476...@googlegroups.com...
in charge JohnO.
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2015, 11:06:42 PM1/23/15
to
JohnO
Jan 23, 2015, 11:19:31 PM1/23/15
to
But the running costs at charter schools are not significantly higher anyway.
>
> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
> >
> >> - to you all
> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising the
> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
> >
> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
> companies, JohnO?
>
> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>
> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
> all schools?
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2015, 11:48:33 PM1/23/15
to
On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 20:19:30 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
Do you have evidence of that? Apparently the higher subsidies from
government are allowing them to provide free uniforms.
>>
>> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>> >
>> >> - to you all
>> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising the
>> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
>> >
>> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
>> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>> companies, JohnO?
>
>They aren't donating you lying little shit.
What isthe difference between a government grant and a donation,
JohnO?
>
>>
>> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>>
>> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
>> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
>> all schools?
>
>Because choice is good, Dickbot. However I understand that this concept is incomprehensible to a mindless, regurgutating little apparatchik such as yourself.
So much for one rule for all . . .
Why would there be less choice if they got the same subsidy as other
private and state schools, JohnO?
government are allowing them to provide free uniforms.
>>
>> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>> >
>> >> - to you all
>> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising the
>> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
>> >
>> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
>> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>> companies, JohnO?
>
>They aren't donating you lying little shit.
JohnO?
>
>>
>> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>>
>> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
>> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
>> all schools?
>
>Because choice is good, Dickbot. However I understand that this concept is incomprehensible to a mindless, regurgutating little apparatchik such as yourself.
Why would there be less choice if they got the same subsidy as other
private and state schools, JohnO?
Rich80105
Jan 24, 2015, 3:05:28 PM1/24/15
to
This may help you:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/24/if-you-dont-understand-poverty-youre-a-sociopath
Pooh
Jan 25, 2015, 12:29:47 AM1/25/15
to
news:jh66ca1lhppcpk6ne...@4ax.com...
Trying to maintain the lie doesn't help your case Dickhead!
I do find it interesting that it's taken this long for you to try the 'I've
already told you' bullshit that you tried to pull in another thread where
similar questions were asked. In that thread you got a chorus of posters
calling you a liar. Wonder how many will line up this time unless they've
decided that pointing out your lies is just a waste of time with an
unmitigated marxist muppet with your chronic brain fade Dickie.
Pooh
I do find it interesting that it's taken this long for you to try the 'I've
already told you' bullshit that you tried to pull in another thread where
similar questions were asked. In that thread you got a chorus of posters
calling you a liar. Wonder how many will line up this time unless they've
decided that pointing out your lies is just a waste of time with an
unmitigated marxist muppet with your chronic brain fade Dickie.
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 25, 2015, 12:34:35 AM1/25/15
to
news:3t86ca93a5807v2jo...@4ax.com...
Cite please Dickhead. Unles of course your just lying as per usual.
>>>
>>> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>>> >
>>> >> - to you all
>>> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising
>>> >> the
>>> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>>> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
>>> >
>>> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the
>>> >latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of
>>> >the state of the left.
>>> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>>> companies, JohnO?
>>
>>They aren't donating you lying little shit.
> What isthe difference between a government grant and a donation,
> JohnO?
>
Look it up in the dictionary Dickhead. Unless of course your 'technical
skills' preclude you from doing that.
>>
>>>
>>> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and
>>> >Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>>>
>>> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
>>> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
>>> all schools?
>>
>>Because choice is good, Dickbot. However I understand that this concept is
>>incomprehensible to a mindless, regurgutating little apparatchik such as
>>yourself.
>
> So much for one rule for all . . .
>
What has that to do with choics. Besides even when Liebor were government
there was never one rule for all. Just a case of do what we know is best for
you in true Stalinist fashion.
> Why would there be less choice if they got the same subsidy as other
> private and state schools, JohnO?
Can you provide evidence to back this claim up Dickie. Or are you just
making things up as usual.
Pooh
>>>
>>> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>>> >
>>> >> - to you all
>>> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising
>>> >> the
>>> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>>> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
>>> >
>>> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the
>>> >latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of
>>> >the state of the left.
>>> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>>> companies, JohnO?
>>
>>They aren't donating you lying little shit.
> What isthe difference between a government grant and a donation,
> JohnO?
>
skills' preclude you from doing that.
>>
>>>
>>> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and
>>> >Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>>>
>>> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
>>> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
>>> all schools?
>>
>>Because choice is good, Dickbot. However I understand that this concept is
>>incomprehensible to a mindless, regurgutating little apparatchik such as
>>yourself.
>
> So much for one rule for all . . .
>
there was never one rule for all. Just a case of do what we know is best for
you in true Stalinist fashion.
> Why would there be less choice if they got the same subsidy as other
> private and state schools, JohnO?
making things up as usual.
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 25, 2015, 12:36:22 AM1/25/15
to
news:bnu7cap9aihu75nb2...@4ax.com...
After you Dickhead. When/if you answer my questions instead of sidetracking
and outright lying I'll consider answering your question.
Pooh
Pooh
and outright lying I'll consider answering your question.
Pooh
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 25, 2015, 4:40:18 AM1/25/15
to
finding - you havent even tried.'
The article went over your head then?
Pooh
Jan 25, 2015, 6:43:44 PM1/25/15
to
news:cee9cahkbgf9e1ngh...@4ax.com...
Lying bastard. You've NEVER given or even attempted to give a definition of
poverty. If you had you'd be able to give me a definition without any
problems. All you've ever done is prattle on about poverty in it's many
manifestations as never defined in your Labour/Green philosophy.
>
> The article went over your head then?
It's enough of a waste of time trying to get sense and truth out of you
Dickhead without reading yet another bullshit cite from you. When it comes
to comprehension fails I don't need to go any further than your posts
Dickie.
Pooh
Pooh
poverty. If you had you'd be able to give me a definition without any
problems. All you've ever done is prattle on about poverty in it's many
manifestations as never defined in your Labour/Green philosophy.
>
> The article went over your head then?
Dickhead without reading yet another bullshit cite from you. When it comes
to comprehension fails I don't need to go any further than your posts
Dickie.
Pooh
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 25, 2015, 7:12:21 PM1/25/15
to
has been the guide to your life so far - I can;t see that changing.
Your techincall skills also prevent you looking back through the
thread: On 18 January (5:33) I posted:
_____________________________________________________________________
So how about it Poo - at what level do you believe it legitimate to
provide a New Zealanders with assistance?
Crash
Jan 25, 2015, 7:53:56 PM1/25/15
to
On Mon, 26 Jan 2015 13:12:15 +1300, Rich80105<rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Rich there is no paucity of compassion at all. We currently have many
ways in which those disadvantaged by events outside their control are
supported through benefit payments and this has been the case for over
70 years now. If, as you appear to contend, said benefit payments are
inadequate (in scope or amount) then it is reasonable for 'poverty'
to be defined in the modern NZ context.
government. If we did the 'welfare state' would have been eliminated,
whereas it was established and expanded by Labour governments and
never significantly changed by National.
There you go with political rhetoric again. The context of King's
comments is the typical opposition stance of the 'government'
(National) has got it all wrong.
The correct action to take is not the continual 'National bad' message
but to define the problem and propose a better solution. This is the
key to the long way back for Labour/Greens/NZ First. To date none of
them have shown any ability to reform their political ways to arrest
their fall (Labour) or stagnation (Greens/NZ First) in electoral
support.
--
Crash McBash
wrote:
ways in which those disadvantaged by events outside their control are
supported through benefit payments and this has been the case for over
70 years now. If, as you appear to contend, said benefit payments are
inadequate (in scope or amount) then it is reasonable for 'poverty'
to be defined in the modern NZ context.
>
>The far right clearly understand that poverty is an issue in New
>Zealand, but their extreme "me first, me only" attitude leads them to
>a new "politically correct" stance of dissemble (there is no poverty",
>deny "we can't agree a precise definition, therefore it doesn't
>exist") denigrate (its all their own fault for poor decisions; they
>need to be responsible for their own actions, so a lack of charity is
>for their own good") and distract "lets change the flag!"
>
If you are correct then it is good that we do not have a 'far right'
>The far right clearly understand that poverty is an issue in New
>Zealand, but their extreme "me first, me only" attitude leads them to
>a new "politically correct" stance of dissemble (there is no poverty",
>deny "we can't agree a precise definition, therefore it doesn't
>exist") denigrate (its all their own fault for poor decisions; they
>need to be responsible for their own actions, so a lack of charity is
>for their own good") and distract "lets change the flag!"
>
government. If we did the 'welfare state' would have been eliminated,
whereas it was established and expanded by Labour governments and
never significantly changed by National.
>
>The question Pooh is trying to avoiud the the obvious one of just when
>governmetn should intervene and provide assistance. That is a
>perfectly valid question for any government, and whatever is decided,
>it is desirable that the effectiveness of those decisions is measured
>by valid measurement and reporting. Nobody wants money to be wasted,
>neither do most people want any New Zealander to die from starvation.
>
Agreed.
>The question Pooh is trying to avoiud the the obvious one of just when
>governmetn should intervene and provide assistance. That is a
>perfectly valid question for any government, and whatever is decided,
>it is desirable that the effectiveness of those decisions is measured
>by valid measurement and reporting. Nobody wants money to be wasted,
>neither do most people want any New Zealander to die from starvation.
>
comments is the typical opposition stance of the 'government'
(National) has got it all wrong.
The correct action to take is not the continual 'National bad' message
but to define the problem and propose a better solution. This is the
key to the long way back for Labour/Greens/NZ First. To date none of
them have shown any ability to reform their political ways to arrest
their fall (Labour) or stagnation (Greens/NZ First) in electoral
support.
--
Crash McBash
Pooh
Jan 25, 2015, 11:06:50 PM1/25/15
to
news:i91bcat461r8pii11...@4ax.com...
No Dickhead. Selective ignorance is your forte and why you're such a keen
supporters of everything Labour/Green pushes. The reason I went off Labour
was because the stench from them became unbearable and National had got rid
of Brash.
Dickhead YOU are the one doing the avoiding. I asked a very simple question
which you have singularly refused to answer. Instead you give us a load of
crap that talks about the issue rather than what defines poverty. You sound
like every two bit politician in the Houses of Parliament.
When you give me a straight answer to my question and not a paid political
broadcast I'll answer your question Dickhead. Untill then you can keep
playing your marxist/stalinist games with yourself to your hearts content.
Pooh
supporters of everything Labour/Green pushes. The reason I went off Labour
was because the stench from them became unbearable and National had got rid
of Brash.
which you have singularly refused to answer. Instead you give us a load of
crap that talks about the issue rather than what defines poverty. You sound
like every two bit politician in the Houses of Parliament.
broadcast I'll answer your question Dickhead. Untill then you can keep
playing your marxist/stalinist games with yourself to your hearts content.
Pooh
Rich80105
Jan 25, 2015, 11:28:07 PM1/25/15
to
a stupid question really.
Did you realise that since Tony Ryall said: "We are the only
developed country in the world with levels of rheumatic fever you
would see in the third world," the rate of rheumatic fever cases has
increased?
Poverty - the word the Nats don't want to hear . . .
Pooh
Jan 26, 2015, 5:46:58 AM1/26/15
to
news:2dgbcapta8bscm9uc...@4ax.com...
Stupidity is your middle name Dickhead. You don't just lie, you tell stupid
lies. I find it interesting that you can see your own faults in others. So
typical of the 'it's not my/our fault it was someone else' mantra of the
dedicated loopy lefty.
> Did you realise that since Tony Ryall said: "We are the only
> developed country in the world with levels of rheumatic fever you
> would see in the third world," the rate of rheumatic fever cases has
> increased?
>
What has it to do with this thread Dickhead which is all about me trying in
vain to get you to front up and give YOUR definition of poverty instead of
your usual habit of just parroting what your Labour/Green masters tell you.
> Poverty - the word the Nats don't want to hear . . .
>
Wrong as always Dickhead. What you mean is: Poverty the word Dickhead hasn't
got a description for!
You can play your stupid game of being a dumb fuck Dickie but no-one is as
dumb as you keep trying to make yourself out to be!
Pooh
lies. I find it interesting that you can see your own faults in others. So
typical of the 'it's not my/our fault it was someone else' mantra of the
dedicated loopy lefty.
> Did you realise that since Tony Ryall said: "We are the only
> developed country in the world with levels of rheumatic fever you
> would see in the third world," the rate of rheumatic fever cases has
> increased?
>
vain to get you to front up and give YOUR definition of poverty instead of
your usual habit of just parroting what your Labour/Green masters tell you.
> Poverty - the word the Nats don't want to hear . . .
>
got a description for!
You can play your stupid game of being a dumb fuck Dickie but no-one is as
dumb as you keep trying to make yourself out to be!
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 27, 2015, 8:40:16 PM1/27/15
to
"Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote in message
typical of the dopey dickhead you are.
Pooh
Pooh
Jan 29, 2015, 2:14:45 AM1/29/15
to
"Pooh" <p.r...@vile.lie> wrote in message
left so he doesn't hurt his head by trying to think for itself.
Pooh
JohnO
Jan 29, 2015, 9:58:28 PM1/29/15
to
http://tinyurl.com/o8hgyg4
Yet another Dickbot lie busted. Charter schools do not get better funding than state schools.
> Apparently the higher subsidies from
> government are allowing them to provide free uniforms.
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/264667/school-dumps-donations,-fees
Rich80105
Jan 29, 2015, 10:46:05 PM1/29/15
to
On Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:58:25 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
That appears to only show funding from the Ministry of Education - not
funding assistance for the purchase of land and/or premises, which
remain the property of the "Partnership" organisation
>
>> Apparently the higher subsidies from
>> government are allowing them to provide free uniforms.
>
>And meanwhile, when a state school does the same, the colossal hypocrisy of the left pours forth:
>
>http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/264667/school-dumps-donations,-fees
Where is the hypocrisy, JohnO? Most schools do not have enough money
to waive school "donations" - that is quite different from being able
to afford uniforms for pupils. If a school gets a lot of people unable
to pay and "voluntary" donations, any school should adjust its
priorities. I suppose you want state schools to have minor budgetting
detietails mandated from Wellington do you?
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>> >> >
>> >> >> - to you all
>> >> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising the
>> >> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>> >> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
>> >> >
>> >> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
>> >> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>> >> companies, JohnO?
>> >
>> >They aren't donating you lying little shit.
>> What isthe difference between a government grant and a donation,
>> JohnO?
No answer I see JohnO - this must be very embarassing for you . . .
>> >>
>> >> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>> >>
>> >> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
>> >> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
>> >> all schools?
>> >
>> >Because choice is good, Dickbot. However I understand that this concept is incomprehensible to a mindless, regurgutating little apparatchik such as yourself.
>>
>> So much for one rule for all . . .
>>
>> Why would there be less choice if they got the same subsidy as other
>> private and state schools, JohnO?
What a shame that they do not, JohnO
funding assistance for the purchase of land and/or premises, which
remain the property of the "Partnership" organisation
>
>> Apparently the higher subsidies from
>> government are allowing them to provide free uniforms.
>
>And meanwhile, when a state school does the same, the colossal hypocrisy of the left pours forth:
>
>http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/264667/school-dumps-donations,-fees
to waive school "donations" - that is quite different from being able
to afford uniforms for pupils. If a school gets a lot of people unable
to pay and "voluntary" donations, any school should adjust its
priorities. I suppose you want state schools to have minor budgetting
detietails mandated from Wellington do you?
>
>>
>> >>
>> >> >Nope. And only an idiot would suggest that.
>> >> >
>> >> >> - to you all
>> >> >> is good with the government socialising the losses and privatising the
>> >> >> profits . . . Government waste is fine with you so long as it goes
>> >> >> to friends of the Nats . . .
>> >> >
>> >> >What mindless drivel. No wonder the Nats are up and Labour down in the latest Roy Morgan Poll, if your poisonous ranting is any indication of the state of the left.
>> >> So you don;t mind the governmetn donating to selected private
>> >> companies, JohnO?
>> >
>> >They aren't donating you lying little shit.
>> What isthe difference between a government grant and a donation,
>> JohnO?
>> >>
>> >> >Meanwhile, disadvantaged families are offered a great new option and Dickbot moans. Ideology trumps the poor as far as Dickbot goes.
>> >>
>> >> Far from it JohnO - if the government can provide better funding for
>> >> students at Charter schools, why should they not improve funding for
>> >> all schools?
>> >
>> >Because choice is good, Dickbot. However I understand that this concept is incomprehensible to a mindless, regurgutating little apparatchik such as yourself.
>>
>> So much for one rule for all . . .
>>
>> Why would there be less choice if they got the same subsidy as other
>> private and state schools, JohnO?
Pooh
Jan 30, 2015, 6:13:47 PM1/30/15
to
news:r9vlcapdcssg5jst4...@4ax.com...
Can you please get back on topic and answer my questions Dickie instead of
pushing loopy lefty bullshit about the eductaion system.
If you want to continue your misinformed rant about charter schools start
another thread!
Pooh
pushing loopy lefty bullshit about the eductaion system.
If you want to continue your misinformed rant about charter schools start
another thread!
Pooh
Message has been deleted
JohnO
Jan 30, 2015, 7:20:09 PM1/30/15
to
>
> >
> >> Apparently the higher subsidies from
> >> government are allowing them to provide free uniforms.
> >
> >And meanwhile, when a state school does the same, the colossal hypocrisy of the left pours forth:
> >
> >http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/264667/school-dumps-donations,-fees
>
> Where is the hypocrisy, JohnO? Most schools do not have enough money
> to waive school "donations" - that is quite different from being able
0 new messages