Round Most of the World in 17 days

I am travelling at present so a little slow with the comment publication. The places I am travelling to are not known for freely available internet so it is a bit complicated.

With me on this trip I have brought along two very special New Zealanders. Like an internationl Where's Wally? They will be appearing in pictures taken in every country and town I visit. There will be a few so I hope they both behave themselves appropriately and the golden rule of travelling with me - KEEP UP!!!

Slowly Sinking Tabloid - Panty Waisting Editor Alert

Braunias dumped by Socialist Leaning Editor

Limp panty-waister

Considering the extensive coverage on the sacking of Steve Braunias, as I have been quoted already by TV3 (who now claim I own this blog and the excellent Quote Unquote) on the issue as a defender of what is right and who is right, I will add my piece.

The Slowly Sinking Tabloid ("SST") has been causing concern for a while. Basically the paper lets face it, is shite. I've got no love for HoS but really HoS has been dumping all over it on Sunday for some time now. HoS is in the position of looking damn fine next to it. While HoS is Auckland-centric, SST has tried to be everything to everyone in New Zealand and in the process, pleasing no one.

The Editor has been washing down stories about Len Brown for months now, drip drying the dirty laundry before it is aired. What we can also tell about Mr Kemeys is that the SST has become a sensationalist dumping ground for crap like "Wealth Gap Divides Nation". Commissioned by none other than - the paper itself! What kind of halfwit would even think of conducting their own survey on such? And then let it be published as if a wealth gap is a bad thing.

Anyway, back to Braunias. I doubt Braunias can be counted as a hard right-winger, but he's been a victim of panty-waisting that only a pinko could ever inflict on a contributor. Sacked after abusing someone who abused him. Only a dud employer would ever do that to its talent. I find that a larger crime as an Editor (not backing his talent) than being a dirty pinko.

Quote Unquote had the initial goss on Steve Braunias' departure from SST. Matt Nippert from the NBR also had the money quote.

The brilliance of Braunias is that he's a disheveled mad scientist sort of media bloke. "You can't be frightened of people. You're not in journalism to make friends" he's once quoted as saying.

Braunias swears a lot, is opinionated, lethally smart and multi-disciplined with humour, serious stuff and the hard-hitting, or ill-disciplined potentially. All of which makes him exciting and fun. For every column of his I read and love, there's two more he writes where I haven't got a fucking clue what he is talking about. Unlike say Russell Brown, where there isn't even one column I can be remotely nice about.

So Braunias' departure seems to have been hastened somewhat by allegations of his response to someone using a NZ Police email address called him "fucking ugly", he called her a "cunt". She must have then gone running to SST and cried like the baby she is.

Columnists in New Zealand tend to be in the "cult of celebrity" section, "I'm screwing the editor or know who is for this gig" section, "failed politicians" section or that of the "social experiment cheap labour filling the white spaces in between the advertising" section. Braunias is one of the few columnists who is actually a very good writer.

SST needs a rapid overhaul of its columnists and staff not to mention what they are allowed to investigate, in order to attempt to address its rapidly decreasing importance in the Sunday market. Braunias' departure wasn't one of them. He's now run off back to Metro and North and South. Where he will be read by around the same amount of people per month than who read more popular NZ blogs. Think I'm kidding? Here are the stats....

North and South - Circulation, only 28,733 pay for it, readership of 299,000 (bludgers in five minute spurts in cafes and waiting rooms)
Metro - Circulation, only 11,202 actually pay for it, readership of 142,000 (bludgers in five minute spurts in cafes and waiting rooms).
Kiwiblog - funded by Curia, monthly readership of last audited stats 226,300 visitors per month
Whaleoil - owes numerous fines, monthly readership of last audited stats 99,200 visitors per month
The Stranded - paid for by Labour, monthly readership of last audited stats 68,200 visitors per month
Asian Invasion - self-funded, monthly readership of last audited stats 58,900 visitors per month

I will at this point disclose that Simon Wilson gave me a try-out for a Metro column when he took on the Editorship. We had a failure to communicate that two people can have only when one cannot express clearly what they want and the other cannot deliver what they think the other person wanted. But it was an honest and pleasant failure to communicate. "Write anything you like just be funny". A complicated edict when your sense of humour is as far removed from each other as the North and South pole. If Wilson and I were on a first date, we would have politely adjourned just after the entree. And to this day I read Metro and to be honest haven't a clue what 70% of it is actually going on about anyway which makes it in more than one way like reading Public Address.

Some have poo pooed Braunias' departure as they either don't like him or fail to understand that column writing and sustained periods of it is actually quite difficult. It only is made to look effortless by those who are very good at it.

Even if you can write, you have to adapt to an Editor. Most editors are cunts. Apart from Tim Pankhurst who was always very nice. They have their own eccentricities and demands as they are allowed to because they are Mr Dic and Mrs Tator. Some are just mental, pedantic he and she beasts put there like a Human Resources Manager to stifle creativity. Many haven't got a clue what they actually want and have random splurts of swearing of their own.

Fact of the matter is that the Mingster found out and was allowed by a supportive editor to make an absolute meal of the SST. Her best line is "Sunday is a small insert magazine in the Sunday Star-Times". She also disclosed what the member of the legal Cuntstabulary actually said to Braunias:

"You're not the most handsome of men, but what a beautiful mind and heart you have," Stewart wrote.

Imagine for a minute if a male police prosecutor sent say Rosemary McLeod the above, "You're not the most attractive of women, but what a beautiful mind and heart you have"? That police prosecutor's life wouldn't be worth living. Rosemary would devote endless weeks of columns after such an incident to the police culture, men being pond scum and classical liberal bias against older women.

Forgive me for the female legal interpretation of what Stewart wrote, but she was soooooo clearly flirting with Braunias. I know that it may seem an odd thing to say to attract a bloke but lets face she's a prosecutor, surrounded all day by Police and has the pick up skills of a broken front-end loader, but I do believe that Ms Stewart was trying to score some action with a dirty email. Cheeky bint.

Braunias should have seen this and reacted in a more appropriate manner. Stating that he is married with child and not interested.

In the end he sent her flowers. Which was genius.

On first glance his man-card should be removed for making the gesture, but again a female legal interpretation of flowers is such. If given to a woman for an apology they mean that subconsciously you don't really mean it. Unlike diamonds, platinum or even something cheap like stainless steel, flowers are not enduring and a bit like the apology, they begin to wilt and die behind the recipients back after just a few hours and end up making a mess all over the platform they are displayed on.

At the end of the day this incident had nothing to do with Braunias losing his column.

Braunias and the SST Editor have obviously had a clash of personalities. Which was inevitable when only Steve appears to actually have one.

It is a shame the SST Editor doesn't have clashes of personalities with others writing in and working for the paper who are actually staler than Stilton.

Amy Chua - Making Friends Worldwide

Nothing riles up the smug defensive Westernised middle-classes like telling them how to be better parents. Sue Bradford learned this the hard way in New Zealand when bringing in well-meaning but practically impossible anti-smacking legislation.

"I just want my child to be happy" is a namby pamby phrase spluttered out at middle class brunch's everywhere that's leading to ruin in the Western world.

Of course parents don't want children to JUST be happy, it's a defensive default mechanism to prepare them for inevitable underachievement. All parents these days as of old have quantifiable measures of success and failure by which they judge their child's life and with it their skill as a parent. Sit next to tables of competing parents talk about their children and you will see what I mean. To an outsider some are just nasty.

The only parents I have ever spoken with who genuinely mean they want their kids "just" to be happy are ones whose child has severe intellectual or development incapacity. You cannot fault that, they are on a different playing field as a parent. Happiness for that child and parent is as easy as a smile.

Yale law professor Amy Chua has espoused some of her beliefs on child-rearing that of course upset namby pamby's all over the English speaking Universe. And may I add, more Westernised Chinese. She's receiving more violent hate mail than Sarah Palin.

I've written about this recently about managing expectations of parents. There's a difference with Chua's children as they appear to actually be achieving to her expectations and brilliant students. They can match her hype because she's never given them an excuse for failure.

Handmirror's Stargazer "thee who doesn't like labels and I don't mean Prada or Gucci" has covered off child failures with tragically Kiwi words to the effect that it doesn't matter if you fail as long as you try your hardest.

Bullshit it does. Human nature requires us to compete and to strive to win. Whatever we define that win to be.

"Oh Mum it doesn't matter if I get a C- because you know, I'm happy and I tried my best".

"Yeah Dad I think I'll quit med school and all those years spent educating me and go on the dole because that would make me happy and I've tried my best"....

Find me a middle-class parent who would ever be happy and accepting that their child said those words?

What makes us happy? Well if a very generic being "happy" makes you a better success in life than having loads of money then people all over the world would give away all their money and go bludge off others all day doing nothing, having no performance pressure, being happy.

But then why do poor people all look and seem so desperately bloody unhappy?

Only Warren Buffett and Bill Gates seem to wake up in the morning wanting to be poorer.

As I am entirely results orientated if I truly believed that being happy and successful could be measured in anything other than personal achievement, such as Stargazer mentions, community work, then you can damn well guarantee I'd quit everything instantly and do more community work than any of the Handmirror's put together.

If being happy and successful was measured as how many children you had, sure, I'm competitive, I would have already grabbed the nearest male and have ten just to make sure I was winning at that as well.

Chinese people have lived centuries feeling they are inferior and most in miserable poverty until recently. Rather than staying inferior and blaming others like most groups of people seem to strive towards, they use that in the 21st century as motivation to make sure their kids will not be inferior to those in the West. So why are they pushing their kids so hard?

They feel that they have to. And they are probably right.

According to Chua "Chinese parents demand perfect grades because they believe that their child can get them". This is strength and confidence in a child that many Westerners just don't have. They expect less than an A so they accept it. I agree with her that give a child an excuse for failure and they'll find it.

That's why the Chinese are not only superior climbing in growth over other groups of people, they are also winning the war competing against the West. The west that has in a screaming sea of welfare bred failure into the vernacular by not valuing achievement such as earning money, career advancement, independence and actually celebrating finding and then being good at something.

China is fighting WWIII with the US and winning without firing a single shot. They now in essence own its future. They've done so because the US has adopted an "everyone must win" policy that started with lobbying for home ownership even for people who could never afford it and massive corporate and personal welfare bailouts to those who fail. Success hasn't been rewarded, failure has.

Stargazer's piece was typical of Western reaction towards other groups of people trying and succeeding to actually beat them. Fear. If a group of persons is suitably tame and non-threatening because of their inability to motivate and educate themselves out of poverty and into wealth these sorts of liberal panty-waisters can fawn praise and understanding over their lives because it will never threaten their own standing of middle class existence.

Stargazer's acceptance of "I just want to know that you really sincerely tried" lowers again the achievement drivers that are natural for human beings to desire. Saying you "just" want your child to have tried. Why "just" if trying is good enough? "Just" is an acceptance of second best.

Chua's raising daughters. This is also a little different because the Chinese female also has only recently realised that she can beat the male. Chinese history has not been kind on women, Chua herself would know that women have to try harder. In China the male, no matter how thick, is more important than the female and this bias still is ingrained. Ironically the Mainland one-child policy has helped Chinese women in many ways with parents heaping all attention without a male who is preferred.

New Zealand women have an excellent record in the past generation of smashing their male counterparts in achievement as children. All my younger female friends and acquaintances are the smartest, largest independent achievers in their family. Regardless of the measure. All have parents who have tried to keep up the egos of other lesser siblings with a large cuddle and words that they were winners too.

Such Westernised coddling of a smashed up achievement ego of losers continues into unhealthy ages. Welfare Within Families is as rife in New Zealand as government whereby often the least successful and motivated members are given assistance over others.

In Chinese culture the sibling, especially if male, would have simply been locked in his room until he wasn't so pathetic and scolded by his father that he couldn't let a girl beat him as it was embarrassing the family.

I won't call the piece of Stargazer's as far as xenophobic as it is carefully worded and genuinely considered but I will call it ignorant of how an entire group is powering on in the world while others are hugging their children to death, giving them "choices" and chanting PC slogans masking failure like "I just want my kids to be happy" and the emphasis of "cool, no pressure" parenting.

Happiness as the Chinese know from their years living in poverty, takes money in 2011 and with that money you can buy a nice warm large home, look after your friends, entertain, ensure you have choices to marry or partner well and stay away from abusive partners. Money makes other countries respect and fear you. Countries that in the past have ignored you.

It also takes a certain amount of inner strength and independence to be truly "happy". Ultimately if the Chua's in the world push their child too far and act inappropriately, a hand turns around and slaps it across her face.

A Westerner would deem this failure as a parent and the Chinese disrespectful, but the true path to happiness is getting to a state where you are so independent financially and emotionally from your parents and others that you no longer care what they or other people think and how they measure their own success or yours.

Those parents opposing Chua so vehemently, viciously and taking great umbrage as to how she has reportedly raised her own children are clearly not at that point yet either as children or parents.

Stretching the "Fit and Proper" Test

In 2001 a Napier lawyer and cannabis addict Philip Jensen was fined $1,500 for cultivating and possessing cannabis.

Jensen's lawyer submitted that he is a cannabis addict, had pleaded guilty to cultivation and co-operated fully with police. He asked that Jensen be discharged without conviction.

In 2011 a Napier lawyer Philip Jensen stood up in a Napier Court room and in defending a Mongrel Mob trainee who thinks "sieg heil" is an acceptable way of "saying hi to the bros" came up with this explanation:

As Hungahunga left the dock, his lawyer Philip Jensen remarked that "it was a German phrase popular in the 60s in the Commando comics".

"Actually it goes back a bit further than that, Mr Jensen. It was made popular in the 30s when very different rules applied," Judge Adeane said.

I wonder if they are the same Philip Jensen's and if so whether he is still rolling his own?

Can The Constitution Save Hone?

The Maori Party is suffering from TPS (Third Party Syndrome) or as Derek "The Silver" Fox put it on television tonight FDC "fairly dysfunctional caucus". ACT can't laugh, we had TPS and FDC ourselves last year when dissenters were in the ranks. It is not easy to deal with and I commiserate with the Maori Party but it is their own fault.

Large parties such as Labour find this stuff far easier to deal with. Chris Carter threw a hissy and could be isolated, contained and exterminated within their rules. They had no option but to expel him. Heather Roy was demoted from her Cabinet position, and stays within ACT after accepting a lesser role, lesser party members were disciplined using the rules of the Party. National have had a dream run of it in their term but if the ship every looks like sinking they'll have a rat in the ship for sure. The Greens hug trees and Peter Dunne can't reach a quorum.

It is easy and pretty to claim free speech as a right to dissenting MP's and members but at a practical level there is free speech then it crosses a line to outright blatant and deliberate public dissent and disrespect or in Maori terms - mana shrinkage. The Leadership of any party can never win either way. Critics say they are either not showing strong leadership or acting to suppress free speech.

The Maori Party however are in the position ACT was in, they have to act this time against Hone. He's done this all before, hui, co-leaders talking to him, round and a round in a pass the parcel all hoping Hone would improve. He hasn't and he won't. All four caucus members are opposing Hone this time. To not expel him would be a sign of utter weakness which in politics is a cardinal sin.

Hone wants out and thinks it will be beneficial to himself to be a martyr to the cause. So call his bluff and boot him. See how he handles it without Party support and expertise around him.

The Maori Party seem hell bent on stuffing this up so have called in not an elder or even a Maori lawyer to assist, they have sort the services of Mai Chen, a female Taiwanese born, and then raised New Zealander to interpret their own bilingual constitution.

Chen is to consult on the constitutional process. All I can say is that will cost many hectares of forest, not trees for paper, I'm talking land.

The Maori Party constitution seems prima facie pretty clear for expelling Hone. The document is online.

Hone can be disciplined under Part 2, 11.2

"in any other way wilfully (sic) brings the party or its members into public disrepute" or
"refuses to comply with the Party Constitution"

He is then referred to a Committee at Part 2, 11.4.

But this is where it gets fascinating as I cannot see an operative insertion where votes are taken by this committee or by anyone, just a vague reference to "resolution". In context of that section it must refer to resolving the conflict, rather than a corporate board voting style resolution. That is, where and who gets to vote? On what grounds can they vote?

"and that the dispute is resolved on the basis of the kaupapa of the Party".

This decision on discipline is not taken by a clear popular vote but by kaupapa.

"Kaupapa" is an interesting word that we've had a google for. In general it seems to be rather fluid sort of waffly Lord Cooke of Thorndon one-man legislator word used to describe principles and ideas that build behaviour and customs. Not in the English sense of theory of course, we couldn't possibly understand what it really means (sigh).

Kaupapa Maori is a plan created for Maori by Maori to express Maori aspirations, values and principles. So reverting to Part 1 of the Maori Party constitution we can see what sort of troubles Hone and the Maori Party are in thrashing this out.

Based upon these words in 1. Manaakitanga, Hone appears toasted.

The Party must endeavour to express manaakitanga towards others, be they political allies or opponents, Māori and non-Māori organisations, taking care not to trample mana, while clearly defining our own.

iv. to ensure that members agree to work together, treat each other with respect and act with integrity in their party work.

Lets have a look at 2. Rangitiratanga. Hone may have a reasonable argument here.

As an organisation, the importance of walking the talk, following through on commitments made, integrity and honesty is demonstrated. As a people, rangatiratanga is reflected in the promotion of self-determination for Māori, and an expression of the rights defined by Mana Atua, Mana Tupuna and Mana Whenua.

The Maori Party it could be argued campaigned not to prop up a National government. It walked differently than it talked. Hone's column addressed this specifically:

The other day I was reading through our speeches from 2005-08 and some of them were mighty impressive. Very pro-Maori, very strong on workers' rights and the rights of the poor, opposed to free trade agreements, supportive of the environment, anti-whaling and very much focused on kaupapa Maori.

A few months back I actually got told off for suggesting that we were voting more with National than before, so I checked up. In 2005-08 we voted 30% with National and 70% against, but in 2008-10 we voted 60% with National and 40% against.

Hone should simply call a democratic vote of the membership as to how they feel the Party has walked the talk. If he can get his supporters to vote, that vote may be a tad uncomfortable for Turia and Sharples.

4. Kotahitanga is another inclusion that the Maori Party may live to regret in their waffle coated drafting.

"All are encouraged to make a contribution, to have their say and then together a consensus is reached". The problem with this is that the drafting is silent as to whether this "all" is the parliamentary wing or the wider membership.

ii. to avoid taking decisions and approaches that lead to division and disharmony within the organisation;

There can be nothing more divisive or lacking in harmony than to expel Hone Harawira as a member and MP. Well perhaps than keeping him there!

6. Mana Whenua. Again Hone looks pretty set here.

iv. to develop a parliamentary team that will take advice and guidance from Māori in the first instance;

Hone again wrote his column specifically with this in mind. And "from Maori". What Maori? Members or any Maori on the street at the time?

And it seems that it just doesn't matter where I go in the country, I am being constantly told by Maori in the street, in the shops, on marae, at the airports, and even in the cemeteries at tangi, that the Maori Party is coming off the rails – usually accompanied with a comment that I should keep speaking out, because none of my mates are.

And, most importantly, go back to the people. We used to get out on the road a lot, particularly on the big issues. Since we've been in coalition with the Nats, though, we haven't done any tours, and it's not as if there haven't been any big issues to deal with – National's Marine and Coastal Areas bill is a classic example. Somehow, though, it seems that we've become too busy to tour any more. I suggest we get "un-busy" real quick, and start reconnecting with the people who put us into parliament.

Hone is backing himself to be the voice of Maori.

7. Kaitiakitanga - again Hone's column covered off part of this.

"It promotes the growth and development of the Māori people in all spheres of livelihood so that Māori can anticipate a future of living in good health and in reasonable prosperity

ii. to promote the achievement of wellness and well-being for Māori;
iv. to create a clean, safe and healthy environment by promoting the protection, restoration and enhancement of mauri within our natural environments"

Going back to Hone's column he referred directly to this:

The downside of being in government with National is having to put up with all the anti-worker, anti-beneficiary and anti-environment (and therefore anti-Maori) legislation that comes as a natural consequence of having a right-wing government.

Tobacco was an excellent start. Simple and positive health and education initiatives and programmes to assist the poor are obvious starters as well.

In essence Hone's column read alongside the Maori Party Constitution was his challenge of the application of his colleagues to it. On closer inspection he appears to be the greatest fluke artist ever or he has written every word on purpose. His entire defence is actually the column he/his advisor wrote. His/advisor's best piece of work is actually challenging the dipshit drafting of documents that may at some point require sanctions and punishment, using "principles" and vague discipline notes as to how the process will actually take place.

Mai Chen will be able to bill six months of lost income from 2010 dealing with this. It really is a cluster fuck of the highest order and again why "principles" left undefined are inherently dangerous in the wrong hands. You simply cannot have a constitution without firm rules and clear ideas. A bunch of intangible principles cannot form a coherent document without a framework for dealing with all situations that you can imagine at the time. Even of more importance is drafting a constitution for a political party. The nature of politics is an extreme environment of personalities, conflicts and differences. Leaving such to chance and "principles" is naive.

Other blogs seem to be wetting their knickers at the prospect of a new left wing political party consisting of Hone's electorate seat, poor loser Sue Bradford (who ran off in a sulk when the Greens preferred mad Metiria Turei for leader) and by his own admission, the gravely ill Matt McCarten with feminist, marxist, radical law lecturer, Jane Kelsey on the list. Chasing the votes of the dirty, smelly underclass. All you really need to top that bunch of rag-tag proponents of left-wing hate speech towards those good hard-working taxpayers who literally pay for the food on the table of the beneficiaries is to elect Martyn Bradbury as its President.

"There are 338 000 beneficiaries and 2 376 480 voters in the 2008 election, that means beneficiaries represent about 14% of the vote - the numbers are there for a new left wing party". Yes 338,000 bludgers to vote themselves an income stirred up with the random left-wing hate speech that thou shall steal more from the workers to pay for the bludgers. Isn't modern-day democracy fabulous? No taxation and you get representation that you can vote yourself an income for sitting on your backside.

But Hone is pure and he won't want a bar of that. He thinks you lot are losers. He is a Maori and wants to be in a Maori Party and environment.

The question is whether the Maori Party caucus will roll him or keep him? If they keep him this time, hug and make-up, I can't WAIT for the next column.

It is Hone. He will not be able to help himself.

I will make the call now Thursday NZ time that based on having a Constitution of recycled air, once again Hone will get away with this and live his 10th life causing embarrassment to the Maori Party caucus.

Based on the "rules" of the Maori Party and that they've turned to Mai Chen to insert 20 odd pages of Chen Palmer opinion into those principles, I cannot see he has actually done anything wrong.

NZ Wine Cheaper Than NZ Icecream

NZ wine never fails to catch my attention at my local gourmet high-end supermarket. It is placed right next to the Champagne.

An interesting factoid, New Zealand wine (750mls) is cheaper than Diane Foreman's NZ Natural Icecream (473 mls). That tub above for 750mls equates to HK102 or around NZ17. It is on special down from around HK75 for the other flavours.

And apparently the below are good (as in good for the producer) prices for these wines.

Monkey Bay is going for a miserly NZ13



Oyster Bay goes for NZ20

Nobilo "Icon" goes for NZ16.5

And for the record my treat this week was not a bottle of champagne, or NZ wine, but a tub of Hokey Pokey (butterscotch) NZ Natural. I've just noticed in the shop which means it is either newly distributed through the chain or they've taken it out from behind the Haagen Dazs.

1NZD is around HK6 presently.

Go find out the rates for these wines in NZ and add in freight etc and wonder like me what money is to even be made exporting the stuff.

Further for the record to NZ Natural.....my favourite is Boysenberry........can't find it here.......

Gervais At His Most Genius

Ricky Gervais Takes Over the Golden Globes....

Brilliant......but I don't know if he's invited back next year!!

It was Paul Henryesque.

Sigh...Here Comes Another One......

You could telegraph it couldn't you? A little past a week since we've been discussing the last child down.



Christmas holiday and yet another Maori baby is killed by someone invited into the home by the child's mother. Mikara Ranui Jarius Reti, of Flaxmere. They can hardly blame the stress of the holidays on the killing, as chances are the offender has a holiday every day.

Again....

Where are Maori women finding these sub-human pieces of shit that as Judith Collins' says come into their home and kill the young of the previous occupant like a Tomcat?

Is being single that bad that you have to all invite these vile pieces of scum into your home? It is perhaps time women took some responsibility in who is around their children.

And another child added to the honour roll of recent mindless, needless killings of kiddies. And their killer gets name suppression.







Meanwhile, Hone fiddles and Pita and Tariana have yet another hui how to deal with him while the Maori Party become more irrelevant to this class of Maori every single day.

Hone Launches Self-Mana Enhancement

Honest Hone Harawira is starting 2011 with a bang.

credit: Silent Running

Hone has realised that Maori Party old fellas Pita "Pte. Godfrey" and "Aunty" Tari are past it and he's going in for the kill nice and early in election year.

Question is, will Pte. Godfrey and Aunty stand up to Hone's self-mana enhancing behaviour in this series of columns to come? Or will they hide the required discipline for an errant MP with "Hone has a right to free speech"? As he craps all over the Party's work in the past three years?

What I particularly love about Hone's latest piece of honesty is this:

"The Maori Party operates on the basis that what is good for Maori is good for the nation".

Imagine the reaction from the likes of Hone if a political party stated what is good for the European majority is good for the nation?

These columns to come as well as the one today will prove that Hone is out of control. Sharples and Turia need to promptly eject him from the Maori Party else he will take the Party over filling their void of effective leadership.

In many ways Honest Hone is completely correct. Many Maori Party voters in 2008 would have expected the Maori Party to support the complete opposite of what National stands for.

The other day I was reading through our speeches from 2005-08 and some of them were mighty impressive. Very pro-Maori, very strong on workers' rights and the rights of the poor, opposed to free trade agreements, supportive of the environment, anti-whaling and very much focused on kaupapa Maori.

But Aunty and Pte. Godfrey traded it all in for limos and titles.

This column from Hone's (researchers) research serves one public purpose as it shows the one reason that despite a massive lead the National Party can never rely on the Maori Party in a future coalition without ACT balancing the scales:

A few months back I actually got told off for suggesting that we were voting more with National than before, so I checked up. In 2005-08 we voted 30% with National and 70% against, but in 2008-10 we voted 60% with National and 40% against.

So presumably if there was no counter-balance to the inherent race-based Maori-centric pro-bludger policy of the Maori Party, most of that 40% of National Party policy would never have made it through.

Worth considering for the Tory's before they plan for 2012 in government. The election win converted into a working majority is by no means a sure thing.

There are now two very different classes of Maori in New Zealand and nowhere is it found more clearly than in the professional sectors. On Roarprawn, Brunette has described this well in her reflection of Maori attitudes to Blanket Man in response to Rosemary McLeod's guilt piece on Blanket Man's choices.

The first class of Maori are what Brunette and her friends represent. There is a large middle-class of Maori. Plenty work in the public sector, on the treaty trough and the like, but they have made the most of the opportunities that life has afforded to them.

The other class is still large, and they are Maori that Hone represents. Those that have not made the most of their lives and have missed out due to their own blissful ignorance and wailing about ingrievances, many that do not even exist or are irrelevant to them because like every New Zealander they have access to the same public education, healthcare and housing as any other New Zealander. They even have had access to special Maori educational opportunities and yet still can't get ahead. Many are the ferals that Michael Laws writes about in the same paper. Their excuse for failure is often always their race. And Hone panders to this by allowing it in his oratory to stir up their passion that somehow it is all the white motherf*****s fault.

The Maori Party is in severe danger of being brownwashed with the second class of Maori. The leadership void from Sharples and Turia needs to be filled by someone younger, professional, wordly and more competent to take the Party forward. Not Hone who will take it back to being a bludger Party intent solely on race-based grievance politics.

And if it is, New Zealand and with it Maori themselves will be the poorer for it.

Roarprawn, who I have had many rounds of champagne with discussing the whole Maori political landscape FINALLY gives Hone a good bit of Wahine smacking.

Of Nutters, Victims and Lynch Mobs

In the past 18 months I have received a fair amount of correspondence to cactus.kate (at) hotmail.com from disgruntled investors in Finance companies. Some of the correspondence is very well-written and researched and with it quite compelling. Most of it sadly are mutterings of random nutcases. Whether they were nutcases before losing their money or not is a moot point. I have swapped notes with some other business commentators on these issues and they seem to have similar fan clubs. Those that heaps praise on you when you write something they like and then crap on you like the sparrows they are when you even mutter in the lowest of tones that they should take some personal responsibility for their own stupidity, especially when you are trying to help them.

"Victims" of Finance Company Collapses

All seek to ask for help (free) in solving the problem that they have lost $x and cannot seem to get help (free) to get the money back. As you all know I only work for free on very odd occasions when I am compelled to because something is extremely interesting to me. I ask each correspondent specifically how they made the monies that they lost in the Finance company in question. Almost all have stories about how they've lost the sale proceeds of a house in XYZ Finance Company Limited, very few state they have obtained their savings solely through either salary or sale proceeds of a business. I can only count three.

I ask this question because there is a certain irony of cashing out tax free gains on the sales of New Zealand's endless golden years of property bought from property developers to give back to Finance companies hoping for a return from companies that are giving money back to finance property developers such that people like themselves can...oh guess.....buy more property from property developers and sell it at a higher price than they bought from the property developer who is financed by savings from people who have made their money primarily from selling property.

Some invested due to financial advisors' advice. I told them to sue the advisors. That's a pretty obvious call with these matters to go back to those who retailed the investment to you as something that it wasn't when they should have read the prospectus.

Several Finance company collapses I feel are due to dodgy directors and inter-company dealings combined with attempted vulture investing from those inter-related parties and I have assisted those people in either putting them on to lawyers I know in Auckland for (paid) help (not one to date has followed through with my (paid) contact) or I have sent the correspondent off with lists of where to obtain more information about the directors and the Finance companies so they can assist their investor group further.

Several (well most) have written to Adam Feeley (adam.feeley (at) sfo.govt.nz for those of you who require his email). I now have devised a precedent copy of Feeley's stock standard reply which he seems to only send to people I consider the more sane of the complainants.

Dear xxxxx

[I confirm receipt of this email and the previous xx you have sent the SFO]. {CK- for persistent emailers}

I can assure you that the SFO gives thorough consideration to all cases referred to it for possible investigation. And any decision to investigate and/or prosecute is made independently without any direction from any other person or agency.

We are aware of the level of public interest in not only xxxxxxxx but also many other finance companies. You will be aware that we are currently investigating and/or prosecuting persons associated with several of them; including Bridgecorp; Capital + Merchant; Dominion; Five Star; Hanover; Kiwi; Mutual; National; Rockforte; and South Canterbury.

We regularly review cases to determine whether there is sufficient, relevant information to commence a formal investigation. In this regard, we require more than evidence of financial losses. There must be prima facie evidence of conduct which indicates one or more possible criminal offences may have been committed.

In addition, we also have to consider whether the matter is one which could be more appropriately dealt with by another agency; whether there is sufficient public interest in pursuing a matter; and whether there are available resources to commence an investigation.

At this stage, the SFO has not made any formal decision in relation to xxxxxxx, and it would not be appropriate to comment in any detail. However, we are aware of issues being public discussed and, if and when we are in a position to comment publicly, we will do so.

Yours sincerely

Adam Feeley | Chief Executive | Serious Fraud Office | PO Box 7124, Wellesley Street, Auckland | 120 Mayoral Drive Auckland 1010, New Zealand | Mobile + 64 21 333539 | www.sfo.govt.nz

In other words Feeley is dealing with it. The bold is emphasised by myself. Just because you have lost money in the Finance company doesn't make it fraud.

Investors who have lost money in Finance companies have to accept that their money is gone. The best thing they can do if they can is let the SFO and Securities Commission do their job. Problem is that even if their favourite Finance Company directors are found guilty of whatever charges, by either the SFO or through the Securities Commission it will not change the fact that they are all unlikely to see a cent back of what they lost.

Instead of writing rants and conspiracy theory ramblings to Adam Feeley and Jane Diplock, both of whom have forests of paper littering their charges, they should be doing what every New Zealander did who was trashed from the 1987 stock market crash and get out there and make more money because you are going to get stuff all back unless your Finance company was government guaranteed.

Is this fair? Well is it fair I ask to set up a business and have a trend change or a government policy eliminate your business to a market value of zero? Is it fair to be sold a house that loses value through re-zoning? Is it fair for your business partner to steal all your company's money leaving you with the debts to pay? Is it fair to take out a student loan when you will probably not get a job that will allow you to pay it back within the next decades? Is it fair to give one decade of students an interest burden on their student debt and the next gets it all interest free? Is it fair to have an accident caused by the carelessness of someone else you are not allowed to sue that sees you lose your income and have to rely on ACC the rest of your life? Is it fair to have your house burned down when you were a day late paying the insurance? Is it fair to be married, build your assets, have your wife run off with half your wealth and then at a later you become bankrupt unable to claim what you gave away to your wife? Is it fair to be owed money by a debtor who then goes bankrupt and cannot pay you leading to the loss of your business? Is it fair to struggle for years to have a baby and then have one discovering it requires constant medical attention? Is it fair to not be able to have children despite years of IVF treatment that you had to pay for when the government stopped subsidising you?

Losing money in a Finance company that you chose to invest in probably doesn't rate on the "victim" scale among any of the above.

And in any case the nice friendly government who is borrowing more than a quarter of a billion dollars ($250,000,000) a week of money that will have to be repaid by your children has come along and forced your children to borrow even more and nicely "guarantee" many Finance companies to pay you back.

Abuse

When answering emails of these "victims" I tell the truth even if they don't want to hear it. One very pushy lot tag teamed me and emailed me several times and when I said I couldn't post anything about their case because they didn't have any new information and I could not access anything available I was hit with this pearler in response:

Dear Mistress Kate

Now we see of what pocket you work for. We have a case and we know that we have a case we gave you the information for a post and now you will not use it. Shame on you and your fraudulent friends at the finance companies. I hope you are enjoying all the money they are no doubt paying you to write about them and mess with people like ourselves. I am 62 years old and old enough to be one of your parents. How would you feel if this happened to your parents? I am sure you would feel differently. SHAME! I lost the savings from many years of sweat labour and now all I have to show for it is a house that I may have to sell and I will now have to keep working.

I hope you are happy now sitting in China and working out ways to sell New Zealand to the Chinese. SHAME.

No Regards

xxxxxx

To which my answer was

Dear xxxxxx

Tomorrow morning when you get up please put your glasses on so you do not mix your medication with the goldfish food again.

Regards

CK


Finance Company UTU

What we have now in New Zealand are a collection of online commentators and contributors playing lynch mob amongst the ashes of Finance Companies. Those who have lost money have successfully recruited those to their cause who haven't lost a cent and are inflaming passions in a war of attempting to pressure Feeley and Diplock to do things they probably cannot. Like make directors of the Finance companies pay back all the fees they earned. Many of these utu'ers have forgotten or never knew in the first place the whole concept of companies being limited in liability. The assets of directors and other shareholders do not actually belong to them. Directors will have to be prosecuted on reasonably large thresholds to most likely be fined or forced to repay monies they may have otherwise extracted from the company.

So I am going to now analyse two comments threads from Brian Edwards' post on Amanda Hotchin and pull out the best hits from the lynch mob Utu'ers. Remember this topic of these threads is Mrs Hotchin, the wife of Mark. This woman has probably never been near a boardroom her entire marriage to her husband nor would have been involved in anything to do with high finance.

The only people I would expect to have this amount of venom towards the wife of Mark Hotchin would be those who have lost money in Hanover. Remember also that Hanover was NOT in the government guarantee scheme so unlike SCF, the taxpayer has not been left with a cent more to borrow of their quarter billion a week, from the ashes of Hanover.

I asked politely on Edwards' thread for those who had lost money in Hanover to identify themselves for their splatterings above. I had no takers. So I give to you the greatest hits of just plain stupid comments on Edwards blog and then the NBR. Remember again, this is just the wife (and kids)......and even taking the crudest of numbers $500 million of Hanover funds divided by 17,000 investors is still only $29,411 per investor. The inflammatory claims that there are that many elderly people here who have lost all their life savings just does not add up.

Brian Edwards' Blog

Gary Stewart - "Naive about the media and how the media and life really works when the golden spoon falls out of your mouth.......Tough on the kids, maybe so, maybe not. Maybe they will grow up to be better, and less self-centred, than their parents – odds are against it though.". Then tops it up with "Of course personal partners and children shouldn’t be pursued by a lynch mob, but on the other hand, trying to run the naive/ignorance/innocence line is just a bit ….. rich".

PJR - "If the media have misquoted her,I still have little patience for those who exhibit a lavish lifestyle while others suffer the consequences of Hotchins actions". So it doesn't matter that the quote that made most people turn dog on her, was actually correct?

Lesley gets all biblical and oversees a small point that the Hotchin's don't actually own all the property listed, plenty of it is mortgaged - "Brian, when I read the email Amanda Hotchin sent to you and now the story in today’s NZ Herald and saw how much the Hotchins actually own and how much elderly investors have lost, my thoughts went straight to this Bible verse which hung in a frame on a wall in the house where I grew up in, and now hangs on my wall: “For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul”. Mark 8 verse 36".

L. Speirs "Poor Amanda.Actions speak louder than words".

Ryansway comes in with an absolute charmer - "They should pray none of those out-of-pocket investors have gang members for relatives, because they might view this as their right to a pound of flesh"......"To NZ’s underbelly they are a bounty and a sitting target for exploitation, and they will find no sympathy from the NZ Police who will turn a blind eye to it". "Getting a bit of attitude from reporters pales by comparison to having your windows broken every night and cars stolen, pets disappearing, and other unmentionable nasty things that are done to vulnerable people.

Andre Dromgool suggests Amanda is in control of the entire finances of the family - "Amanda Hotchin is hated for living off other people’s misfortunes when in this day and age she has equal power with her husband to determine where and how their family live".

CN - "Regardless of what she did or did not say, she has still happily enjoyed the riches gained by the actions of her husband and Eric Watson".

Merv accuses Amanda of the ridiculous - "Amanda Hotchin is NZ’s very own Ruth Madoff."......."Her writing the email, reveals that she was always a part of Hanover’s inner sanctum"...."Not long after having wrangled the moratorium off the investors, the Hotchins hightailed it, shouting all their friends on a no-expenses-spared junket at the exclusive Vomo Is. resort in Fiji, for Mark’s 50th birthday bash". Once again confusing the whole issue that perhaps the Hotchin's had their own money coming into Hanover.

Lady Antebellum - "Amanda Hotchin’s behaviour reminds me of someone who’s driven drunk, wiping out an eldely couple on a pedestrian-crossing, she gets out of her Merc, stumbles to the front of the car, throws herself on to the bonnet, wailing and carrying-on about the damage to the bumper and headlights". Yes well arguably the elderly couple were thrown in front of the car by their financial advisors or lack of them.

Mike brings Hitler and the Jews into the debate and before any facts are tried in a court declares Amanda has breached morality - "Mrs Hotchin seems to have the moral compass of a real estate agent at a mortgagee sale"...."At the end of the day, under the cold light of the law, it may be that she and her husband have done nothing wrong. But what about morally? In the US pre 1865 it was legal in some states to own slaves. I won’t even go into Hitler’s Nuremberg laws with regard to Jews. Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right. And to demand $7,000 a week when most people get by on less than that a month, shows that the Hotchin’s moral compass is skewed to say the least".

Fred - "If she truly cares about her children, then firstly she should explain to them why their father is so hated, how greed and his actions led them to flee their country"...."She should convince her husband to front up, come back to NZ and find a proper work, etc"... I can't even add to that questioning her caring as a mother. Disgusting. And what is "proper work"? Hotchin has made it perfectly clear he hasn't been on holiday and that he has been working overseas. I know a novel concept for New Zealanders that you can work from overseas with the internet and all.

And from the NBR (most lack the creativity to make up a pen name)

"The most disgusting women in NZ.If she is sop caring why not live in a modern family home and ditch the expensive overseas holidays".

"Did not read Mark or you complaining about the media when Hanover used Richard Long, Greg Muir, Tipene O'Regan and inappropriate advertising to suck in the hundreds of millions Dollars for Eric and Mark to play with".

"When your husband runs a firm that literally steals huge amounts of money from trusting Kiwis, in fact he destroyed their financial well being and destroyed their retirement plans, you are going to be tarred with the same brush and you are going to have to deal with it".

"Don't for one minute have any sympathy for her or her husband. Think about the people that lost everything and will never get their say or opinion in the media".

"Smart women usually leave their husbands in similar situation, instead of sticking up with some "failures" not enjoying any more pride. Perhaps this what they used to preach"....

"And your children - explain to them why you can't return to New Zealand - why they can't play play with their friends - why they see the press articles and read what they read - oh, those lovely lovely dividends - happy are you, was it really worth it?"

"I have to feel sorry for her, but she and her children have profited richly from Hotchin's activities in my humble opinion".

"The Hotchins are the victims?? Are they serious? Word is that they still show off to their friends about having a net worth in excess of 100m. Go figure. The jig is up".

"Dear dear - poor old Amanda Macbeth is now having to pay the price for all those appearances in the gossip columns. What a come down - from "Auckland society queen" to shamed wife of a despised con artist"..

"Word of advice for her, fire all PR spin doctors and hire good divorce lawyer".

From the sanctimonious crap above you would think the poor woman had murdered children in an orphanage!

I was once reasonably critical of her based on the Marshall article, but I commend Mrs Hotchin for front-footing it on Brian Edwards blog and drafting a reasonable response to criticism. She needs to now keep front footing it and release evidence backing her claims that Jonathan Marshall and his SST editors fabricated her now infamous quote that turned the country and most commentators against them. Mr Hotchin and Watson need to release more details of what was paid in dividends and what was reinvested in Hanover. Fran O'Sullivan covered this in slightly more detail in this column in August last year. It also wouldn't hurt for Hotchin to disclose what he owned prior to Hanover and what therefore can be separated from any purchases of assets since.

The front-footing of course has come late in the piece but it is never too late to speak out and present clear evidence that stops some great NZ backyard myths continuing about Hotchin and her family's spending habits. Many that are likely to be false but have been kept alive by their silence.

Quite often those under investigation keep quiet for fear of what the media will do with their information but it is always better just to charge hard with your own releases because the media will write what they like anyway.

In the meantime the lynch-mob will continue to attempt to spread their Hanover Utu on all Finance companies that have failed to return investors deposits.

With all the hate speech it makes me concerned quite what this lot will do if after the investigations are complete by the SFO and Securities Commission of all finance companies, the end result is minor charges only or not enough evidence to substantiate fraud or criminality.

In any instance most investors will never see their losses back. So it makes you wonder why those non-investors who haven't lost a cent are just so damn vile?

It definitely proves a Kiwiblog thread to be a kindergarten morning talk in comparison.

Beneficiaries Do Fear The Right

More cutting edge commentary from a man who requires the right-wing Whaleoil to boost his television ratings from two to twenty-two.

Beneficiaries do fear the right Bomber, that's why they vote for the left who buy their votes with more benefits and bashing of those wealthier than them who are made to pay for the welfare.

Let me summarise more of Bomber's cutting edge political and social commentary (remembering unlike myself and other bloggers, this is actually his occupation):

- Professor Peter Saunders is an "islamaphobic fiction writer".
- Roger Kerr (OMG) is married to Catherine Isaac and therefore can't comment objectively about ideas he's spent his lifetime proposing.
- Adrian Roberts and Enid Ratahi Pryor are bias to the point of being corrupt because they are working in welfare and profiting from it.
- Pig farmers aren't allowed to opine on the welfare of pigs.
- More lies that I am proposing sterilisation of beneficiaries. I am not, I am simply stating the taxpayer shouldn't be paying for future children that beneficiaries cannot afford. They can still breed just don't expect others to pay for it.
- I am a racist casual fascist.
- I suggest solo mothering is a crime. No, that would require them to be jailed. I am suggesting having children when you cannot afford to is irresponsible and should be incentivised correctly by the taxpayer.

Little wonder Bomber has for his entire "career" in broadcasting blissfully meandered between alternative radio and television mostly funded off the tit of the taxpayer forced to fork out for his reactionary crazed rants.

There was a brief foray into commerciality that ruined his brand completely by being tagged and owned by right-wing PR maestro Matthew Hooton in fronting for disgruntled big-business DML against Labtests pretending that the world was going to end when Labtests received a contract. It did only for Bomber, he had to apologise.

You would think someone of Bomber's longevity in the New Zealand Broadcasting community would have evolved with a secure well-paid gig on something a little bit commercial by now? But no. He's still on the out.

Bwaaaah...... right wingers are all beneficiary bashing, anyone who doesn't fall at the feet of the demands of Maori are racists, Business Roundtable commenting on welfare always bad, Ayn Rand! Adam Smith! Fascists the lot of you.........yawn. Bomber has been saying the same things since he was a teenager.

It's like a cracked record when everyone else in their lives has moved on to CD's and iTunes.

For a man who has attempted to build a career in New Zealand with a gimmick of broadcasting fermenting conspiracies and his own brand of special Bomber hate speech against everything ranging from capitalism, the right and those richer than he thinks they should be, Bomber was quick to the trigger to link Sarah Palin with the shooting we find later caused by a crazed (more left wing) nutjob. Then denying it and abusing Whaleoil suggesting he doesn't read Whaleoil. We know that's another lie. Of course he reads Whaleoil. He reads my blog, we know that. Whaleoil is the star of Bomber's own show, of course he reads him.

One would expand further of the anti-capitalist hate bile of Brand Bomber or even get upset at his name calling.

But given he requires and uses with it the right wing might of Whaleoil to star on his rip-off Ralston Group, Citizen A, to get more than two third party viewers, lets face it folks being abused by someone of the influence and quality of Bomber online as racist or fascist is akin to finding out you are being insulted in fluent Mongolian on The Voice of Mongolia.

Only the Mongolian has a much larger following in his community.

Labour's Big 10 Tax Policies of 2011

Since the collective Pinko brains-trust of Stuart "Mangrove" Nash and David "Silent T" Cunliffe are busy in either mangroves or with BBQ's, Labour has become bereft of tax policy ideas.

Which is not advisable in election year when there are more bludging net beneficiaries everywhere gagging for a political party to stuff the rich with more tax.

Labour are getting hammered in the polls. But they are still in with a large chance on the basis of the National Party having unstable coalition partners all with their own sort of uncertainty.

Lucky then that I have designed their election revenue policy for them that would see them romp home. It is not just about raising tax rates, there are some ways of tinkering with the way income is taxed that are potentially better at extracting more revenue.

10. The "Nanny Rahui" Proposal to Lower GST -

Nanny proposed a dreadfully worded Bill to remove GST on fruit and vegetables. Labour should lower GST on everything back to 12.5% maybe even go to 10% in conjunction with proposal number 3. You know, because you were going to "axe the tax" and all?

9. The Nanaia Mahuta Forced Heirship Proposal -



Princess Mahuta should know this all too well. Sitting on tribal assets that can't be freed up can be awfully frustrating. This policy will require all trusts in New Zealand to be registered with the IRD with the name of the settlor and beneficiaries. This register would not be available publicly but available to information swap between government departments.

Rest home subsidy assets and any means testing of assets will now include all assets an individual is a settlor of or beneficiary of in a trust. Even though they don't own them. Only fair you know, being rich pricks and all. All settlors and beneficiaries in a discretionary trust would be deemed to own all the assets for this purpose. For example if a trust has net assets of $2 million then each settlor and beneficiary of a discretionary trust would be deemed to own that $2 million until it is actually distributed.

8. The Fonterra Fart Tax Proposal -



This one is a long time coming. Farmers, the largest of polluters (according the the numbnuts measuring of carbon) should be taxed per head of animal per year with the cost that New Zealand has to pay to the invisible pie in the sky. Will this result in higher than otherwise milk prices? Hell no, as Fonterra always argue they operate in a world market. Well the world is going green and farmers can't expect Labour's beneficiary class to subsidise them can they? The Greens will also love this policy of polluter pays and will be given an increase in funds to clean up waterways caused by animal emissions.

7. The Trevor Mallard Proposal to Means Test Superannuation -



Anyone with assets or is a beneficiary or settlor of a trust with more than say $500,000 can no longer receive Superannuation. At 65 years old the elderly should be encouraged/made to use their own assets first and that they've stored in trusts before bludging off Labour's voting welfare recipients. After all, they can't take their money with them can they?

While not technically a revenue policy, I have named it after Trevor because he's the only MP in Labour capable of dealing with angry middle class, wealthy pensioners. Most that don't vote Labour anyway so he will consider it sport.

6. The Parekura Horomia Proposal to bring in Thin Cap Rules for all Interest Deductions from Land -



Named after Pare because he's so not thin, this policy will reduce the deductible amount to 20% of the total interest expense on real property (land) such that land owned by farmers, property "investors" and the like cannot pay less or even no tax by increasing the interest deductions based on leveraging property.

So for example where interest costs are $500,000 per annum, the total deductible amount will be reduced to just $100,000 per annum bringing many companies, partnerships and trusts from tax loss positions into profits and a taxpaying position.

Currently excessive leveraging on land is based purely on tax advantage gained from interest deductions. This has to stop. The land owning classes have had it too good too long.

5. The Stuart Nash Proposal to reintroduce Gift Duty -



National are going to abolish it. Labour should just bring it back. Mangrove loves his family trust and probably wishes to add other assets into a trust to keep them away from future spouses, creditors and other vermin. He is pictured here receiving gifts from others.

Thing is, trusts without a gift duty just become vehicles for those wishing to quickly avoid things. Trusts are of course all for rich pricks anyway.

4. The Helen Clark Memorial Proposal to Duty the sale of Property -

Capital gains tax is for wimps. And the former Dear Leader is no wimp. We are thinking a duty if you like.

Introduction of a 20% duty for the sale of all property including primary residence and all forms of land. Helen owns a few properties and when she comes to sell them Peter and herself won't mind paying that little bit extra for the poor. The duty will apply on the total sale price at the time of sale. A million dollar sale will attract a $200k duty. No if's, no buts.

This will ensure that the poor have a chance at owning their own home according to Labour. Rich pricks with property now can pay the price for speculation. Also those greedy Chinese will be paying their share because the duty is unavoidable, you can't take land back to China can you?

3. The Michael Cullen Memorial Proposal to Tax Rich Pricks -



A new top tax rate of 45% on those rich pricks earning over $120,000 and an increase of the current top tax rate for income between $70,001 to $120,000 from 33 cents up to 40 cents. But the rate isn't as important as to how the tax will be applied.

Included in income calculations will be Partnership income taxed at the highest rate. This means the thousands of New Zealanders have Partnership income and split it with a family member or partner who doesn't for example even work in the business will have to pay tax on all income at the rate that all the income would be judged if earned by just one person, before the split is allowed of the after tax income.

Included also will be company income where the company consists of a sole practitioner or is closely held with family members. The corporate veil will be pierced for all those rich prick avoiders.

Along with similar anti-avoidance measures to ensure splitting of income is disallowed.

2. The Krukziener Memorial Proposal to remove Marshall Clauses -

I've drafted thousands of loan agreements in my career of some eleven years, almost all with Marshall clauses (which excludes the shortfall in interest as a "gift") where the loan is repayable on demand. Guess what? No one has EVER demanded the loan is repaid.

Loans with Marshall clauses are a very common way of getting accessible money out of structures and providing cheap finance to family members who otherwise should get off their arses and go to the bank for finance or save up like the rest of the world has to.

1. The Eric Watson don't Fucking Come Back Proposal to tax expats -



Mark Hotchin either received crap advice or more than likely didn't listen to advisors properly about shifting assets. Eric Watson did. That's why Eric's assets weren't frozen, he's gone properly.

This proposal includes taxing New Zealand citizens (passport holders) at a 45% deemed disposal rate on expatriating their wealth at the date of departure if they become non-resident and a 15% inbound transaction tax on their assets coming back in even while they are still non-resident.

You know because you have left and should pay for excessive welfare and benefits for all New Zealanders so Labour can stay in power for another nine years. Only fair.

* Disclaimer - I have no responsibility whatsoever for the negative effects to economic growth, foreign investment, immigration, inflation, interest rates and employment statistics as a result of such policies.

Summer Whale

For all the liberal panty-waisters listening to Radio New Zealand currently they have Noelle McCarthy on Summer Noelle, we in the blogosphere now have the Summer Whale.



Greenpeace have even kindly donated a logo.

Charged on by Willie Jackson's taunts that Whale may not be up to interviewing, our favourite mammal has answered that challenge the best way possible. By interviewing political figures all summer long.

Whale's first interview is with VRWC favourite Judith Collins. Highlights I have transcribed below but her answers on boy-racers are the best so have a listen. I heard a rumour that upcoming will be an interview with the bolshiest of Labour MP's, lets hope by then Whale has his skills on top form because he will need it:

Judith Collins on personal responsibility

"Once we start saying society is the problem that means no one has any personal responsibility".

"People who call themselves academics who think of all the reasons why ordinary people...don't have personal responsibility and its that sort of attitude that means people never take responsibility and they end up bashing and killing their children how can anyone actually do that?".

On child abuse

"Violent offender who acts very much like a tomcat and goes around basically killing the young of the previous partner".

"What we have is an underclass of people who often are involved in the gang culture, many of whom are Maori but not exclusively but who come from total welfare dependency...and their attitude is they take no responsibility and if they aren't given what they want they will cause trouble".

On Clayton Cosgrove

"I think he enjoys being slapped around and I understand he has to beg to get a question now...every now and then he pops his little head up gets a little slap and sits back down".

"He just never does his homework".

On David Parker

"David Parker's not bad but he's a charisma free zone...he probably works hard. Don't think he will ever set the world on fire".

Crying Racist Again

Frogblog has yet another skin crawling post where s/he deems TVNZ scheduling as racist for bumping Te Karere for the tennis and then bumping a match for high rating TV.

But tonight, a doubles match, involving New Zealander Marina Eracovic, was bumped after the first set, which she and her partner won, for ONE Network News, and then Masterchef UK and Coronation Street.

A very poor and racist look imo! If TVNZ are going to reschedule Te Karere to fit around the tennis, then surely they should reschedule ONE Network News (and the crap programmes that followed it).

Frogblog clearly knows stuff all about tennis. Doubles matches are almost always given insignificance to singles. Both by tournament organisers and television scheduling.

Again Frogblog also shows blissful ignorance of economics. Womens tennis v One News? The tennis would have to have Maria Sharapova in a pole dance followed by a strip tease to outrate One News.

When Te Karere can pull in the sort of money with the viewers that One News does then it can hold precedence but in the meantime it is in a token slot as it is that it doesn't deserve based on its ratings and advertising dollars.

But yet another chance to scream "racist" isn't it? Really it is becoming a tragic yawn fest of name calling when its okay and not considered racist for Hone Harawira to tell us we are white motherfuckers yet not okay and racist to reschedule a simple Maori language program?

Frogblog joins the honour roll of idiots showing up in my latest welfare posts who wouldn't know racism if there was a tyre around their neck and they were surrounded by little men in white sheets with matches and cans of petrol.

Indefinite Detention for Child Abuse

In a timely example here is how Hong Kong rolls when it comes to scum beating up kids. The Judge even asks as the offender is losing all face "Are you a human?".

Indefinite detention at age 22 for this level of abuse here. Wonder what the scum who attacked these children would get?

DPB - Don't Pay Breeders

Yet another brown faced little kiddie dying at the brutal hands of caregivers has us all sigh collectively. Well those that aren't on a burying their heads in the sand sort of holiday as Maori leaders appear to be the rest of the year.

The most horrific recent cases of child murder in New Zealand involve Maori. That's a simple fact that anyone can see. We know Maori don't like being reminded so here are the pictures of half a dozen of them.







Without Maori in the statistics New Zealand has one of the lowest rates of general child abuse in the world. That is - Maori are over-represented in bashing kids. That's why it is okay to single them out as a group and demand they improve. It's no one else's fault but themselves that their statistics are so appalling. It's a violence perpetrated on their own.

Unlike the Chinese who randomly kill their kids and themselves by throwing them off tall buildings in despair, New Zealand parents tend not to kill their kids and then themselves. It's not as neat and honourable as that.

Michael Laws has upset the handwringers (again) by columnising his opinions on the problem and even (shock horror) using a picture of a dead child on Facebook.

Maori are trying to deflect the issue from themselves and claiming a collective "youse all do it too". That they are as a group, killing their own kids. But it's not the evil coloniser or Indian or Asian immigrants who are killing Maori kids. Oh no, Maori would be screaming at the top of their lungs and wanting compensation if that was happening. Maori are doing the job very nicely all by themselves.

You cannot blame poverty, drugs and alcohol for abuse. Most poor people don't smash up their kids. Most people who drink alcohol don't abuse kids. There is just something so fundamentally evil and wrong about a child basher that it is a condition in itself. Drunk poor meth-users are one thing. A child basher is in a class of their own.

Laws has spent weeks on end in Starship hospital so he's well placed to comment. And sure there are many Lucy's in residence, but their illness isn't avoidable. The many brown faces in Starship who have injuries born at the hands of those who are meant to be caring for them are all avoidable. They aren't accidents.

So what is a solution to the problem? That's another cry that the apologists are weeping as we comment about yet another kiddie dismembered at the hands of those who are meant to be their number one protector? And a whanau all banding together like the gang of crims they all are, to protect the guilty. That's all they are - unpatched gangsters taking their own vow of silence.

More handouts for having these children isn't the answer.

The heaving pathetic underclass do not seem to have any idea how to look after and better themselves let alone their kids. All the Whanau Ora in the world given to them from the collective troughing of the "consultant" middle class neo-minted Maori brorocracy won't help them.

I was one of the few on the centre-right in favour of Sue Bradford's anti-smacking Bill for this reason that certain groups causing the worst carnage are too thick to differentiate a smack from a life-threatening belt. Too irresponsible for a child's life to be risked with their making of a judgment call. Something had to be done. While children are still dying, the anti-smacking Bill was a step to do something about the problem of child abuse. But it was not enough.

Regardless of your race, not killing your child is fairly bloody fundamental. One of those things that doesn't need to even be said at Plunket or passed down from generations does it? Sticking a child on a clothes line, body slamming a baby, beating a child up and down isn't even an action of primates. A baboon is more advanced in its thinking.

That's the main issue, those killing and maiming children from any race are not human beings, they are the missing link from...well you can't even say primates can you as most wild animals manage to look after and not deliberately kill their own children? You cannot legislate to protect children from these creatures because creatures do not acknowledge any laws.

So the time has come for a fresh approach. Let's stop handwringing semantics to the problem, remove historians and academics from the debate. Let's forget about offending a few precious souls who would rather see more Maori kids killed because solving the problem ruins their lily white world and exposes them to criticism. Let's actually DO something.

We aren't allowed to sterilise those most at risk of offending and Laws has already suggested a lump sum of $10k for sterilisation to much horrow and howling from those with no better answer, so how about another way?

How about we cut off the DPB and dole altogether and PAY the underclasses NOT to breed.

It's an idea thats time has come.

Not breeding or not breeding further to those already with children should become a condition of receiving welfare.

If Maori especially want their underclass to keep having kids that they cannot afford then how about they front up with resources from their billions in Treaty settlement assets if more money is really the answer? It's not and they know that else they'd be spending their collective inheritance helping their own families in need. They don't because the middle-class brorocracy controlling Treaty money aren't that stupid. They've seen the mistake of the unconditional guilted Pakeha love of decades of welfare.

To "grandfather" the policy those currently with children can keep their DPB and dole for a small set period, any extra children born from this period will see the DPB and dole cut altogether.

Women have the babies, that's a biological fact and the reason this policy must be targeted at them. Paying them not to breed a) gives them empowerment to sort their own lives out first and b) makes them realise that if they do breed, best they be able to pay for the child and have a father responsible enough to truly want and care for his kids. That is - choose fathers for their kids better. Drop kick loser men.

Instead of a baby bonus, it will be a baby barrier. Perhaps the most effective contraception on the market.

The DPB costs for each sole parent $278.04 net or around $14,458.08 per year. A very small price to pay to women not to breed who will never be able to afford it.

The unemployment benefit should also be cut to fathers of these kids with the same incentivisation. No kids, you get paid your dole equivalent. But if you breed and can't afford it, then you get no state assistance.

If you've bred with a man who has left you in the poor house and is himself doing well, you can name and claim from him directly through child support at higher rates than now.

Apologists say these kids are the future of New Zealand and they will be paying for the retirements of others. Statistically though they won't be. They will always be a burden on the taxpayer. New Zealand is collectively better off as a nation if they are never born.

Children born into DPB and dole "lifestylers" in the year 2010 and beyond haven't got a chance. Its not like the 1960's where it was commonplace for those children to achieve anyway with New Zealand's position in the world. The world has changed. New Zealand with its continued emphasis on low-return, high-leveraged peasant farming, has to compete with Nations with far larger resources and lower wage costs who don't have cradle to grave welfare. Countries we used to call "third world" such as India, China and even emergers like Brazil.

Our New Zealand underclass are too sad and pathetic to compete against the Chinese, Indians and Brazilians. They lack any desire that BIC countries do, because unlike for example the Chinese, they simply don't have a record of thousands of years of poverty to motivate them to do better and to value and strive to be educate, work hard and care for their children.

National and ACT cannot promote this sort of policy. Too many centre-right voters gutlessly shirk away from this sort of approach at the first mention of the "r" (racist) word. To be given a chance NZ First will have to be the Party to do it. And if they do it, the policy will be rip-snortingly popular with their standard 60+ electorate and get Winston to 5%.

New Zealand's underclass are now destined for a life of cradle to the grave net beneficiary status. By the time their health, (attempt at) education, superannuation, corrections, police, welfare bill is run up these kids are costing multi-millions. Forgetting that they are then to produce children and grandchildren themselves who repeat the cycle.

There is only one solution - and that is that they are never born into this life they are destined for.

The parents of these welfare dreamers then have a chance of sorting themselves out before a child complicates their life further. Who knows, they may even become wealthier and one day be able to afford the children they now just keep popping out.

Until the underclasses are incentivised correctly they will act logically and keep shagging for the cash.

You can't blame them. Breeding is something, perhaps the only thing that they are all very good at.