Kiwi Polemicist

January 4, 2010

• Haircuts justify illegal behaviour by politicians

Police car blocking parking for disabled people

Police car blocking parking for disabled people

This is from Stuff:

Wellington City Council will not issue parking tickets to drivers of Bill English’s convoy for parking on yellow lines and across a mobility area while he was getting a trim [haircut].

The council initially said it would issue tickets to Mr English’s security detail but, after discussions with its lawyers and the diplomatic protection squad, it concluded that Mr English’s drivers were within the law.
Council chief executive Garry Poole said police could park anywhere, as long as it was in the course of their duties. And a haircut for the acting PM is a valid excuse.

“While we do have the legal right to issue infringement notices to any vehicle parked unlawfully, police vehicles are exempt from parking restrictions if they are used by officers in the course of their duties.

“We have examined the circumstances of this particular case and I am satisfied that the exemption applies.”

Mr English had his haircut at the upmarket Haight Ashbury salon in Johnston St, in the city centre, on November 26. His BMW Crown limo was parked on yellow lines and a Holden Commodore used by members of the DPS [police Diplomatic Protection Squad] was parked partially across a mobility zone.
The cars were parked for about 45 minutes, until a freshly trimmed Mr English emerged from the salon.

“In this case, I am satisfied that the diplomatic protection squad were using their judgment and that no road user was inconvenienced,” Mr Poole said. “They are aware of the need to stay clear of mobility parks unless strictly necessary for operational reasons.”

Despite the fact that a cop car was blocking a space reserved for disabled people Poole the council man is “satisfied…that no road user was inconvenienced”. How exactly does he know that not one disabled person wanted to park there during those 45 minutes?

From this episode we can conclude that…

  1. Haircuts for politicians are “strictly necessary for operational reasons” and a “valid excuse” for illegal behaviour (style before substance is their motto, which is a good thing because if politicians had any substance you and I would be completely stuffed).
  2. Politicians can’t be bothered with parking legally and walking to a salon.
  3. Those who write the laws are above the laws.

What do you think about blocking mobility parking and parking on yellow lines for the sake of a haircut?



July 22, 2009

• John Key’s lie: “There aren’t any little pixies”

The comments button is at the bottom right of this post.

The NZ Herald has an article that begins thus:

Labour’s call for the dole to be paid to redundant workers even if their partners were on high incomes would cost about $1 billion over three years, Prime Minister John Key said today.

“It demonstrates (Labour) haven’t got their heads around what’s happening in 2009,” Mr Key said.

“It’s not that I don’t have sympathy for those people but in the end someone has to pay the bill – and there aren’t little pixies at the bottom of the garden printing cash.”

pinocchio with long nose - real manMr Key, your nose is growing. That is exactly what the NZ Government has done since 1934 – printed money at will – and it’s the same thing that Hitler did before World War Two. It’s called fiat currency, and every time the government prints some money each dollar in your wallet is worth less. You see it as inflation, and it’s one of the ways that the government steals from you.

We should return to a gold-backed dollar without fractional reserve banking, where each dollar bill is exchangeable for a quantity of gold that actually exists. Only then can Key truthfully say that there are no pixies at the bottom of the garden printing money, and only then will we be free of the government theft that is visible as inflation.

For a full understanding of this topic see What Has Government Done To Our Money?.

Then there’s this clanger from Key; It demonstrates (Labour) haven’t got their heads around what’s happening in 2009. In my humble opinion Key hasn’t got his head around what’s happening in 2009 either, but that’s what happens when you’re a Keynesian Socialist.


July 13, 2009

• Update: Govt forces folic acid into bread

Filed under: Health — Tags: , , , , , , — Kiwi Polemicist @ 9:58 pm

The comments button is at the bottom right of this post.

This is an update to my earlier post Govt forces folic acid into bread.

This is from Stuff:

Rules forcing bakers to add folic acid to bread could be scrapped within months of coming into force if the Government secures a review.

Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson said yesterday that she could reverse the 2007 decision to make folic acid mandatory in most bread from September regardless of the outcome of the review.

But there is a catch folic acid fortification was agreed under the trans-Tasman food safety treaty and Australian agreement is needed for any review.

That is unlikely before the next ministerial meeting in October, a month after the requirement takes effect.

Ms Wilkinson said New Zealand would lobby for support ahead of the summit and, if agreed, the review could be completed by January.

She believed New Zealand would then be free to take a fresh look at folic acid in bread.

“If the review is in place [completed], then at that stage we think we have the option to opt out, whatever the review says.

“My thoughts at the moment are that I would rather have fortification on a voluntary basis, thereby giving New Zealanders a choice.”

The beneficence of our Food Safety Master knows no bounds, but those are only her thoughts “at the moment” so who knows what they will be when the next moment arrives. We all know that moving lips on a politician indicate that lying is occuring, but let’s hope that Wilkinson does restore a fraction of our freedom.


July 9, 2009

• Govt forces folic acid into bread

Filed under: Health — Tags: , , , , , , — Kiwi Polemicist @ 12:21 pm

The comments button is at the bottom right of this post.

Our nanny state government is going ahead with plans for compulsory fortification medication of bread with folic acid according to Stuff. There are concerns that this may be associated with cancer, but there are more fundamental issues here:

  1. The state has no right to control what people eat
  2. The state has no right to forcibly medicate those who choose to eat bread
  3. The state has no right to force people to purchase something that they do not freely choose and thereby control what they do with their money (organic and unleavened breads will be exempt but they are expensive niche products so in effect the majority of the population will be forced to purchase folic acid, which is the intent of the law)
  4. The state has no right to control what bakers do with their private property, i.e. their bread and their money (which will be used to purchase the folate)
  5. The state has no right to impose an additional cost upon bakers and/or bread eaters

The socialists at the The New Zealand Organisation for Rare Disorders say

…the Government should “stand by sound science and public health interests” and implement the standard.

The organisation said the bakers’ arguments were selfish and lacked moral or economic justification.

It said between 80 and 130 babies died or were seriously disabled by neural tube defects each year.

“Most of these deaths or serious disabilities would be preventable by simply adding a trace of vitamin to replace what is stripped out of the wheat in the milling process,” it said.

Translation: “We want to save 80-130 babies each year and to hell with the personal freedoms of everyone else”. That’s pure Socialism/Marxism.

Then there’s this piece of hypocrisy from Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson:

The compulsory aspect went against National’s philosophy of personal choice, she said…

Have a look at John Key’s beliefs regarding the anti-smacking law and you’ll see that National doesn’t give a damn about personal choice. Key is a commie in a blue suit.

The message from our masters in Wellington is the same as ever: “We know what is best for you and too bad if you don’t like it”.

What do you think about compulsory medication of bread?

Click here to view an update to this post.


May 30, 2009

• Budget 2009

I’m not going to attempt an in-depth analysis, but here’s three points for you to consider:

1) Stopping the planned tax cuts. This move can be described in three words: stupid, stupid, and stupid. The Socialists/Marxists in Wellington have the idea that your money is better off in their hands and they say that they will use the money to “lead the country to recovery”. It’s more like leading it to ruin, because giving money to the state is like giving money to an alcoholic: it just gets pissed away.

In 2009/10 the government will take more than 30% of GDP in taxes. Studies have shown that a tax take of 15-23% of GDP leads to economic growth and anything more kills the economy; 23% of GDP can be had from an income tax rate of about 10% plus the miscellaneous taxes that plaque our lives*. Naturally I favour a simpler (cheaper) tax regime plus low taxes that will foster growth as has been shown overseas; with a flat income tax rate of 5-10% and no other taxes the economy would take off like a cat does when a child tries to give it a bath (it would also address the chronic shortage of medical professionals because the government could afford to pay a competitive wage and the tax regime would be attractive).

History clearly shows that reducing tax rates increases the tax take, but all the Wombles of Wellington can think of is keeping their sticky mitts on your money. The present taxation levels are simply parasitic and it’s no wonder that the patient is sick.

2) Stopping the contributions to the Cullen Fund (for future superannuation costs) was sensible. However, if the government adopted the tax regime described above they’d have more than enough money to pay for the superannuation that they shouldn’t be providing.

3) If you’re in the financial dung the first thing to do is trim discretionary spending. Here’s some of what this government should, in my humble opinion, cut:

  • $50m cycleway. The idiocy of this beggars belief.
  • $323.3 million over four years for home insulation and “clean heating devices”. Why should you pay for the insulation and heating in someone else’s house?
  • $34m for broadband internet in schools, when schools can’t even get the three R’s right.
  • $10.5m extra over four years for arts, including $3.4m for ballet. Presumably you’re happy to be paying for ballet so a few people can watch it. All arts spending should stop immediately because there is no rational reason for state funding of the arts.
  • $290m for high speed broadband in 2009/10, out of a total commitment of $1.5b. Let the private sector sort it out, and make it easy for them to do so.
  • $52m for defence. Our defence forces are a joke, and they’ll still be a joke after spending another $52m on them.
  • $11.7m over four years for the “financial adviser watchdog”. “The implementation of the Financial Advisers Act and the Financial Service Providers Act will help restore confidence in the financial markets by introducing a minimum standard of competence for financial advisers,” Commerce Minister Simon Power says. “It will also place the supervision of financial advisers with a central regulatory body, the Securities Commission.” How wonderful, more regulations and more compliance costs. Anyone who trusts a financial adviser just because they’re “government approved” is an idiot, therefore this scheme has nothing to recommend it. Caveat emptor.
  • $1.2m to “strengthen local networks and give a voice to community groups that are often not heard in government processes”. Apparently this is necessary “because local organisations often did not have the opportunity to engage in the policy processes of central government”. What’s the point in talking to a government that just nods politely and does what it intended to do in the first place?


Admittedly cutting those expenses would like jettisoning the Titanic’s silverware, and I’m not pretending that removing these things will stop the ship sinking, but I do want to show you that there’s plenty of frivolous government spending.

We have the same problem that the people on the Titanic did: the master has steered us into dangerous waters and we’re sunk. We need a new ship  – a new fiscal regime – and a new master.

What are your thoughts regarding the budget?


*I’ve Been Writing by Richard Prebble, p102

Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at