Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
At least we have one unbiased journalist
512 views
Skip to first unread message
Tony
Jan 17, 2024, 9:38:57 PM1/17/24
to
https://karldufresne.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-striking-outpouring-of-empathy-for.html
Good sense, and fair.
One excellent comment among others was this one -
LNF said...
Media have said she needs sympathy. 2 brief questions
If the job is so stressful and causing her these mental issues why didn't she
stand down in October
Would the media have been so concerned and sympathetic if say Judith Collins
had been the person in the spotlight
January 17, 2024 at 2:36 PM
Good sense, and fair.
One excellent comment among others was this one -
LNF said...
Media have said she needs sympathy. 2 brief questions
If the job is so stressful and causing her these mental issues why didn't she
stand down in October
Would the media have been so concerned and sympathetic if say Judith Collins
had been the person in the spotlight
January 17, 2024 at 2:36 PM
Crash
Jan 17, 2024, 11:19:31 PM1/17/24
to
health issues as a contributing factor to what she did, Ghahramen does
indeed belittle those who truly suffer mental health issues. Trying
to excuse the situation of being accused of shoplifting as a mental
health issue is rubbish.
Not yet exposed is where Ghahramen went on her holiday trip. This is
very relevant given that the Greens have cited difficulty in
contacting her as a contributor to how long it took for them to act
when they knew of the allegations.
She is not an electorate MP so her obligations in Parliament are
entirely with the Greens - so are the Greens the cause of Ghahramen's
stress? Certainly there is no electorate obligations in this picture.
Ghahramen has been caught out and has resigned from Parliament. The
full explanation of these events cannot be known until the results of
the prosecutions are known.
--
Crash McBash
Gordon
Jan 18, 2024, 1:56:53 AM1/18/24
to
["Followup-To:" header set to nz.general.]
I thought that the reply from the Greens as a mixture of entitlement and
some crazy logic that could only come from the Green's.
No sorry Greens but it did not even get to the launch pad. The media should
have been exposing it. Stealing three times is pretty serious stuff. Well to
any decent person.
some crazy logic that could only come from the Green's.
No sorry Greens but it did not even get to the launch pad. The media should
have been exposing it. Stealing three times is pretty serious stuff. Well to
any decent person.
Rich80105
Jan 18, 2024, 3:40:43 AM1/18/24
to
arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
A better example may be the sympathy for Todd Muller; there was a lot
of sympathy and a willingness to let him depart quietly and give him
time to recover.
Those were both in a different time however; neither had been subject
to the vicious attacks that younger female politicians on the left
have had to suffer . . .
Tony
Jan 18, 2024, 2:46:36 PM1/18/24
to
her all you like but that is bullshit and we all know it.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 18, 2024, 3:32:56 PM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
> There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
> arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
> as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
> There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
> arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
> as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
JohnO
Jan 18, 2024, 3:41:38 PM1/18/24
to
On Thursday 18 January 2024 at 21:40:43 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 02:38:54 -0000 (UTC), Tony
> <lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
> >https://karldufresne.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-striking-outpouring-of-empathy-for.html
> >Good sense, and fair.
> >One excellent comment among others was this one -
> >LNF said...
> >Media have said she needs sympathy. 2 brief questions
> >If the job is so stressful and causing her these mental issues why didn't she
> >stand down in October
> >Would the media have been so concerned and sympathetic if say Judith Collins
> >had been the person in the spotlight
> >January 17, 2024 at 2:36 PM
> There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
> arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
> as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>
> A better example may be the sympathy for Todd Muller; there was a lot
> of sympathy and a willingness to let him depart quietly and give him
> time to recover.
Todd Muller was not accused of a crime so your comparison is like you: idiotic.
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 02:38:54 -0000 (UTC), Tony
> <lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
> >https://karldufresne.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-striking-outpouring-of-empathy-for.html
> >Good sense, and fair.
> >One excellent comment among others was this one -
> >LNF said...
> >Media have said she needs sympathy. 2 brief questions
> >If the job is so stressful and causing her these mental issues why didn't she
> >stand down in October
> >Would the media have been so concerned and sympathetic if say Judith Collins
> >had been the person in the spotlight
> >January 17, 2024 at 2:36 PM
> There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
> arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
> as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>
> A better example may be the sympathy for Todd Muller; there was a lot
> of sympathy and a willingness to let him depart quietly and give him
> time to recover.
>
> Those were both in a different time however; neither had been subject
> to the vicious attacks that younger female politicians on the left
> have had to suffer . . .
Crash
Jan 18, 2024, 3:42:32 PM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 02:38:54 -0000 (UTC), Tony
><lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>https://karldufresne.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-striking-outpouring-of-empathy-for.html
>>Good sense, and fair.
>>One excellent comment among others was this one -
>>LNF said...
>>Media have said she needs sympathy. 2 brief questions
>>If the job is so stressful and causing her these mental issues why didn't she
>>stand down in October
>>Would the media have been so concerned and sympathetic if say Judith Collins
>>had been the person in the spotlight
>>January 17, 2024 at 2:36 PM
>
>There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>
That is not the issue. The issue Tony raised is what would have
happened to Judith Collins if she had been caught shoplifting. As
usual all you have is a response that is 100% anti-National rhetoric.
>A better example may be the sympathy for Todd Muller; there was a lot
>of sympathy and a willingness to let him depart quietly and give him
>time to recover.
>
>Those were both in a different time however; neither had been subject
>to the vicious attacks that younger female politicians on the left
>have had to suffer . . .
So you say, without any shred of credibility.
--
Crash McBash
wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 02:38:54 -0000 (UTC), Tony
><lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
>
>>https://karldufresne.blogspot.com/2024/01/the-striking-outpouring-of-empathy-for.html
>>Good sense, and fair.
>>One excellent comment among others was this one -
>>LNF said...
>>Media have said she needs sympathy. 2 brief questions
>>If the job is so stressful and causing her these mental issues why didn't she
>>stand down in October
>>Would the media have been so concerned and sympathetic if say Judith Collins
>>had been the person in the spotlight
>>January 17, 2024 at 2:36 PM
>
>There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>
happened to Judith Collins if she had been caught shoplifting. As
usual all you have is a response that is 100% anti-National rhetoric.
>A better example may be the sympathy for Todd Muller; there was a lot
>of sympathy and a willingness to let him depart quietly and give him
>time to recover.
>
>Those were both in a different time however; neither had been subject
>to the vicious attacks that younger female politicians on the left
>have had to suffer . . .
--
Crash McBash
JohnO
Jan 18, 2024, 3:42:55 PM1/18/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 18, 2024, 4:04:15 PM1/18/24
to
beliefs as followers of any other religion. Just so long as they don’t
start using it as their basis for deciding what is right and wrong.
One thing about animists: unlike some, they don’t claim that their gods
are the true gods, that all other gods are false.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 18, 2024, 4:04:55 PM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
And I suspect you are of the age when you need it.
Rich80105
Jan 18, 2024, 4:32:35 PM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
>>
>> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
>> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
>> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
>
>Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed - specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living their lives.
So you want to ban religious belief? Certainly the proportion of
those stating in the census that they have no religious belief is
growing, but I suspect Christianity is still the most numerous
acknowledged religion - and that covers both Maori and Pakeha.
So how should it be removed, JohnO? And why?
wrote:
>On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
>>
>> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
>> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
>> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
>
So you want to ban religious belief? Certainly the proportion of
those stating in the census that they have no religious belief is
growing, but I suspect Christianity is still the most numerous
acknowledged religion - and that covers both Maori and Pakeha.
So how should it be removed, JohnO? And why?
Tony
Jan 18, 2024, 5:14:46 PM1/18/24
to
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
>>>
>>> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>>> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>>> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>>> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
>>> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
>>> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
>>
>>Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed -
>>specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living
>>their lives.
>
>So you want to ban religious belief?
No he doesn't you twit, keep on topic.
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
>>>
>>> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>>> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>>> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>>> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
>>> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
>>> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
>>
>>Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed -
>>specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living
>>their lives.
>
>So you want to ban religious belief?
JohnO
Jan 18, 2024, 5:57:17 PM1/18/24
to
On Friday 19 January 2024 at 10:04:55 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>
> > Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
> Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>
Of course you would. We have had free heathcare long before we had lefties in government.
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>
> > Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
> Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>
Crash
Jan 18, 2024, 5:58:46 PM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>
>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>
>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
[snip]
<l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>
>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>
>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for. What we
do have is universal healthcare that is taxpayer-funded, augmented by
private user-pays healthcare.
--
Crash McBash
JohnO
Jan 18, 2024, 5:59:21 PM1/18/24
to
On Friday 19 January 2024 at 10:32:35 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> >> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
> >>
> >> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
> >> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
> >> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
> >> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
> >> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
> >> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
> >
> >Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed - specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living their lives.
>
> So you want to ban religious belief? Certainly the proportion of
Not even close to what I suggested. You are such a stupid little fuck.
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> >> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
> >>
> >> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
> >> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
> >> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
> >> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
> >> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
> >> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
> >
> >Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed - specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living their lives.
>
> So you want to ban religious belief? Certainly the proportion of
> those stating in the census that they have no religious belief is
> growing, but I suspect Christianity is still the most numerous
> acknowledged religion - and that covers both Maori and Pakeha.
>
> So how should it be removed, JohnO? And why?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 18, 2024, 6:34:04 PM1/18/24
to
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>
>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>
>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
> [snip]
>
> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>
>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>
>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
> [snip]
>
> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
Tony
Jan 18, 2024, 7:01:45 PM1/18/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>> [snip]
>>
>> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
>
>Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
Taxes are in place in all countries in one form or another, they are not
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>> [snip]
>>
>> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
>
>Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
politically based or justified.
Crash
Jan 18, 2024, 8:38:03 PM1/18/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 23:34:02 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
healthcare with taxes? Are they all 'lefty'?
--
Crash McBash
<l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>> [snip]
>>
>> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
>
>Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
Care to identify any governments since 1930 that has not funded
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>> [snip]
>>
>> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
>
>Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
healthcare with taxes? Are they all 'lefty'?
--
Crash McBash
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 19, 2024, 12:13:00 AM1/19/24
to
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 00:01:42 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>>
>>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>>>
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:58:43 +1300, Crash wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>>
>>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>>>
>>>>And I suspect you are of the age when you need it.
>>>
>>>
>>> We do not have free healthcare - it all has to be paid for.
>>
>>Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
>>
> Taxes are in place in all countries in one form or another, they are not
> politically based or justified.
Countries which try to rely on non-free healthcare tend to find it ...
>>
>>Paid for the lefty way--through taxes.
>>
> Taxes are in place in all countries in one form or another, they are not
> politically based or justified.
very expensive.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 19, 2024, 12:13:27 AM1/19/24
to
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 14:38:02 +1300, Crash wrote:
> Care to identify any governments since 1930 that has not funded
> healthcare with taxes?
The USA certainly seems to be trying. At great cost to its citizens.
> Care to identify any governments since 1930 that has not funded
> healthcare with taxes?
Tony
Jan 19, 2024, 12:32:01 AM1/19/24
to
therefore are not poltically motivated. I suspect never were. Therefore taxes
are not a left wing initiative.
Willy Nilly
Jan 19, 2024, 1:32:52 AM1/19/24
to
Without that definition, it would have been ruled unconstitutional.
Didn't you know that?
BR
Jan 19, 2024, 11:46:12 AM1/19/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>
>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>
>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
"Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
<l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>
>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>
>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Rich80105
Jan 19, 2024, 3:18:13 PM1/19/24
to
Republicans to limit Obamacare - a bit like the Nact1st government
here likely to follow the last Nat-led government in encouraging new
development of private hospitals.
I was talking to a health professional yesterday who said that the
most common event leading to a business closure in the USA is a major
medical event - the reality is that most of the population cannot
afford insurance for major medical events. He spoke of a doctor he
spoke to having a premium of professional indemnity insurance of
$US150,000 a year - perhaps there is a reason for some of the high
costs of hospitals there . . . We can be thankful for Pharmac and ACC
here in New Zealand - they ensure that we get good value for the
amount of spending committed by government on medicines, and that most
people can survive without medical insurance; albeit waiting lists for
surgery are leading to a rich / poor divide over priority for
operations.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 19, 2024, 4:12:53 PM1/19/24
to
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 05:31:59 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Countries which try to rely on non-free healthcare tend to find it ...
>>very expensive.
>
> That was not my point. I was pointing out that taxes are exacted
> everywhere and therefore are not poltically motivated.
But only lefties want to use them to give people free healthcare.
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>Countries which try to rely on non-free healthcare tend to find it ...
>>very expensive.
>
> That was not my point. I was pointing out that taxes are exacted
> everywhere and therefore are not poltically motivated.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 19, 2024, 4:13:45 PM1/19/24
to
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 06:32:59 GMT, Willy Nilly wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 14:38:02 +1300, Crash wrote:
>>
>>> Care to identify any governments since 1930 that has not funded
>>> healthcare with taxes?
>>
>>The USA certainly seems to be trying. At great cost to its citizens.
>
> Obamacare has been defined, by the USA Supreme Court, as a tax.
That’s the point. That is the only way to offer good healthcare, via a
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 14:38:02 +1300, Crash wrote:
>>
>>> Care to identify any governments since 1930 that has not funded
>>> healthcare with taxes?
>>
>>The USA certainly seems to be trying. At great cost to its citizens.
>
> Obamacare has been defined, by the USA Supreme Court, as a tax.
Socialist-style tax.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 19, 2024, 4:14:24 PM1/19/24
to
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>
>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>
>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>
> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
We all are paying. About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>
>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>
>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>
> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
Tony
Jan 19, 2024, 6:01:06 PM1/19/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 05:31:59 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Countries which try to rely on non-free healthcare tend to find it ...
>>>very expensive.
>>
>> That was not my point. I was pointing out that taxes are exacted
>> everywhere and therefore are not poltically motivated.
>
>But only lefties want to use them to give people free healthcare.
That is an interesting statement - and it is absolutely wrong - I am not a
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 05:31:59 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Countries which try to rely on non-free healthcare tend to find it ...
>>>very expensive.
>>
>> That was not my point. I was pointing out that taxes are exacted
>> everywhere and therefore are not poltically motivated.
>
>But only lefties want to use them to give people free healthcare.
lefty (god forbid) and I want all people to have excellent health care for the
lowest possible cost (ideally completely free)- and I know of many who feel the
same - probably thousands - and if I know of thousands then how many are
there?. Your claim is wrong.
Mutley
Jan 19, 2024, 9:48:56 PM1/19/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>
>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>
>We all are paying. About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
In NZ these days if you want good health care for the likes of
>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>
>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>
>We all are paying. About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
specialist and hospital treatments you need health insurance here as
well.. Without it and if you're non Maori you go to the bottom of
the waiting list.
Rich80105
Jan 20, 2024, 1:31:27 AM1/20/24
to
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 15:48:53 +1300, Mutley <mutle...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Maori are still disadvantaged in general compared to Pakeha - they
have on average lower incomes, and in rural areas are more isolated
from both GPs and hospitals. As a result they die earlier. Health
insurance is becoming unaffordable for many - more retired people are
struggling, just at the time when surgery is more likely to be needed.
That stems from fewer retiring New Zealanders owning a house and
having lower savings. There are private hospitals in Northland however
- Shane Reti has been actively involved with them.
With Covid still needed around 300 hospital beds around the country,
and up to ten ICU places, our hospitals are still under abnormal
pressure, and I do not think that is likely to improve over the next
few years.
wrote:
have on average lower incomes, and in rural areas are more isolated
from both GPs and hospitals. As a result they die earlier. Health
insurance is becoming unaffordable for many - more retired people are
struggling, just at the time when surgery is more likely to be needed.
That stems from fewer retiring New Zealanders owning a house and
having lower savings. There are private hospitals in Northland however
- Shane Reti has been actively involved with them.
With Covid still needed around 300 hospital beds around the country,
and up to ten ICU places, our hospitals are still under abnormal
pressure, and I do not think that is likely to improve over the next
few years.
Willy Nilly
Jan 20, 2024, 3:55:50 PM1/20/24
to
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>With Covid still needed around 300 hospital beds around the country,
>and up to ten ICU places, our hospitals are still under abnormal
>pressure
This is just false. The recent increase of hospital covid admissions
>With Covid still needed around 300 hospital beds around the country,
>and up to ten ICU places, our hospitals are still under abnormal
>pressure
is simply because they have spare capacity, and get well-paid from the
government for used covid beds, so they encourage anybody with a
drippy nose, especially children. to take a bed for a few days.
Hospitals and clinics around NZ are getting every bit of government
funding they can, so expensive treatments are utilised as possible.
But there is plenty of capacity, and if demand went up, they would
simply stop offering beds for drippy noses.
Rich80105
Jan 20, 2024, 4:22:32 PM1/20/24
to
Those in ICU make it more difficult to plan some operations, and
contracting with private hospitals to take patients is very expensive
and comes out of the hospital budget.
They do not admit patients for drippy noses unless there is a lot more
behind that symptom.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 20, 2024, 9:33:17 PM1/20/24
to
will tell you you’re a leftie.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 20, 2024, 9:34:27 PM1/20/24
to
the USA.
Tony
Jan 20, 2024, 10:26:40 PM1/20/24
to
Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not make
us lefties.
Nobody has ever called me a leftie, for good reason, I am also not right wing.
And I cannot understand why anybody cares. The terms are pointless and add
nothing to humanity or knowledge.
Willy Nilly
Jan 20, 2024, 11:36:30 PM1/20/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Public hospitals are not paid any more for having Covid patients.
Ding, wrong, hospitals got bonuses per covid case back in lockdown
>Public hospitals are not paid any more for having Covid patients.
days, haven't heard they ever rescinded that.
>Those in ICU make it more difficult to plan some operations,
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/450874/covid-19-data-visualisations-nz-in-numbers
>They do not admit patients for drippy noses unless there is a lot more
>behind that symptom.
Crash
Jan 21, 2024, 2:37:18 AM1/21/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 02:34:25 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
That is because the biggest cost factor in healthcare provision (at
ALL levels) in the USA is public liability (ie negligence lawsuit)
liability.
When I lived in the USA in the early 90s I provided software support
to a mutually-owned (ie owned by its customers) insurance company (a
customer of my employer) that insured what we call GPs. Doctors were
required to come to the assistance of anyone they encountered at any
time that required treatment they were qualified to provide, so
liability applied 7/24. In those pre-internet days, GPs used an 1-800
number to call in each day when they went on and off duty (ie 'on'
when opening their practice, 'off' for 'lunch break', 'on' for
'back-from-lunch', 'off' for close-of-practice). Their monthly
premiums were calculated for their 'on' hours because their liability
was considerably higher for 'on' vs 'off' hours.
Other overheads such as rent, staff costs etc. were less.
Punitive damages as a concept is the biggest contributor to public
liability insurance costs in the USA, particularly for GPs.
--
Crash McBash
ALL levels) in the USA is public liability (ie negligence lawsuit)
liability.
When I lived in the USA in the early 90s I provided software support
to a mutually-owned (ie owned by its customers) insurance company (a
customer of my employer) that insured what we call GPs. Doctors were
required to come to the assistance of anyone they encountered at any
time that required treatment they were qualified to provide, so
liability applied 7/24. In those pre-internet days, GPs used an 1-800
number to call in each day when they went on and off duty (ie 'on'
when opening their practice, 'off' for 'lunch break', 'on' for
'back-from-lunch', 'off' for close-of-practice). Their monthly
premiums were calculated for their 'on' hours because their liability
was considerably higher for 'on' vs 'off' hours.
Other overheads such as rent, staff costs etc. were less.
Punitive damages as a concept is the biggest contributor to public
liability insurance costs in the USA, particularly for GPs.
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 4:02:45 AM1/21/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 20:37:16 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
Thanks Crash for that clarification. We can be very thankful for ACC
and Pharmac - combined they save us millions. ACC is not perfect, but
thankfully National have given up on trying to privatise it - it runs
at much lower cost than private companies could run that sort of
insurance.
wrote:
and Pharmac - combined they save us millions. ACC is not perfect, but
thankfully National have given up on trying to privatise it - it runs
at much lower cost than private companies could run that sort of
insurance.
BR
Jan 21, 2024, 11:04:43 AM1/21/24
to
On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 21:14:21 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
anything, i.e. there are people who have spent their whole lives
bludging.
>About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
Some people are paying twice. They have private medical insurance, but
are still required to fund government healthcare via taxes.
<l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>
>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>
>We all are paying.
No we are not all paying. There are many people who have never paid
>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>
>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>
>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>
>We all are paying.
anything, i.e. there are people who have spent their whole lives
bludging.
>About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
are still required to fund government healthcare via taxes.
JohnO
Jan 21, 2024, 2:02:28 PM1/21/24
to
JohnO
Jan 21, 2024, 2:05:23 PM1/21/24
to
Crash
Jan 21, 2024, 2:16:47 PM1/21/24
to
state subsidies that is supposed to cover what it would have cost to
for equivalent taxpayer-funded care. It is completely inadequate
because private providers provide a higher level of care and in some
circumstances care that the taxpayer does not provide. Health
insurance helps bridge the funding gap but does not always cover the
total cost of treatment.
--
Crash McBash
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 3:07:14 PM1/21/24
to
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 05:07:05 +1300, BR <bl...@blah.blah> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 21:14:21 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
><l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>>
>>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>>
>>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>>
>>We all are paying.
>
>No we are not all paying. There are many people who have never paid
>anything, i.e. there are people who have spent their whole lives
>bludging.
A lovely word bludging - I presume you are thinking of more than just
><l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>>
>>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>>
>>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>>
>>We all are paying.
>
>No we are not all paying. There are many people who have never paid
>anything, i.e. there are people who have spent their whole lives
>bludging.
partners of senior politicians, stay at home parents, children,
prisoners, those in residential care of various kinds, and those
surviving (less well than previously) on NZ Superannuation. Who have I
missed that you were trying to insult, BR; I presume you were not
just referring to the partners of successive Prime Ministers . . .
For all of those of course someone is paying taxes such as GST on any
costs incurred in looking after their welfare - in fact one of the
most significant moves in our tax system was the move from income tax
being the major form of taxation to introduce and then increase
consumption taxes such as GST, excise taxes etc.
>
>>About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
>
>Some people are paying twice. They have private medical insurance, but
>are still required to fund government healthcare via taxes.
And that is their choice of course; many are not able to afford
>>About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
>
>Some people are paying twice. They have private medical insurance, but
>are still required to fund government healthcare via taxes.
medical insurance (especially as they get older), but there are still
substantial costs to the health system though subsidies for General
Practitioners, and to cover medical care that private health insurers
do not cover - many of our most expensive cancer treatments for
example are not covered under most health insurance policies. So by
all means take out private medical insurance - it may enable you to
"jump the queue" for some elective treatments, and avoid having to
wait while more urgent cases get dealt with; and in a few cases
private hospitals are able to encourage such preferential treatment by
being able to afford new technology - but you will still be relying on
the public system for affordable GP consultation fees, for a lot of
free medical testing, for emergency treatment, and for some services
not sufficiently profitable for your insurance company.
>
>Bill.
Willy Nilly
Jan 21, 2024, 3:12:58 PM1/21/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024, Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Thanks Crash for that clarification. We can be very thankful for ACC
>and Pharmac - combined they save us millions. ACC is not perfect, but
>thankfully National have given up on trying to privatise it - it runs
>at much lower cost than private companies could run that sort of
>insurance.
Aaanndd, just for a change -- I completely agree with Rich here.
>and Pharmac - combined they save us millions. ACC is not perfect, but
>thankfully National have given up on trying to privatise it - it runs
>at much lower cost than private companies could run that sort of
>insurance.
However, Labour always tinkers with ACC, such as providing suicide
cover back in the 1990's (a disaster as it prompted people to commit
suicide), and there were other disastrous modifications proposed a few
years ago by Labour (all guaranteed to make ACC costs spiral out of
control), the details of which I don't remember, and which hopefully
never got implemented, or if they did then we're counting on National
to revoke them. Right, Rich?
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 3:52:25 PM1/21/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:05:21 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Could you give a theoretical example of that, JohnO, based on a family
in that position?
wrote:
in that position?
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 3:53:38 PM1/21/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 11:02:26 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
What is misleading, JohnO?
wrote:
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 3:57:52 PM1/21/24
to
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 08:16:45 +1300, Crash <nog...@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 05:07:05 +1300, BR <bl...@blah.blah> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 21:14:21 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>><l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>>>
>>>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>>>
>>>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>>>
>>>We all are paying.
>>
>>No we are not all paying. There are many people who have never paid
>>anything, i.e. there are people who have spent their whole lives
>>bludging.
>>
>>>About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>>>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
>>
>>Some people are paying twice. They have private medical insurance, but
>>are still required to fund government healthcare via taxes.
>
>That is a bit misleading in that all private health providers receive
>state subsidies that is supposed to cover what it would have cost to
>for equivalent taxpayer-funded care.
Can you give a reference for those payments, Crash. I do know that
through the Covid period and at other times, hospitals under stress
have commissioned work from private hospitals at their normal rates to
alleviate back-logs, but I do not think that there is generally any
subsidy from the public health system for health services through
private health insurance arrangements for example.
wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 05:07:05 +1300, BR <bl...@blah.blah> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 21:14:21 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>><l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 05:48:35 +1300, BR wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:04:53 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>>>> <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:41:34 -0800 (PST), JohnO wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lefties really are the scum of humanity.
>>>>>
>>>>>Without lefties, you would have no free healthcare.
>>>>
>>>> "Free" is just another word for "somebody else is paying".
>>>
>>>We all are paying.
>>
>>No we are not all paying. There are many people who have never paid
>>anything, i.e. there are people who have spent their whole lives
>>bludging.
>>
>>>About half what it costs per head to fund a US-style
>>>health-insurance system. So we all are paying ... and saving.
>>
>>Some people are paying twice. They have private medical insurance, but
>>are still required to fund government healthcare via taxes.
>
>That is a bit misleading in that all private health providers receive
>state subsidies that is supposed to cover what it would have cost to
>for equivalent taxpayer-funded care.
through the Covid period and at other times, hospitals under stress
have commissioned work from private hospitals at their normal rates to
alleviate back-logs, but I do not think that there is generally any
subsidy from the public health system for health services through
private health insurance arrangements for example.
Tony
Jan 21, 2024, 4:08:17 PM1/21/24
to
that question - oh wait, maybe you would - just because you are asinine.
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 4:09:12 PM1/21/24
to
Tony
Jan 21, 2024, 4:11:09 PM1/21/24
to
private health care - indeed you have suggested that before- You are a creep/
>
>>
>>Bill.
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 4:54:48 PM1/21/24
to
working life, in New Zealand and Australia, but not in the UK; and I
was at one time a Director of a health insurance company in New
Zealand. Taking private health insurance is nearly essential in the
USA, desirable in Australia, and I believe for most people optional in
the UK and New Zealand. I do take out travel insurance however;
primarily for the health cover included. I have no problems with
people taking out health insurance, but it is not an efficient way of
providing services for needs that are largely identical for all people
- the higher transaction costs are in an economic sense wasted money
for our community - the costs of assessing cover and collecting
premiums takes around 15% to 20% of the premiums that policyholders
pay. That was part of the reason that part payments were abandoned
for public hospitals. Freedom of choice is all very well, but from a
nation-wide perspective most governments would rather spend money on
medical staff than on pushing paper.
>>
>>>
>>>Bill.
Tony
Jan 21, 2024, 4:57:41 PM1/21/24
to
> I had health insurance for most of my
>working life, in New Zealand and Australia, but not in the UK; and I
>was at one time a Director of a health insurance company in New
>Zealand. Taking private health insurance is nearly essential in the
>USA, desirable in Australia, and I believe for most people optional in
>the UK and New Zealand. I do take out travel insurance however;
>primarily for the health cover included. I have no problems with
>people taking out health insurance, but it is not an efficient way of
>providing services for needs that are largely identical for all people
>- the higher transaction costs are in an economic sense wasted money
>for our community - the costs of assessing cover and collecting
>premiums takes around 15% to 20% of the premiums that policyholders
>pay. That was part of the reason that part payments were abandoned
>for public hospitals. Freedom of choice is all very well, but from a
>nation-wide perspective most governments would rather spend money on
>medical staff than on pushing paper.
Your health is not the topic - do try to keep up.
>working life, in New Zealand and Australia, but not in the UK; and I
>was at one time a Director of a health insurance company in New
>Zealand. Taking private health insurance is nearly essential in the
>USA, desirable in Australia, and I believe for most people optional in
>the UK and New Zealand. I do take out travel insurance however;
>primarily for the health cover included. I have no problems with
>people taking out health insurance, but it is not an efficient way of
>providing services for needs that are largely identical for all people
>- the higher transaction costs are in an economic sense wasted money
>for our community - the costs of assessing cover and collecting
>premiums takes around 15% to 20% of the premiums that policyholders
>pay. That was part of the reason that part payments were abandoned
>for public hospitals. Freedom of choice is all very well, but from a
>nation-wide perspective most governments would rather spend money on
>medical staff than on pushing paper.
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Bill.
Willy Nilly
Jan 21, 2024, 5:39:18 PM1/21/24
to
to burden it with huge additional costs. The only principle that you
ever consistently apply is -- more Communism.
Rich80105
Jan 21, 2024, 7:03:54 PM1/21/24
to
What I was showing is that the issue of ACC payments relating to
suicides has been through a number of changes and now appears to be a
compromise that is accepted by successive governments since 2010. What
change (if any) are you looking for, Willy Nilly?
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 22, 2024, 1:54:27 AM1/22/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
> Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not
> make us lefties.
Since they are pretty much the centre of mass of the rightie world, yes it
> Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not
> make us lefties.
does.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 22, 2024, 1:55:34 AM1/22/24
to
Tony
Jan 22, 2024, 2:03:47 PM1/22/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
we hold lefty views - there is no logic in that.
JohnO
Jan 22, 2024, 2:13:45 PM1/22/24
to
Rich80105
Jan 22, 2024, 8:38:02 PM1/22/24
to
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:13:43 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
New Zealand's dealings with the USA are largely in relation to trade,
tourism and defence - we may get a bit closer as National has for a
long time encouraged mutual support between their party here and the
Republicans in the USA, but we will I believe try to retain an
independent foreign policy stance.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties are overall very much to
the right on economic issues - with the Democrats about as right wing
as National here. Federal politics dominate economic policies; as for
Australia, the States are limited in how much they can impact on such
matters, and as federal decisions on matters such as termination of
pregnancies show, their Supreme Court is extremely right wing.
I would however be interested in any evidence of the left-leaning
status of the west coast states - how is that evident?
Labour is centre-right in New Zealand, but still definitely to the
left of National, and hence even further to the left of ACT. National
like to call themselves "centre-right", but the reality is that they
attract very few from the centre of politics.
wrote:
tourism and defence - we may get a bit closer as National has for a
long time encouraged mutual support between their party here and the
Republicans in the USA, but we will I believe try to retain an
independent foreign policy stance.
Both the Democratic and Republican parties are overall very much to
the right on economic issues - with the Democrats about as right wing
as National here. Federal politics dominate economic policies; as for
Australia, the States are limited in how much they can impact on such
matters, and as federal decisions on matters such as termination of
pregnancies show, their Supreme Court is extremely right wing.
I would however be interested in any evidence of the left-leaning
status of the west coast states - how is that evident?
Labour is centre-right in New Zealand, but still definitely to the
left of National, and hence even further to the left of ACT. National
like to call themselves "centre-right", but the reality is that they
attract very few from the centre of politics.
Tony
Jan 22, 2024, 10:37:31 PM1/22/24
to
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:13:43 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Monday 22 January 2024 at 19:54:27 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
>>>
>>> > Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not
>>> > make us lefties.
>>> Since they are pretty much the centre of mass of the rightie world, yes it
>>> does.
>>
>>You don't understand the USA and its federal nature. Some states especially
>>the west coast states from Washington to California and the North East are
>>absolutely miles to the left of New Zealand.
>
>New Zealand's dealings with the USA are largely in relation to trade,
>tourism and defence - we may get a bit closer as National has for a
>long time encouraged mutual support between their party here and the
>Republicans in the USA, but we will I believe try to retain an
>independent foreign policy stance.
>
>Both the Democratic and Republican parties are overall very much to
>the right on economic issues - with the Democrats about as right wing
>as National here.
Nonsense - the Democrats are well to the right of National.
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:13:43 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Monday 22 January 2024 at 19:54:27 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
>>>
>>> > Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not
>>> > make us lefties.
>>> Since they are pretty much the centre of mass of the rightie world, yes it
>>> does.
>>
>>You don't understand the USA and its federal nature. Some states especially
>>the west coast states from Washington to California and the North East are
>>absolutely miles to the left of New Zealand.
>
>New Zealand's dealings with the USA are largely in relation to trade,
>tourism and defence - we may get a bit closer as National has for a
>long time encouraged mutual support between their party here and the
>Republicans in the USA, but we will I believe try to retain an
>independent foreign policy stance.
>
>Both the Democratic and Republican parties are overall very much to
>the right on economic issues - with the Democrats about as right wing
>as National here.
> Federal politics dominate economic policies; as for
>Australia, the States are limited in how much they can impact on such
>matters, and as federal decisions on matters such as termination of
>pregnancies show, their Supreme Court is extremely right wing.
>
>I would however be interested in any evidence of the left-leaning
>status of the west coast states - how is that evident?
>
>Labour is centre-right in New Zealand,
No, Labour are well to the left in NZ and the Greens are even further left in
>Australia, the States are limited in how much they can impact on such
>matters, and as federal decisions on matters such as termination of
>pregnancies show, their Supreme Court is extremely right wing.
>
>I would however be interested in any evidence of the left-leaning
>status of the west coast states - how is that evident?
>
>Labour is centre-right in New Zealand,
fact Marxist or communist.
> but still definitely to the
>left of National, and hence even further to the left of ACT. National
>like to call themselves "centre-right", but the reality is that they
>attract very few from the centre of politics.
The fact is they are centre right.
>left of National, and hence even further to the left of ACT. National
>like to call themselves "centre-right", but the reality is that they
>attract very few from the centre of politics.
Why do you persist with these obvious lies, you have never provided credible
evidence for your fantasies.
JohnO
Jan 22, 2024, 10:39:16 PM1/22/24
to
On Tuesday 23 January 2024 at 14:38:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:13:43 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Monday 22 January 2024 at 19:54:27 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> >> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
> >>
> >> > Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not
> >> > make us lefties.
> >> Since they are pretty much the centre of mass of the rightie world, yes it
> >> does.
> >
> >You don't understand the USA and its federal nature. Some states especially the west coast states from Washington to California and the North East are absolutely miles to the left of New Zealand.
> New Zealand's dealings with the USA are largely in relation to trade,
> tourism and defence - we may get a bit closer as National has for a
> long time encouraged mutual support between their party here and the
> Republicans in the USA, but we will I believe try to retain an
> independent foreign policy stance.
>
> Both the Democratic and Republican parties are overall very much to
> the right on economic issues - with the Democrats about as right wing
> as National here. Federal politics dominate economic policies; as for
> Australia, the States are limited in how much they can impact on such
> matters, and as federal decisions on matters such as termination of
> pregnancies show, their Supreme Court is extremely right wing.
>
> I would however be interested in any evidence of the left-leaning
> status of the west coast states - how is that evident?
>
> Labour is centre-right in New Zealand,
You are an ignorant fool.
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:13:43 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Monday 22 January 2024 at 19:54:27 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> >> On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 03:26:37 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
> >>
> >> > Most Americans are to the right of most New Zealanders but that does not
> >> > make us lefties.
> >> Since they are pretty much the centre of mass of the rightie world, yes it
> >> does.
> >
> >You don't understand the USA and its federal nature. Some states especially the west coast states from Washington to California and the North East are absolutely miles to the left of New Zealand.
> New Zealand's dealings with the USA are largely in relation to trade,
> tourism and defence - we may get a bit closer as National has for a
> long time encouraged mutual support between their party here and the
> Republicans in the USA, but we will I believe try to retain an
> independent foreign policy stance.
>
> Both the Democratic and Republican parties are overall very much to
> the right on economic issues - with the Democrats about as right wing
> as National here. Federal politics dominate economic policies; as for
> Australia, the States are limited in how much they can impact on such
> matters, and as federal decisions on matters such as termination of
> pregnancies show, their Supreme Court is extremely right wing.
>
> I would however be interested in any evidence of the left-leaning
> status of the west coast states - how is that evident?
>
> Labour is centre-right in New Zealand,
Tony
Jan 22, 2024, 10:47:01 PM1/22/24
to
masters. He reminds me of the dog on the HMV logo, patiently absorbing
everything he hears from the one source of truth.
Rich80105
Jan 22, 2024, 10:54:47 PM1/22/24
to
https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
And I do understand that you will claim it is wrong purely because you
don't like the answers . . .
Rich80105
Jan 22, 2024, 10:55:19 PM1/22/24
to
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:39:14 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
See here:
https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
https://www.politicalcompass.org/nz2023
Tony
Jan 23, 2024, 12:54:27 AM1/23/24
to
its site that supports or justifies the conclusions it publishes. You have been
told that multiple times and yet you continue to use what is obviously a left
wing political site to prove your folishness.
The site is a thinly disguised left wing mouthpiece, just like you (except you
have no disguise).
Tony
Jan 23, 2024, 12:54:54 AM1/23/24
to
Rich80105
Jan 23, 2024, 4:59:53 AM1/23/24
to
Tony
Jan 23, 2024, 2:35:49 PM1/23/24
to
Preferably in some sort of English.
Gordon
Jan 23, 2024, 10:57:49 PM1/23/24
to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/His_Master%27s_Voice
Tony
Jan 23, 2024, 11:51:47 PM1/23/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 24, 2024, 12:28:05 AM1/24/24
to
Dumbfuckistani terms, you are a leftie.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 24, 2024, 12:30:05 AM1/24/24
to
military might of the USA.
Tony
Jan 24, 2024, 12:38:49 AM1/24/24
to
"lefties". That is completely illogical.
Next somebody will say that just because we are west of Argentina we are
westies or some other silliness. Or perhaps because we have less wealth than
China we are paupers.
It is all about relativity, not absolutes.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 25, 2024, 6:16:50 PM1/25/24
to
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 05:38:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
> Just because we are left of some other country does not make
> us "lefties". That is completely illogical.
Doesn’t make it any less true.
> Just because we are left of some other country does not make
> us "lefties". That is completely illogical.
> Next somebody will say that just because we are west of Argentina we are
> westies or some other silliness.
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Jan 25, 2024, 6:24:44 PM1/25/24
to
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 22:39:28 GMT, Willy Nilly wrote:
> Rich, you weasel, first you praise ACC for its low cost, then you want
> to burden it with huge additional costs.
Somebody has to pay those costs. There is the social cost of the
> Rich, you weasel, first you praise ACC for its low cost, then you want
> to burden it with huge additional costs.
suffering, and the consequent economic cost of the inability of the
sufferers to contribute to the economy.
The whole point of lefty/Socialist Government services is to cushion the
blow to individuals by spreading these costs over everybody. Even if you
ignore the issue of compassion, you can think of it as “social self-
interest”.
Rich80105
Jan 25, 2024, 6:45:12 PM1/25/24
to
On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 14:59:20 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Friday 19 January 2024 at 10:32:35 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>> >> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>> >> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>> >> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
>> >> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
>> >> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
>> >
>> >Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed - specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living their lives.
>>
>> So you want to ban religious belief? Certainly the proportion of
>
>Not even close to what I suggested. You are such a stupid little fuck.
>
>> those stating in the census that they have no religious belief is
>> growing, but I suspect Christianity is still the most numerous
>> acknowledged religion - and that covers both Maori and Pakeha.
>>
>> So how should it be removed, JohnO? And why?
>
>Removed from legislation you dimwit. NZ law should be secular and have no imposition of some people's weird beliefs upon others.
The prayer at the opening of parliament has been changed recently.
Personally I have no problem with it, but would have no problem with
it not being given should a majority of parliament so decide.
wrote:
>On Friday 19 January 2024 at 10:32:35 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 12:42:54 -0800 (PST), JohnO <john...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >On Friday 19 January 2024 at 09:32:56 UTC+13, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 21:40:40 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > There was indeed a lot of sympathy for Judith Collins when she
>> >> > arranged to be photographed praying in a church - it was rightly seen
>> >> > as the end of an era for both her and her political party.
>> >> This is why, democracies have to be secular -- they must look after the
>> >> welfare of all their citizens equally, regardless of ethnicity, religion,
>> >> sexuality etc. Church/temple/mosque/whatever has no place in Government.
>> >
>> >Indeed - and for this reason a lot of M?ori nonsense needs to be removed - specifically animist mythology that is getting in the way of people living their lives.
>>
>> So you want to ban religious belief? Certainly the proportion of
>
>Not even close to what I suggested. You are such a stupid little fuck.
>
>> those stating in the census that they have no religious belief is
>> growing, but I suspect Christianity is still the most numerous
>> acknowledged religion - and that covers both Maori and Pakeha.
>>
>> So how should it be removed, JohnO? And why?
>
>Removed from legislation you dimwit. NZ law should be secular and have no imposition of some people's weird beliefs upon others.
The prayer at the opening of parliament has been changed recently.
Personally I have no problem with it, but would have no problem with
it not being given should a majority of parliament so decide.
Tony
Jan 25, 2024, 6:49:28 PM1/25/24
to
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 05:38:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony wrote:
>
>> Just because we are left of some other country does not make
>> us "lefties". That is completely illogical.
>
>Doesn’t make it any less true.
Except it is not true, lefty is an absolute - left of somewhere is relative.
>
>> Just because we are left of some other country does not make
>> us "lefties". That is completely illogical.
>
>Doesn’t make it any less true.
They are not the same.
>
>> Next somebody will say that just because we are west of Argentina we are
>> westies or some other silliness.
>
>You said it, I didn’t.
Didn't what? A complete sentence would help.
>> Next somebody will say that just because we are west of Argentina we are
>> westies or some other silliness.
>
>You said it, I didn’t.
Rich80105
Jan 25, 2024, 7:13:22 PM1/25/24
to
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/126063842/acc-rules-have-failed-grieving-families-of-suicide-victims-since-2010
Another article is here:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/7692747/ACCs-suicide-snub-adds-to-family-pain
in which was:
"In 2001 the Labour government introduced changes to the Accident
Compensation Corporation Act that meant entitlements were paid to
families of victims whose suicide was the result of mental illness (ie
not necessarily a mental injury). In 2008 this was extended to cover
all suicides.
This meant families of suicide victims could receive a funeral grant,
a survivor's grant of around $5000, funding for counselling and a
share of income-related compensation for dependants.
Two years later National's ACC Minister Nick Smith changed the law, so
families of suicide victims only received entitlements if ACC
established the person who committed suicide was not able to
appreciate the consequences of their action, or that a previously
covered mental injury caused, or contributed to, the suicide."
Labour promised a review but that does not appear to have happened.
Yes the Labour is more likely top support those in need than National,
but minor differences can persist in to later terms of parliament
unless they are given high priority for some reason.
0 new messages