John Key - scumbag?

wah wah wah! labour *cry* wah! wah! labout


^--- just saving Bob, NR, et al the trouble of having to post....

Giorgio Agostini, a prominent Chilean psychologist, says Vallejo shows intelligence and leadership skills, but is wrapped up in ideology.

"This has her trapped, in the sense that it's difficult for her to listen and empathise with other positions."

So sweet that NR thinks about you in his spare time neil :>

we have labours word for it? I cant see anything from the video.

this from today's Herald piece on Camila Vallejo had me thinking of you neil

Yeah sweet in a serial killer kind of way... :-/

Its an odd comment in the context of that article, as is the note that she is "daughter of communists".
They've made a feature article about a revolt that fails to explain why there is a revolt.

After five months leading the biggest marches in two decades of Chilean democracy, the students have begun face-to-face talks with the Government over their demands for profound changes in what they say is the country's unequal and underfunded public school system.

A closed-door session this week discussed removing taxpayer support for private institutions, and using the money to help make public universities free to all - a demand Pinera had refused to even discuss.....

While the students want to put the Chilean state back at the centre of education funding and administration, Pinera and his centre-right Government would improve the existing system, which was largely privatised during the dictatorship of General Augusto Pinochet.

The students want "free and equal quality education for all".

Pinera insists on "free education for those who need it, and enough financing for all the rest".

I'm sure that there are a lot of pissed off people there as there are here there and everywhere

the students' protest is what the article is about, not some general state of affairs in Chile

under the Pinochet regime they would have been repressed and the present protest would never have taken place

which kind of shows how far Chile has come since those times

Rhetoric.
Your use of the word "pissed off" allows you to imply that what might be at question here is people's state of mind rather than the material reality of their lives and the power of others to impose that reality on them.

Which is the very reason I took issue with the commnets of that psychologist. The focus is on the personal, rather than the wider situation of what is happening politically in Chilen society.



But if its an article about a protest it would be improved by giving some background to the demands being made by those students, ie what is happening in Chilen society that there is a massive and popular protest movement? The problem is we have a media that makes a fetishism out of superficial personal nonsense.



Chile has not come far enough
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/08/camila-vallejo-latin-america-revolutionary?newsfeed=true[/quote]


It was personal because the picee is as much about her and her leadership as it is about the student protest. A psychologist's opinion or observation would be expected to be a personal one. Q For such as you seek a political economist's or sociologist's opinion would be sought.

I know the shadow of 1968 hangs above the left and your guardian piece conjures up those images but I dont see how that guardian piece shows how far Chile has to travel. Ive seen water cannon on the streets of Amsterdam in the supposedly advanced liberal left leaning Nederlands.

What it perhaps does show is how those with an agenda and idees fixes can co-opt general unfocussed discontentment to their political advantage to pursue their political agendas.

Materially I'd say Chlleans are better off than if they were to have what those students demand which would come at tremendous cost to their economy.

He is a scumbag for many, many reasons.

Nothing new to paint your opposition as doing something that will cause economic/social harm. Labour does it too, vehemently.

Mr Key claimed Standard and Poor's had said at a meeting last month that "if there was a change of Government, that downgrade would be much more likely".

The next election is on November 26.

Standard and Poor's sovereign rating analyst Kyran Curry, who attended the meeting in Auckland, said that would not have happened.

"In Auckland last month, I might have talked about the importance of the Government maintaining a strong fiscal position in the medium term but I would never have touched on individual parties.

"It is something we just don't do," Mr Curry said. "We don't rate political parties. We rate Governments.

They did go on to say though if there was a change of Government, that downgrade would be much more likely

Oddly, a Labour govt being elected would definitely increase the likelihood of a credit downgrade.

Regardless of his blunder...

why Rob? Nine years no downgrade... and no record borrowing

The comments about kiwisaver, cullen fund, cap gains tax are almost irrelevant in this - in particular as they have a huge lag.

You have to remember, S&P is just one company which does ratings. They downgraded the US Govt only months ago too. The other two major ratings agencies, Fitch and Moody's, still rate them AAA (and us too I think)

I am so angry with our government today ... they are useless twats and also reading a column in the NZ Herald about a government report that trivalises what the family court does omfg ..yeah lets just chuck more money into plastic wakas who cares about abused kids and families that are falling apart oh yeah and the environment meh...arrrrrrrgh

On that radio show Key pronounced himself a great fan of Coronation Street.

"Who's home at 5.30?" Key said. "It's got to be moved" and he would talk to "someone important enough to see whether that can happen".

I asked one of Key's press secretaries Lesley Hamilton if he had made such an approach to TVNZ. But Hamilton said absolutely not - and he was never serious about making such an approach.

That was never explained when he was on air. It was just something to say.

On that radio show Key pronounced himself a great fan of Coronation Street.

"Who's home at 5.30?" Key said. "It's got to be moved" and he would talk to "someone important enough to see whether that can happen".

I asked one of Key's press secretaries Lesley Hamilton if he had made such an approach to TVNZ. But Hamilton said absolutely not - and he was never serious about making such an approach.

That was never explained when he was on air. It was just something to say.