Max Mason - career bureaucrat

The present political mentality of Kiwis dictates that what Max Mason says is true: ie people moving here and demanding rates be left low need to accept they (high rates) are part of the  population problem.

This however does not need to be fact.

It is solely due to people like yourself who demand council “do this - do that,” and “What is the council going to do about the other,”  etc that ensure its perpetuity.

In effect, you are poking yourself in the eye with a sharp stick, and then complaining that it hurts.

The solution is simple - If it hurts, stop doing it!

If you were only to wean yourself off the council dependancy and make room for private enterprise to provide the things you want (thats how the law of supply and demand works) You will have everything you want at no expense and no responsibility should it go belly-up.

The reason we have this situation is because there are too many busy-bodies (the likes of Max Mason) who know whats best for you and how and what you should spend your money on, and whats more they think they have the right to demand you do it (oh, and it pays to keep them employed and free from having to do a job that actually creates something worthwhile - ie something people actually WANT and will purchase free of compulsion).

It is their addiction to ganging up with likeminded people and demanding council force others to do things “they” demand which ensures the problem wont go away.

These minority (whos rights you have just abused) are the ones who complain (as they have every right to).

Immunisation

When I was young and had my first children I did as I was told.

I had my children jabbed with a needle full of god-knows what  because the government said I should.

If I was instructed by the government, then it must be right, and so I did as I was told without question.
I was young, uninformed and stupid to do as I was told just because the government told me to.

Many years later when I understood who the government was, and how they made decisions (by the counting of votes and not by the quality of thinking) I realised that these things needed to be scrutinised, and that I had the right to make  my own decisions and should be responsible for my own actions.

At the same time my closest neighbour had a child, who very shortly after being immunised was diagnosed as being autistic (could have been a coincidence - who knows).

The screams emanating from that house were enough to make any parent take notice.

Shortly after that I had another child, and after reading up on the subject made an informed decision not to immunise.

If I had my child jabbed, and they had an adverse reaction, I would blame myself.
On the other hand If I didnt jab my child and it contracted a disease (many of which were on the decline before immunisations became prevalent due to better hygiene and nutrition) then I would blame myself.

You can say that you are damned if you do, and damned if you dont - make your choice and stand by it. We have become a nation of sheep, dependant on the thinking of others and not prepared to use our own intelligence and who have had our responsibilities as parents stolen from us by politicians with the best intentions, but no responsibilities.

Why should I take the word and do the bidding of others like Tony Ryall and Phil Shoemac etc over my own research and put my childrens lives at stake, when I am the one who has to pay the consequences.

Childrens lives at risk in P manufacture houses

Q: Why do people put their childrens lives at risk by making P at home?

A: Because they cant purchase it anywhere else

Q: Why?
A: Because its illegal.

Q: Who makes it illegal?
A: The Government

Therefore it is the Governments fault. THEY are responsible for putting these childrens lives at stake - so blame them.

But to carry this argument closer to its conclusion . . .

QWho votes for the government?
A: Oh, thats right - YOU! - so its YOUR fault (If you voted for any of the main political parties that is).

People who want to take drugs will do so regardless of whether they are legal or illegal - they will get them one way or another (as proven by their willingness to put their families lives at risk by making them at home)

I ask the question:
Would these people who take the Extremely dangerous drug P, still take it if they could get a Safer alternative? (All drugs are dangerous - just some more dangerous than others)

They quite happily put other peoples lives at risk (their childrens, and also the people they steal and rob for the ingredients) and then they manufacture P in dangerous locations, with harmful ingredients to unknown potency, in unhygenic conditions because they cannot purchase safer, cleaner, less harmfull alternatives.

I believe it is our culture of USING FORCE on other people to make them comply with what WE personally think they should or should not be doing, instead of minding our OWN BUSINESS which is to blame.

Further more, this situation will continue until we change our ways.

If people commit a crime against others, then lock them up, but there is no such thing as a crime against yourself.

OK, I can expand on my argument further . . .

Why do you insist drugs are made illegal?
Because they are dangerous, and people who take drugs are a burden on our HEALTH [sic] SYSTEM.

They are only a burden on it because you insist government should be responsible for them.

How about teaching people the necessity of being responsible for their OWN healthcare instead of giving them a false sense of security and leading them to believe the GOVERNMENT will look after them.

In the last few years society has made it almost Unacceptable Not to have a CELL PHONE
Who says it cannot be made unacceptable not to have private health care also?
( - stop forcing us to pay for the government system and we would have money to do it with)

People who DONT have a cell phone obviously do not CARE about the consequences of not having one - what do you want to do? - FORCE THEM to have one?

Same for healthcare.

The majority of New Zealanders would understand the necessity of having healthcare insurance, leaving the few who Do NOT care about their health to be looked after by charity.

The answer is in EDUCATION - not Mindless FORCE

Its time to change our culture - this one has been failing and holding us back for far too long

Tauranga Museum

Give me a child till he is 9 and he will be mine for life.

That was the Jesuit motto, attributed to Francis Xavier, the co-founder of the Jesuit Order.

The implication is that the best opportunity to indoctrinate a person in a lifetime of belief and devotion to religion is when they are young.

This is the reason socialist governments place such importance in keeping hold of the government-run education system - to ensure they have a supply of socialists in the future to keep their political viewpoint alive - no matter that it doesn’t work.

It is hard to change from something you have been taught to believe is right your entire life.

What has this got to do with a museum?
Bringing children into the museum debate is part of the same old trick.

Try asking them if we should have a FREE lolly shop - they will mostly say YES!

What do THEY know of where the money comes from to pay for it, or who has their rights and their property STOLEN from them for them to be given that FREE lolly shop!

Do they realise that when THEY become ratepayers they will be FORCED to pay for it in the FUTURE what the CHILDREN of yesterday DEMANDED!

There are better and more moral ways to achieve what you want without the use of FORCE.

Bullying

I don't understand why you are all so surprised that bullying is so prevalent in society. We are constantly sending out mixed messages, and consent to having our children brainwashed into one minute thinking bullying is good, and the next it is bad!

To understand it, first you must ask the question "What is bullying?"

It is one person or a group of people using force on another to get what they want, and to make others do something they would not otherwise do!

Just the same as taxation is theft, then democracy and referendums are bullying - they are a wolf in sheeps clothing! Tax and referendum are alternative words given to an action to make gullible people think they mean something other than what they do.

Next time you are asked to vote in a referendum, take a moment to think about who you may be bullying, and why the biggest "gang" should be entitled to use force over the minority to get what they want.

The rights of the individual should not be up for the vote. Minorities have rights too. The use of force (in all of its guises) is the most uncivilised action one man can make against another. Bullying will continue to be a problem as long as you continue to teach our children that it is acceptable in society.

More Library nonsense

So Simon Anderson says the city needs to go under the scalpel - I could not agree more  - However, this is where people without principles come unstuck.

Simon will quite cheerfully lop off some of the things that you want, but moans and wails when the council threaten to chop off something that she wants.

How about the council supply nothing (other than essential services, which they could then do justice to). Reduce your rates by 75 percent, and let you spend your money on the things you want, and others spend it on what they want.

All those do-gooders and busybodies wringing their hands saying that a library is a necessity and less-fortunate people will not be able to afford them - will have plenty of money left to donate to the cause, or even spend their time in a productive fashion by volunteering to work at the library instead of using their time complaining and demanding that other people pay for the things they want  - shame on them.

Do not get me wrong - I love libraries - only it is the way immoral and un-principled people demand they be funded is what I do not agree with.

More tax will fix the problem . . . NOT!

Tony Farrell has come to the conclusion that tax increases on alchohol are the only way to solve the problem, and I disagree.

I think it is criminally negligent of the government-run education system that it does not include time teaching Milton Friedmans "Iron Law of Prohibition" in the curriculum, and Tonys solution a good example of why the government should NOT be in control of the education system.

Tony quotes "evidence from NZ Researchers."
Well, here are a few quotes from history:

More tax will not deter those who chose to drink excessively - It will only hurt their families who will end up with less money for essentials.

Higher taxes will have direct relation to increase in crime. ie if they cant afford to purchase what they want, they will steal money or alchohol.

It will put innocent peoples lives at risk - dairy owners, liquor outlets etc.
Those who still wish to drink may try making their own, of unknown and dangerouse ingredients/potencies.

Those really desperate will drink alternatives - meths, anti-freeze etc.
Higher prices will give a NEW monopoly to the gangs (they already have a lucrative business in drugs).

google "robberies for cigarettes" to see where all this is going.

Surely your idea of fixing the problem doesnt involves more of this, because thats what you are asking for.

Michael Laws

I see what's happening.

The purveyors of political correctness (none of whom will admit to the fact) will keep moaning and whinging until all those with the testicular fortitude to speak their mind and say it like it is for fear of hurting some poor souls feelings (ie: Paul Henry, Michael Laws, Andy Hayden etc)  - are silenced, so eventually we will live in a country where mediocrity rules, where competition is outlawed, where excellence is scorned, where the truth is never spoken, there are no winners or losers, where the word I is banned and replaced with we, and where all kittens are white so you can see them at night.

As much as I disagree with them much of the time (and Michael Laws can be a pompous arse at times) I say thank heavens for the likes of Michael Laws and Paul Henry - I would rather have 2 the likes of them than a thousand of the alternative whom the politically correct would suffocate this once proud nation with.

At least they have an opinion, and dont just regurgitate what they think other people want to hear them say.