Brash Employs Chris Christie School of Politics

Dr Brash today has moved into the third stage of his political metamorphosis on comeback into what we term the Chris Christie School of Politics.

He abused a repeater by calling him a "deceitful bastard".

The Chris Christie School of Politics is a philosophy of turning on the media or other silly organisational idiots and telling it like it is in the bluntest fashion possible. Often with invective. That is, treating those with as much disdain as they are treating you, often on a multipier scale - that is dealing maybe twice the abuse they give you, or twice the love. I like to start off with a multipier of 1.5, ranging up to four if they are slow-learners or send you beautiful presents in terms of love.

Dr Brash was coming across until today as far too timid when dealing with sub-zero intellectual talent such as Patrick Gower. A repeater who doesn't have enough grunt to shine Dr Brash's shoes, let alone repeat correctly on economics.

So Dr Brash served Paddy one in the chook and Paddy has been whining about it since all over twitter and probably through the newsroom. I rate the insult an A, Brash should have called him a "fucking little deceitful pinko bastard". I would have given that an A+ on the Cactus scale of abuse.

And it was the best television of the day. I didn't even watch the Leaders Debate because Phil Goff was on that and he's not the Leader of the Labour Party so TVNZ was falsely advertising that.

Gower didn't rattle Brash, he pissed him off. Then Gower used edited highlights to glorify himself.

Watch it here

And just to top himself off today in pathetic repeating glory high-fiving all is junior colleagues on twitter, Patrick Gower cannot even spell the word deceitful, let alone claim that Dr Brash was telling porkies.

Old school reporters used to this sort of abuse from Sir Robert Muldoon should school the younger polytech grads in the media that Patrick is not a hero, he's been punk'd for crying about it. And should be spanked by those around him for being the self-styled pride of the campaign and not managing to even spell the insult correctly. That is he fucked up the punchline.

Nice Guys Sometimes Finish First

This morning the awful news circulated among the VRWC then the MSM that our intellectual giant, the most philosophically sound and widely published patron has passed away. It was news we were all expecting but didn't want to hear.



Roger Kerr was a man of softly spoken words, a true gentleman who seemed to have time for everyone. Young or old.

It may be election time and therefore everyone is sensitive about these matters, but the pinkos have even managed today to politely communicate everything that was great about Roger - complete passion for what he believed in and his good gentlemanly manners.

Most on the left have made waffly comments that they respected his opinion, they didn't else they would have actually followed it more often. They respected him as a gentleman and person. Which is why they didn't have to look far for words to say something nice.

Like most of the VRWC I met Roger at a meeting of likeminds, I got lost one day many years ago as a student and ended up at a Young Nats meeting in a restaurant in Ponsonby. Given my aversion to dining with centrists, Roger's presence was the only thing that kept me at the Young Nats meeting.

I have since been to many Business Roundtable events and the odd conference since and am a wide reader of Roger's work.

What he leaves behind for us younger members of the VRWC is literally a lifetime of wonderfully written literature, speeches, opinion and research. In preparation for a post on political or financial issues I often read his work extensively before thinking about it, perhaps add or disagree with parts, then writing it in my own style. I hope the Business Roundtable keeps a more neatly indexed library of his complete works and makes it more accessible to all on the internet.

It is not often in life you get to meet someone so academically smart who doesn't sit in an ivory tower on the taxpayer tit.

Roger asked me how I got so many people to read my blog and whether he could apply my advice to his blog and change his writing style accordingly. I had to gently explain to Roger the strengths of my niche in blogging was probably not a business model that could be applied with his personality and talents.

Roger suffered ill health for a reasonable period yet he was to the end like he was all the time, so calm and rational about the simple fact that sometimes the nicest guys get to finish first on this earth.

RIP Roger and our thoughts today are with Catherine, Nick and the rest of Roger's family and close friends.

Taking My Advice

The other day I gave some strategic advice to Occupy Aotea Square squatters that they have to move from their current insignificant base and actually get off their backsides and create some havoc.

Today they had a field trip to the Citibank Centre to the US Consulate.



Do you know this man? I think it is Hone Harawira disguised heavily in cap and scarf over his face concealed in the mask of a white man.

In true New Zealand Occupy tradition of not being able to organise a piss-up in a brewery they were directionless, charmless, hopeless and most importantly - took no hot chicks.

Bit like the Labour Party but at least they have Jacinda. Well they will have when they depose their current no-mates Phil and let her front the next lot of Telecom inspired ads.

Intrepid Journeys - Aotea Square

Awake with the stoners more like.



No prison for pot Dr Brash.

Listened to this chap for a couple of minutes didn't understand a single muttering word that came from his mouth.

The plan.



The .00000000001%...who were there.



Too lazy to pitch that bad boy.



The rich do not need saving however.



More booze? Prohibition?



Oil lobby.



Defacing US flag, anti-war, anti-anti-anti??



Say what?



Say what?



Occupy in dramatic action shot.



Anti-Hubbard sign.



Invoking Gandhi?



Group shot of the crowd.



Really?



Now they wish to liberate the University. From what precisely?

I had a half hour spare today waiting for a delivery to arrive for me at Smith & Caughey Queens Street, while I'm accidentally in town for a very quick trip, so around 2pm so I took up the Occupy challenge to go down to Aotea Square and have a look at the protest.

What I saw reinforced further that if these occupiers are the future of New Zealand and indeed the 99% then New Zealand is utterly poked. The pathetic heaving underclass is alive but not well in Aotea Square for sure.

I approached the area firstly underwhelmed with the size of, well everything. If it was a bloke in a bar and you had a pre-squeeze, it wouldn't be coming home with you. Too small.

On the plus side I do give them some credit that it all seemed very peaceful.

The stench of the unwashed was soon apparent, although in two days if the gas pipeline from Taranaki is not fixed, unwashed Auckland central residents could be everywhere.

These people aren't even Labour voters. They are worse than that. We are talking Alliance or Mana. Or even too stoned to vote.

I was not dressed in a suit which would be a sign of war. Given I had showered that morning and blonde it was quite apparent I was there on my Blackberry to take photos and perhaps I was the 1% enemy. Any competent protest movement would have at least questioned my presence. Alas not our Occupiers.

Now I'm not anti-weed. But it was soon evident that the non-violent, non-alcoholic protest was fuelled on dak. The rolling eyes of the 40 people I counted in the vicinity were proof they were either psychiatric patients, or stoned. Or perhaps both.

Trained in Management at University and with now extensive experience, I am qualified to provide some advice regarding. I would like to think if I was a pinko I could at least run a decent meaningful protest. Remember everyone these people are gaining sympathy from quasi-Labour MP Selwyn Pellett. I doubt Selwyn's actually gone there and seen quite what he's backing to receive a dividend from.

1. Your message must be consistent.

As evidenced by signs around below, "Occupy" is a mish-mash of New Zealand's degenerates. In other words, these are people that if as the middle classes were living next to you not only would you roll your eyes at, you would erect a bloody large fence so you didn't have to see them. We had Maori activists, the pro-cannabis lobby, anti-oil, anti-capitalism, hippies, students and a sign that suggested "calves are induced murder". Surely Gilda Kirkpatrick could have told you that about her high heels before you got to Aotea Square.



2. Your message must be on point.

A sign saying "no capital gains tax" belongs at a National or ACT Party meeting. "Tax evasion" only gets me excited enough to think I might want to actually join the protest.



3. Hot chicks.

Simply there were none. Laila Harre on her own recruited at least half the Alliance membership. She also provided the likes of Matthew Hooton with enough drooling sympathy to listen to the cause. There are no Laila's here but the feminist movement was represented by this sign.



4. Alcohol and drugs.

It's fine to provide weed to be smoked outside before arriving, but walking through the space drove me to drink and this was alcohol free. This young topless man (his pants fell down part way through a hoola hoop movement) asked me if I was over 20 and could go buy some alcohol.



Normally I would be flattered at least with the age thing, however his eyes suggested he was inbred or stoned. Either way I realised that Len may be too soft-cocked to allow degenerates who voted for him to be arrested for squatting in tents but I would be up for supplying liquor to a minor as well as public drinking. He later told Auckland council security in my presence that he was security for Occupy.

I suggest he won't be tomorrow when the idiot in charge reads this post. I have respectfully refrained from taking close up pictures identifying any of the others in the square apart from the speaker at the event, however will be doing them a favour identifying this moron so he can be ejected.

Len's Men (Supercity security) did discuss in my earshot what they would do about Occupy's security and concluded they couldn't do anything. Yes the occupiers have a security roster of their own, this guy pictured was actually on it. The problem is the longer this crap goes on the more the ratepayer is paying for it.

5. Hazards

I arrived completely sober. In the time I was there I almost slipped up twice on the steps. ACC may have had claims already from the stoned and unwashed. Occupying this space was dumb. It's out of the way, no one was around and it's no Wall Street. We could leave these halfwits there a year and it wouldn't matter. Well other than once it starts to rain the grass will be off.



6. Expansion

When building a business you need room to expand. Occupy can't, it's almost at capacity as the grassed area is capacity. Yet tents outnumber people present. Not good business planning. And it is pretty clear that the tents are not full so they are attempting to create a facade that the protest is much larger than it actually is. A bit like what Whaleoil referred to yesterday as "Un-occupied".



7. Other hazards

I found the one respectable person there who was sporting a pro-MMP badge. He looked like a student, was reasonably dressed and more importantly appeared literate and not stoned. I asked him where the protesters actually were as I pointed out there were more tents there than people. "Oh I live ten minutes away I don't stay here there's light pollution".

That is, at night the poor petals can't sleep as Queen St has too many lights.

In summary if these losers and degenerates want to get noise they should move and "go big".

Occupy Shortland Street.

It would be loud, rude, stop traffic and disrupt $700+ an hour lawyers and barristers getting to work. Which means Len would have to actually make a decision regarding. Handing over to Crusher would be the only option.

Aotea Square is nothing. It's like pissing in the ocean. Doesn't matter. If these hippies, dope smokers, Mana party members and fuckwit middle class kiddies want to make a statement pack up their middle class tents and occupy Shortland Street.

If you are gonna go.

Go big. Or go home. Which is it going to be Occupy?

Crazy Bob - Time For White Coat

Bob Parker has a shot of small dick syndrome after watching Aucklander Len Brown standing on a ute waving to the All Blacks fans and now thinks Christchurch can host the Commonwealth Games in 2022.

Newsflash for Bob, the only thing Crippled Christchurch is good for hosting for the next decade and beyond is a Portaloo Explosion Derby.

The Commonwealth Games, like the Olympics is a total waste of space in any instance. It is where sports that individually cannot get an audience, gift wrap weeks of inane boredom with nationalistic chest-beating and whalla - sport?

There's a zillion more important things for Christchurch to focus on the next decade than this.

Labour Gets Smart

The best decision thus far by Labour this year is to scrap a campaign opening.



Tomorrow it will announce instead I assume a sort of compulsory savings plan, where people responsibly already saving will now be made to put money aside today to pay for the retirement of those too irresponsible to save.

When your Leader is pants, the last thing you want is more exposure for him.

Labour in any instance have been campaigning for months starting with their CGT policy which was fronted not by Goff but Parker and Cunliffe with the ongoing assistance of its quasi-Finance Spokesmen Selwyn Pellett, Gareth Morgan with Bernard Hickey excitably cheerleading like a schoolgirl.

Gilmore for PM

There is no need for the silly pathetic Aaron Gilmore for PM twitter and facebook really.

No one parodies Aaron Gilmore better than himself. Even JK himself wouldn't stand a chance.

Man After My Heart

If Chris Christie will not stand for President then I hope this guy does on the basis of this one statement that he cares not a stuff about inequality.

Rick Perry announced on Tuesday that if elected president he would slash the corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 and give everyone the option of paying a flat income tax rate of 20 percent.

He also would try to encourage U.S. companies who have stored $1.4 trillion overseas to move their profits back to the United States by allowing them to pay 5.25 percent in taxes at first, according to Reuters.

I don't care about that," Perry said of the increased economic inequality that would result from the tax plan in an interview with The New York Times. "If that's what comes, I'll take that criticism."

Finally a politician who has answered the "inequality" question.

Why should we care about inequality?

It is mainly a white, middle class first world gripe. That is, people already better off than most of the 7 billion people in the world, justifying why they can't afford a bigger house, car or boat.

Some people were born smarter, better looking or with better sporting prowess than others. There is inequality everywhere.

Anyone in New Zealand talking about inequality never addresses the issue that they are already better off than most of the world's 7 billion population.

The 1% Fallacy

Who is the 1% in New Zealand?

The other day I posed the question of in New Zealand, who exactly are this "1%" that have got the half dozen Occupy protesters so upset?

The only person who has come up with any sort of argument is Labour leaning blogger Rob Carr. His analysis is here. No such numbers in raw seem to exist. NBR has promised an analysis on Friday. Reading the raw Credit Suisse report, New Zealand barely rates a mention.

So let's draw a long bow and assume Rob's guesstimate is correct that in New Zealand you need around $800-900,000 in net assets to be considered "them" by protesters.

The problem is of the 1% I would say 80-90% are constrained due to their attractiveness in wealth; defacto relationships or marriage and therefore contingent. Not many of us are neatly legally single whereby no one can take a bludging claim on our anointed 1% status.

Take Mr X who has a lazy million in net assets and is by Rob's calculation "1%". He's been married to Mrs X for 20 years. If they divorce prima facie she owns half the assets and they both fall out of the 1%. That's a large inaccuracy in the statistics right there. It's bottom heavy according to Rob's calculations and therefore bottom heavy with couples who individually wouldn't rate.

I suspect the $800-900k figure to get 1% individually is a hell of a lot lower. And as Rob quite rightly points out, people are embellishing their lifestyles living on debt feeding off bank lending and a willingness to make everyone seem wealthier than they actually are. Politicians like that.

Then we may have Mr A who is worth $20 million. If he dies tomorrow and splits his fortune held in trust among 20 family members, there's 20 more in the 1% adjusting the stat who are trust beneficiaries even though only the settlor is credited as owning the assets.

I've discussed this in the past about the fallacy of the NBR Rich List. Families are rated with individuals. There is no accounting for how many people the family wealth is actually supporting.

If you look at those with $800-900k in net assets, chances are the number 1 asset owning class is a house. One very simple house bought in Herne Bay on mortgage in the 1970's may now be worth with house inflation say $1 million, putting the owner in the 1% (and their spouse). That is, through absolutely no risk taking whatsoever these sorts end up in the 1% as a function of being bloody old. None would count themselves as rich and in many cases as a function of time most are struggling with the outgoings to pay to live in Herne Bay for example. Hell New Zealand has examples of state house tenants living in homes that if cashed up would put owners in the 1% and beneficiaries currently squat in them.

New Zealand wages being as low as they are, it would take a lifetime for most workers to accumulate $800-900k in net worth solely from after-tax and after-rent savings. And if you threw it on the roulette wheel called the NZX you'd have to have ridden a few crashes. Another reason that New Zealand would have a ridiculous amount of property millionaires in this 1%, many like farmers, accidentally rich through expansionary bank lending policies, not through any great intellectual achievement.

1% with buyers remorse?

One of the sugar Daddys and business pin-up boys of the Labour Party is Selwyn Pellett. Pellett is by independent and reasonable accounts a good bloke so I'm not picking on him and I don't want slathing comments about him from readers. Even if he called on Phil Goff to be axed in April yet still supports him.

“Labour is likely to lose the election no matter who is leading it, but with Phil Goff at the helm it could be a devastating result. People have simply stopped listening,” Pellett said.

As a four figure co-funder of the Labour Party this election, I posed a few quickies to Selwyn on Twitter as along with Bernard Hickey he's becoming a more prominent Labour Party Finance spokesman/apologist these days so can face some more examination of his ideas.

Selwyn's angry that generation Y are being screwed over by asset sales and accumulation by their parents and grandparents.




Inheritance and the 99%

The problem with Selwyn's argument is that when the baby boomers die, where do you think their assets go? Thin air? The $800-900k in net wealth that puts Mummy and Daddy in the 1% goes to the "Y's" That's right, the sort of snotty brats now sitting in Occupy protests all over the world pretending they are in the 1960's and protesting about something worthy like free love on acid. That's the private assets. The public assets, well Generation Y don't currently own those anyway do they? Not one has paid for those assets, like family wealth they are inherited from prior generations, who borrowed from evil banks so they could all own a nice big home that their kids cannot afford, but don't need to as one day the house will all be theirs whereby they pretend they actually deserve to live in it.

So when someone who hasn't contributed says "don't sell OUR assets" what they are really saying is "I didn't pay for them, I don't pay enough tax to ever put into the system more than I'm taking out, but yeah I don't think our assets should be sold because....ergh...yeah there's a hot chick I'm spading and she's in Aotea Square.....cool.". And that's the fallacy of Labour's campaign against asset sales and protests around them. Less Labour voters than National or ACT have actually contributed to those assets and less are likely to as the amount of people paying net tax in New Zealand declines. David Farrar recently analysed this via Bill English's office.

On a personalised level it's like this. Selwyn runs into financial difficulty (heaven forbid as unlike these shitty Gen Y'ers I of course wish him well and hope he gets even richer even if he sprays it on pinkos). He has a fictitious delinquent child who at 3x years old is not working or contributing to the family despite being old enough to and another child of similar age who earns a Labour minimum wage of $15 per hour. Selwyn owns a spare beachhouse that he rents out that will of course one day realise a tidy capital gain probably when the children are much older even though they've promised never to sell it, that if he sells 49% of to his mate, he can pay off debts. The fictitious delinquent child and other start screaming "Daddy don't sell our assets" and throw tantrums even though Selwyn would still own half of it. What does Selwyn do? Charge the delinquent rent? Listen to the child whose contributed nothing to the family? Of course he doesn't. He mans up and does what is needed as he's made all business decisions to be successful, without any emotion attached.



Bankers are evil but so is Selwyn?

Selwyn thinks banks and bankers make too much money. Fair enough. However right now the fictitious 99% are protesting all around the world that it is Selwyn as well who makes too much money off his workers and capital.


Selwyn thinks that because he "distributes wealth" through creating jobs that he is immune to the Occupy criticism. Well a Chinese factory owner making those little component parts has the same argument doesn't he? And every member of the Rich List? As does the head of a bank. Lending creates wealth in itself, ask all businessmen who have borrowed money from a bank. Ask bank employees if they haven't had wealth distributed to them for their work? Just because you are in a high-tech trendy "wanted" industry, doesn't make your business any deserving than the old-age bank keeping the finances flowing.

Who deserves wealth?

The day as a businessman that you start making judgment calls on who "deserves" to be wealthy, is the day you end up smacking your own face in the concrete and hard. You may not like the debate. Especially if you were a recipient of corporate welfare on your return to New Zealand in 2001 from overseas.



The sad fact is that most people don't "deserve" their wealth. In a puritanical sense they haven't totally worked for it or financed it themselves. Many have inheritance or soft family loans to thank for their success. Many got kickstarts from government contracts and their mates. A large amount of women have married better than others and divorced even more stupendously. Does a housewife who in a past life was a receptionist ever deserve $10 million in payout simply for marrying a man with $20 million and having two children? More money than she ever would have made living on her own as a receptionist. And any women with two children who hasn't married as well?

And many have gone to a bank, relied on expansionary lending policies for residential property and got rich off the bank.

Some take corporate welfare because they are already wealthy but "everyone else is doing it" so they think they have to line up and take it as well. This is the new high-tech entrepreneur model it seems.

Does a son who sponged an interest free loan off his parents ever deserve the money they have now by selling the business their grandfather built? Of course not.

Is a businessman who borrowed money from a bank risking depositors money than their own, more deserving than one who risked all the money in from his own savings? No.

Very few people in the 99% actually deserve their wealth either. Very few have made all their money by themselves, with no financing from banks, parents or friends or divorce.

While many turn up to work each day to work for someone else in return for wages, New Zealand is littered with examples of people working for themselves. Who is more deserving of their wealth?

Those employed, or those who create jobs for others in SME's?

The 99% are of course going to banks to borrow funds put on deposit by the 1% in any instance. The 1% are funding borrowing for the 99%.

The Wall St occupation and New Zealand

The Wall St anti-bank sentiment of Occupy in New Zealand is also a fallacy. The current GFC has seen zero money used to bail out banks in New Zealand. Finance companies? Yes. But no bailout for them meant hundreds of thousands of oldies would lose their money and gosh we can't have them dying poor can we? Nothing for generation Y to inherit that Selwyn thinks they may deserve. They may have to actually go earn their lifestyles.






As for Selwyn thinking NZX companies deserve more support than banks. Why? What returns are NZX companies offering shareholders? What has NZX been doing to promote new listings. Significant new listings? What about removing RWT on dividends? Anyone lobbying for that? And can't you buy shares in banks anyway if they're such a sure bet? Ergh...yes....but banks aren't a sure bet are they? The best way for the NZX to grow in credibility and size is whack 49% of those SOE's on to it. Selwyn's argument to shift money from property to the NZX is boosted by the asset sales he is against.

Almost all businessmen at some stage have gone cap in hand to a bank. All farmers have. And when the bank loans you the money they are fabulous. If not, the she-devil and it's all the bankers fault and loud outcry to politicians result who in turn pressure policy to free lending to make voters feel richer than they actually are. It is all highly co-dependent and horribly cyclical.

The over-generous lending policy of banks at the insistence of politicians has pushed up house prices, it's pushed up land prices but no politician wants to burst that bubble. Not Labour. Not Selwyn's mates, they are too scared to put CGT on the family home where this 1% of Herne Bay wealth example is created. Apparently you deserve to be able to have a gain from your own home but not from a second property. Politicians worldwide have driven bank lending policies. Everyone must have their own home and for political stability it must never decline much in value.

Cash buyers for property with hard earned savings have to effectively compete with banks acting as agent for their mortgaged clients. Who is more deserving? The cash buyer or the one who has the most generous bank manager? Is this fair? Of course not.

A kid in their twenties can go "buy" several million dollars of farm with a deposit lent from their parents that employs only himself and a partner, yet an independent forty year old can't go borrow the same to build a business that employs 20 people. Who deserves the funding? Yet rural lending constitutes $47 billion and the net result is farmers only getting rich by selling farms to each other. The returns from farming still don't stack up on a lending scale used for SME's and other businesses. Do they deserve this wealth? Selwyn and some other businessmen have bandied together to support getting more of your savings on the NZX in their pockets and away from residential housing.

The first million and the 1%

They say your first million is the hardest to make, be that as it may I wonder if the likes of Selwyn, Morgan Jr and Sr would have the same tax spruiking leftist attitudes of deciding for you who deserves to keep their cash, if they were at the point of having just made their first? Or trying to get the first on the ladder? But now they've comfortably got runs on the board they're making it harder for others to do exactly what they did. There's a not so nice word for that.

They all have made capital gains and say how ludicrous they got them tax free. I don't see however a retrospective cheque for 15% being stumped up to the consolidated fund, do you? No the Morgan Jr and Sr would rather give their own money to charity worldwide and invest in New Zealand start-ups in Jr's case. Which is all very well and good but most New Zealand taxpayers never get that choice to decide who deserves their money.

It is not Selwyn will be paying for years to come it will be Generation X's of my age who will be indulging these Y brats who have been egged on with entitlement mentalities and buy-a-vote policies that apologists boomers like Selwyn are now advocating by funding and acting as the acceptable high-achieving business face of the Labour Party.

I for one am stuffed if I'm going to sit by and put up with random snotty kids and mindless beneficiaries protesting that they've been hard done by in New Zealand of all countries. As they lounge around with consumables, interest free student loans which most of us Generation X New Zealanders never received, world class education and demands that they want more because "well, you know we are the future of New Zealand and we cant even afford a deposit on a house even though we go to Aussie each year and drink all weekend...."...... And they deserve more. Some are talking of violence and hatred towards those oppose them. Mana are launching a platform for the election from this. You can see it in action already.

Bring on the water cannons and heavy Spring rains and cooler temperature dips in Auckland.



courtesy of Bookface of Cr C.Brewer

It's time someone just called the core of Occupy what they are - envious, greedy politicising opportunistic young thugs.

Little News

I have been on tin budgies and in and out of airports for the past 24 hours, but seriously, this is NEWS? How?

It is just Facebook.

I made a common sense suggestion to water cannon the tiny mob in Aotea Square protesting against New Zealanders who may only have as little as $800-900k in net assets - the 1%, on George Wood's Facebook. In any instance Auckland's weather lets nature take care of that probably without assistance. Andrew Little then engaged in a bit of what looked like drunk/tired/late at night-facebooking and took a hit at George Wood.

If people want politicians to engage on social media they have to put up with the downside, some of them may have a Little sense of humour, others may get a little Tauey, others quack at the wrong time.

Or in the case of Carmel Sepuloni - call a kid barely out of University involved in adult stuff like political coups and Vote for Change, an idiot.

If people start crying to the teacher when there's a bit of argy-bargy we will lose this entertainment.

If it is good enough for the public to abuse politicians, it is good enough for them to be allowed some leeway to abuse the public back. And vice versa. I have always advocated this approach.

Something needs to happen to make the campaign interesting. I consider them to be less SMOG (social media own goals) than neo-combat drills. Good for team morale and the political soul.

Andrew Little's politics and militant union background are abhorrent enough to me. No comment on Facebook or Twitter really can compare to that.

What is The 1%?

Apparently the top 1 per cent of New Zealanders own 16 per cent of New Zealand's wealth, higher than every country except the United States and Sweden.

This has been parroted everywhere over blogs and sappy Labour hugging columnists like Bernard Hickey. Very vague. Percentages not raw numbers.

But can someone please let us know the dollar amount that your individual net worth (not household worth or your income) has to be before you are in the top 1% of New Zealand?

Before Everyone Lines Up

"John Key stops in to see if Curia can deliver his next internal poll on concerns that the blue Penguins have finally succumbed to Whale Oil"

Best Nek Minnit Yet

Ask and you shall receive, someone has Nek Minnited the post I did yesterday.

Natural Born Killer - Brunette

The best white Maori we know, Brunette is a hard woman. But a softie at the same time and above all just hard case. The troops in the VRWC affectionately call her "nana" and given the age she lost her virginity lets face it, she's old enough to be nana to most of us.

Due to her chronological advantage, Brunette beats us all for booze consumed, tales of eating, fighting, swearing, long lunches and of course shagging. Due to her lack of appreciable past standards such as a man having an IQ over 100 or looking fancy in a suit and tie, she's done a shit load of it. I don't know whether to be impressed with her stats or appalled. Most of it down country when she was younger. Anyway all that practice paid off and the bloke nowadays is a very acceptable model even if he's Australian.

One thing that truly appalls me about Brunette is not that she drinks frog blood aka red wine, but she bites the heads off Muttonbirds to kill them. She's opined professionally on the subject on her blog at length.



Today she informed a wide-eyed VRWC that she's murdered 40,000 muttonbirds in her lifetime. Which makes her 40 times more lethal to native wildlife than the oil from Rena. And she's whinging about saving the bloody sparrow with long sticks called the dotterel? The muttonbird is way cuter and even has a NZ band named after it.

Perhaps that's why Maori haven't been too outspoken about the birds at the Mount. Quite apart from the simple fact most Maori (like others) can't bloody afford to live anywhere near the main beach roads full of retired poseurs such as Waikato dairy farmers, Maori have enough style to know rats on wings that shit everywhere aka seagulls don't count, the dotterel is too stupid to survive and 1000 birds is barely a years kill quota for someone like our Brunette Maori Warrior.

Cruden To Crusher

This is a picture that will do the rounds for sure taken from a Facebook friend's page.

The man pictured on the right is leading the chants with "Quade Cooper Sucks".

A few weeks later here he is again having made Quade Cooper suck.



Best Nek Minnit ever.

Bring It Home Richie

It is quite clear watching the All Blacks play today that we have the best team at the RWC. It is a travesty that we now play France in the final, a group of dummy spitting numpty's that have lost twice. Not just to us but to lowly ranked Tonga.

It is unfair to say France don't deserve to be in the final, they do. With their usual bullshit sense of the ridiculous they've played rubbish rugby all tournament and barely done enough to progress. A bit like their economy. The French always just scrape through with minimal effort.

They'll try to destroy the game next week. It's their only hope of winning.

Australia should have been in the final. But losing to Ireland stuffed up the seedings and we were robbed the final that the RWC needed as the match today will probably be better than the final.

The All Blacks still have to beat France and we still have to go through the agony of nerves again next week. However what is making this team so good is that when one player doesn't go so well, another individual sticks up their hand and plays a blinder.

Last week it was Piri Weepu, he was pretty absent this week and looked sick. But it was Cory Jane under the high ball and I think yet again Ma'a Nonu who steadied the ship. And the entire forward pack. Who were amazing. They smashed Australia back in every tackle and pounded their noses and chests all day. Richie McCaw on one leg made David Pocock look like a little flat chested beer bitch.

Without Dan Carter we have adapted to playing differently and in a way other teams would not have planned for. Watching Israel Dagg run one out with his gas is massive, as are all the Hurricanes players in the RWC. Sonny Bill only impacted with a yellow card this week, however given an opportunity he will front next time.

If Weepu had landed all the kicks he had the scoreline would have been a thumping. Of some concern is the inability to put away all chances as they come as we could have had some more tries early on but when the team is winning so well, it seems academic to criticise. Graham Henry seems to have it all under control and New Zealanders have been reasonably silent in attempting to select the team.

The All Black squad is the best in the tournament and I believe now will win. No other squad could play with their third choice first five-eight. No other squad has a bench as deep as ours.

What I like about the RWC is firstly, it's exposed New Zealanders to hitting the piss every weekend so they can see how much damn fun it is to have town fully packed like international cities should be. And second, it's made people I've never thought could possibly be interested in rugby, actually care.

Like my friend who we will call Doris, as it explains her 38 years perfectly. Doris is afraid of breaking a nail opening a door, let alone watching hits in rugby. She sent me an email the other day that made me wonder if her husband had hacked her email. She spoke fluent "rugby". It was as frightening as if I wrote her an email discussing the finer points of nail polish.

Rugby isn't a widely played sport in the world, however we must get New Zealand back on the waiting list to host another RWC. No other country would support games like New Zealand has. From those who attended at silly prices the matches that didn't matter in the provinces to those who next week will shell out several thousand dollars to sit on a piece of wobbly plastic no doubt in inclement Auckland weather - you've all been awesome.



New Zealand will spend Labour Day the best possible way it can - hungover. Let's hope it is a happy hangover. For if Richie McCaw can lift that cup above his tired head balanced on his "niggly" no doubt aching foot, it will be the only thing Labour will have to smile about on their day.

Footnote - Speaking of which Lynn Prentice from The Stranded has declared himself on Bookface to be a rugby misery guts. Doesn't like rugby, over it. Sick of it. Appears he doesn't like the riff raff making loud noise late at night. Anyone knowing Lynn's residential address feel free to send it to the Whaleoil tipline tipoff@whaleoil.co.nz so we can alert rugby fans all over Auckland on the most widely circulated blog where to make some noise and empty the contents of their bladders come Friday and Sunday nights.

Occupy This Losers

Some twits think they can squat in Aotea Square for six weeks and stink up the town like some wallies have in New York. Before this gets out of control and you have the likes of Hone Harawira and John Minto down there to show more hypocrisy I suggest giving them one day and then on an hourly basis perform the following:

Too harsh?

Let us have a look at Auckland's trusty weather forecast for the next 6 days

Good luck with that protest then against corporate greed. Best you go grab some gear from Icebreaker, Marmot, Timberlands, Merrell and a bit of Nike chucked in for fun. Hot coffee from Starbucks and McDonalds, washed down with a bit of Heineken on the side.

If the protest reaches any sort of numbers I hope for a photo so we can do a bit of tagging