ELECTION 2014

[Bounty Hunter]

Not voting is not the same as no confidence (in the system or otherwise)

This is the same way some have argued elections are broken: you don't end up with the best people, you end up with the least-bad people. Since people aren't one-dimensional, those are very different concepts. Least-bad involves very little risk; you eliminate everyone who displays any risk factors at all.

Noink

Little bit more context buddy?

Where'd your quote come from? I can't tell if it's reinforcing my statement or challenging it...heh

[The Demon Lord]

Not voting is not the same as no confidence (in the system or otherwise)

This is the same way some have argued elections are broken: you don't end up with the best people, you end up with the least-bad people. Since people aren't one-dimensional, those are very different concepts. Least-bad involves very little risk; you eliminate everyone who displays any risk factors at all.

Noink

Little bit more context buddy?

Where'd your quote come from? I can't tell if it's reinforcing my statement or challenging it...heh

And that is the Crux of the issue - moving forward involves Risk, Elections reward those who take little to no risk, thus we get rewarded with the current crop of limp wristed self serving cretins (aka Politicians) whose sole objective is to do the bare minimum to stay on the Gravy Train

[Bounty Hunter]

And that is the Crux of the issue - moving forward involves Risk, Elections reward those who take little to no risk, thus we get rewarded with the current crop of limp wristed self serving cretins (aka Politicians) whose sole objective is to do the bare minimum to stay on the Gravy Train

What?

The crux of the issue is that Tiwa provided a quote without providing a context or source?

I guess some risk is involved....but aside from an analogy I don't see how this has anything to do with elections....

[Tiwaking!]

The crux of the issue is that Tiwa provided a quote without providing a context or source?

The source from the quote is from a Hacker News thread called "Why Google's hiring process is broken"
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2557672
The quote is a response to the outline of the process of Google's hiring process (which I have spoilered)

Spoiler :

Lets say there is a person X, who gets hired, from company Y, and person X really didn't fit in at Y and felt really abused by the company. Now new candidates from Y generate an email to X with the standard "You worked at Y when candidate Z did etc etc." Now person X is still pissed off about how Y treated them and so they respond to all of those emails with "Yeah, candidate Z was a crappy engineer, everyone had to carry for them they never did anything useful." Maybe someone else from Y says "candidate Z was great, everyone turned to them for advice." The process of separating the interviewers from the decisions means that this feedback bubbles up all equally weighted. Hard to know that employee X has said the same thing about every candidate that has come from Y, and if the committee sees two comments one positive and one negative and there isn't anyone on the committee who knows any different then how do you evaluate?

The simplest solution if either has an equal probability of being the 'correct' assesment is that you pass on them because you can't know if you have bad data. And that was a part of the process that was fundamentally broken.

Basically the only way to know if someone is good or not is to assume the worse.

And that is the Crux of the issue - moving forward involves Risk, Elections reward those who take little to no risk, thus we get rewarded with the current crop of limp wristed self serving cretins (aka Politicians) whose sole objective is to do the bare minimum to stay on the Gravy Train

I guess some risk is involved....but aside from an analogy I don't see how this has anything to do with elections....

Elections are not about voting for the 'best' candidate. It has never been about voting for the 'best' candidate.

Elections are about voting for the candidate who best appeals to YOU. This is bias.

In a hiring system without bias, you must utilize the process of least-worst candiate. In Googles hiring system, and all hiring systems, however, they can opt-out and not hire anyone.

In an election you have a choice:

a) vote for the candidate you like
b) vote for the least-bad candidate (this includes voting for someone because you like their party)
c) not vote

Unlike a hiring system, however, someone has to get the job.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

Someone had to get the job at google as well.

Otherwise they'd have no employees.

[Kayne]

Could someone do me a favour and explain what is bad about John Key?

I'm not repping the guy. It just seems every time I see "Fuck John Key" on face book, or hear it in real life, it's from someone who can't actually speak english, and usually has the most stupid and hypocritical opinion possible.

Without any sort of ...bias? stigma?... would someone be able to actually list points that make him such a "c*** dat deservs 2 gt fukin lintchd!"

[Retardobot]

jon key iz wers then hitler

[Lias]

Could someone do me a favour and explain what is bad about John Key?

I'm not repping the guy. It just seems every time I see "Fuck John Key" on face book, or hear it in real life, it's from someone who can't actually speak english, and usually has the most stupid and hypocritical opinion possible.

Without any sort of ...bias? stigma?... would someone be able to actually list points that make him such a "c*** dat deservs 2 gt fukin lintchd!"

People hate him for various things, some of which others love him for.

Labels I personally think apply to him would be rich, white, arrogant, friendly, centrist, hypocritical, dishonest, forgetful, capitalistic, pro business, pro USA, pro copyright, pro IP, anti privacy, pro spying, pro asset sales, republican.

He's very popular with many people because he is friendly, and is seen as being "safe hands" to run the country economically. I voted him him in the 2008 and 2011 elections for that reason, even though I've never particularly liked him. I didn't vote for him this term, because my disquiet as some of his other policies and views has become strong enough that even though I still think he is the best for NZ economically, I couldn't stomach voting for him again.

The main things I personally dislike about him are his support for copyright/intellectual property law combined with his blind support for the US government (which is owned lock stock and barrel by US corporate interests), in particular his ongoing support of the NSA/5Eyes, and the TPPA. Also his arrogance and hypocrisy, the way he blatantly lies to the public and only admits it when he is caught out (albeit pretty much every politician is like that). That and his association with Cameron Slater, who is quite possibly the most vile human being (other than pedophiles) currently residing in New Zealand.

Have a read of his Wikipedia Entry for some background, and this NZ Herald article for some more recent stuff.

[Kayne]

I should buy you a box or something for writing that out Lias.

I'll have to give you the money because I look 12 years old.

[Lias]

I should buy you a box or something for writing that out Lias.

I'll have to give you the money because I look 12 years old.

HAANZ 18+ card
NZ drivers license
Passport

Only legal forms of ID around here matey.

[Kayne]

Everyone tries to scratch at mine, Then they try do the math (2014 - 1994, he's gotta be closer to 10 than 20), then they scratch at the card, they ask if I have a older brother... and then they ask if they're the first one to ask.

"Don't worry! It's a compliment!"

It's not :<

[Lias]

Everyone tries to scratch at mine, Then they try do the math (2014 - 1994, he's gotta be closer to 10 than 20), then they scratch at the card, they ask if I have a older brother... and then they ask if they're the first one to ask.

"Don't worry! It's a compliment!"

It's not :<

NahI only tell the girls its a compliment.. guys I tell they are baby faced motherfuckers who gonna get ID'd at 40.

When XSANNZ and I lived together (and he's in his 30's) every time we went and got flat groceries and got beer he'd get ID'd.. Baby faced motherfucker lol.

[Pitchey]

Only because your face has all the style and panache of a baboons arse Lias! 

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

I had a beard all this month, didn't get asked for ID once.

Shave it off, get asked for ID next day. I'm 30 in a week. I'm already telling kids to get off my lawn.


Kayne, grow a beard.

[Retardobot]

Lias did a good job at illustrating my contempt for John Key.

The guy is a rat faced goon who seems to have trademarked the response to ANY pressing matter - "at the end of the day, I can't comment when I don't have all the facts". You do have all the facts, and if you don't, then it's your job to have them you arrogant cunt.

I have friends who support him and National purely because "I don't like lazy dole bludgers", typical misinformed voters who go to the polls to vote for friends.

His constant campaigning for tighter security due to the rising terrorist threat is a paradox brought on by his constant campaigning for tighter security laws.

The majority of voters are idiots and I truly believe they've voted in Bush for a second term.

[Pyromanik]

Third.

[The Demon Lord]

Lias did a good job at illustrating my contempt for John Key.

The guy is a rat faced goon who seems to have trademarked the response to ANY pressing matter - "at the end of the day, I can't comment when I don't have all the facts". You do have all the facts, and if you don't, then it's your job to have them you arrogant cunt.

I have friends who support him and National purely because "I don't like lazy dole bludgers", typical misinformed voters who go to the polls to vote for friends.

His constant campaigning for tighter security due to the rising terrorist threat is a paradox brought on by his constant campaigning for tighter security laws.

The majority of voters are idiots and I truly believe they've voted in Bush for a second term.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/government/expenditure

From the Governments own websites - somewhere between 30-45% of Tax is spent on Social security and Welfare which is curiously about the same percentage that the Govt collects from Income tax:



so yes, I don't like lazy dole blodgers because all of the money which I pay in Tax from my hard work pretty much goes straight to people who aren't working.

Teflon John maybe a smug git to whom nothing that should stick does, but please don't deride people who are upset about the amount the NZ Govt spends on Social Security and Welfare (and fleeces those that work in the form of Tax) as 'typical misinformed voters'

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

I voted for John Key, because Dotcom doesn't like him, and I don't like Dotcom.

But I don't understand why Key associates with Slater. Salter looks like a blob of snot dressed up in clothes.


At the end of the day (he), while other parties had some good policies (aka Labour, Green) they always shot themselves in the foot with one big stupid policy which just turned me right off. That left National as the least bad option for me, which I'm happy with.


But I'm not liking this warrantless surveillance stuff...

[Retardobot]

Teflon John maybe a smug git to whom nothing that should stick does, but please don't deride people who are upset about the amount the NZ Govt spends on Social Security and Welfare (and fleeces those that work in the form of Tax) as 'typical misinformed voters'

My point was to not attack those who believe strongly about welfare spending. However using it as a reason to vote for National was and is a cop-out purely because you're unable to come to a reasonable conclusion on who you want to vote for. It's a polarising topic at every election and no parties that get in seem to really make any outward attempt at making a difference to whether you're for it or against it.

It's the shopping voucher of voting.

"I have no idea what to get Shitty McDiddler, so I'll just buy him a voucher so it looks like I care".

Going to the polls because you don't like dole bludgers is weak.

[The Demon Lord]

Going to the polls because you don't like dole bludgers is weak.

Its no weaker or stronger than any other reason to go to the Polls - In fact given the info above, I'd actually say its a pretty strong reason to go to the polls.

The real question should be however - Has National done or is doing anything to objectively reduce the Welfare spend?

Historically Labour has overspent on Welfare (IMO) and National tends to underspend - so after a decade of Labour spending my hard earned tax so that others can sit on their arse, I too would be inclined to vote national (except there are other National policies that I strongly disagree with)

[Tandoori]

I might yet come back to pick apart some comments about both politics and political systems generally. That tl;dr of those comments probably amounts to: don't focus on the PM - there's a whole caucus behind him that shapes policy and; for God's sake, vote - you're a fucking idiot if you don't.

In the mean time however, I would just like to point out that 'dole bludgers' are typically conceived as being those on unemployment benefits (and sometimes the DPB).

In reality, the overwhelming majority of spending on social welfare goes to Superannuatants. Without picking through the Crown Accounts, I recall that Superannuation expenditure was approximately fourteen times that expended on the Unemployment benefit (although its probably worth noting that Accomodation Supplements may also be received by those on the unemployment benefit - and that expenditure is about 13% of that of Superannuation).

There's also about 640,000 people receiving Super versus 295,000 receiving some form of Unemployment or job-seeker benefit.

What's pertinent here is that we know the Government has repeatedly made comments that it was not willing, in spite of overwhelming evidence about the increasing strain on the Crown's finances, change Super eligibility. Currently, it's not means-tested and the age of eligibility is, arguably, becoming further and further out of touch with the new reality of working lives which can go far beyond 65 (with the assistance of better medical care). That policy position has rested on the tenuous argument that the Prime Minister made an electoral commitment to not raise the age of eligibility. Given that this same Prime Minister has proven himself willing to break similar promises in the name of fiscal responsibility (remember the promise of no increase to GST?), it seems a matter of politics alone that prevents us reducing the pressures of Super on the Crown Accounts (and by logic, our tax system).

Remember this is all occurring in the context of a seven-fold increase in public debt under this Government. Of course, that's not a comprehensive indicator of the quality of fiscal policy, but it's also something that we should bear in mind when we start crediting this government with being sound managers of the economy.

[Bounty Hunter]

It annoys the shit out of me when people are like "ALL DEBT IS DEFINITELY VERY BAD"

[Kayne]

Another question - Do any of you political peoples watch parliament TV?

Does it answer any questions or is it just a big room filled with big children trying to see who can say the best come back?

[Tandoori]

Another question - Do any of you political peoples watch parliament TV?

Does it answer any questions or is it just a big room filled with big children trying to see who can say the best come back?

It's good for a giggle, and it can be quite enlightening insofar as you can see the faces MPs (under pressure or on attack). But it's really just the rubber-stamp to make law. Therefore, it's only really interesting when it manages to hold up laws that the Government wants to pass or when parliament passes laws that weren't on the Government's agenda.

You should familiarise yourself with our constitutional arrangements if you want to understand what's really going on. Scan over the Cabinet Manual and learn about the process of government. Process and timing determine the political agenda.

[Xsannz]

Everyone tries to scratch at mine, Then they try do the math (2014 - 1994, he's gotta be closer to 10 than 20), then they scratch at the card, they ask if I have a older brother... and then they ask if they're the first one to ask.

"Don't worry! It's a compliment!"

It's not :<

NahI only tell the girls its a compliment.. guys I tell they are baby faced motherfuckers who gonna get ID'd at 40.

When XSANNZ and I lived together (and he's in his 30's) every time we went and got flat groceries and got beer he'd get ID'd.. Baby faced motherfucker lol.

did movember stopped getting id's, shaved because my 7 year old didn't like my beard and mo,

6 month old cried and wouldn't let me hold her for a few hours till she cottoned on it was me and the 7 year old and wife was happy, but now back to being id'd for buying toilet roll and bear again.  FML