Saturday, April 17, 2010

Essential differences #2

Essential differences #1 was here. Now for version 2, courtesy of those nasty, angry, mean and downright jealous socialists over at The Standard.

Here are some teasers:
Key’s $50,000,000 came from somewhere, for what? It is not naked envy that makes us look askance at the completely unjustified rewards that people like Key amass for pulling financial strings. It is the obscenity of someone having sucked so much out of ordinary working families coming back to New Zealand to bash beneficiaries.

This is not a tall poppy. This is a tall poisonous weed.

Shona thinks Key's a sociopath.

Draco T Bastard (appropriate moniker) agrees and confirms he holds millionaires in contempt:

I hold all millionaires in the same contempt because they’ve all used the same exploitation to get there. HC does have a redeeming factor though – when in government she actually tried to help the society to be better while Jonkey and the rest of NACT are doing their damnedest to make things worse.

I think it is very important to remember that these people want Len Brown to by mayor of Auckland, with Sue Bradford as his deputy.

With attitudes like that, how could Auckland possibly develop, grow and its citizens be prosperous. They simply couldn't. Auckland would be dragged back even further.

Remember that later this year.


The Veteran said...

These are the people who worship Phil Goff

These are the people who worship Keith Locke

These are the people who worship Winston First

These are the people who worship Jim Anderton

Not to mention Labour Party Minister Philip Field who elevated ripping off the poor and vulnerable to an art form.

nuff said

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Of course he's too dumb to realise that he has attributed millionaire status to that most bilious of bitches, Helen Clark.

They don't quite realise what dick heads they are.

Inventory2 said...

The nastiness of the left never fails to amaze. These are the people who are supposed to be people-focused, not money-focused. But the mere fact that someone else might DARE to acquire wealth is such an affront to their worldview. They are a sad bunch.

But I wonder if they have ever wondered (those from the EPMU especially) what would happen if all those who have made a buck and invested it into a business were to close the doors and walk. Perhaps they ought be careful what they wish for.

Anonymous said...

These people don't understand one important fact: millionares are their betters

the sooner these leftists learn their place in society and how to behave the better NZ will be!

Anonymous said...

These statements are certainty a disturbing insight into the socialist mind.

What does it say about people who think that it's evil for someone to accumulate their wealth via consensual business transactions but bay with approval when it comes to misappropriating taxpayer funds, taken by coercian, to be applied for the private purpose of re-electing the labour party.

Can the standard actually get any lower?

ZenTiger said...

What about the concept where you get rich by adding value, for a fair price?

People enjoy artist's songs and a very few (proportionally) manage to become exceedingly rich from a small fee multiplied by a big number - same with writers and other similar professions.

The only reason to cap their income at $999,999 is envy. Besides, they become businesses in themselves and hire staff, security, production managers etc and often put back into the business or charities.

Businesses are actually very much similar, but rely on ongoing investment and services to stay alive. There is a case for shareholders to be more discerning in the pay packets they sign off on (pandering to the greedy is as bad as pandering to the envious) but that is a different problem entirely.

For business

Psycho Milt said...

The left has wankers too? Quelle surprise! Maybe y'all haven't noticed, but Sinner's posted on this thread, among the people who worship Gerry Brownlee, and worship David Garrett, and worship Richard Worth, and worship Nick Smith.

Anonymous said...

Nick Smith mostly holds fucktard ideas too, so he can be quite firmly thron into the lot of these loons and their clawing envy

Anonymous said...

There is a case for shareholders to be more discerning in the pay packets they sign off on (pandering to the greedy is as bad as pandering to the envious) but that is a different problem entirely.

No it isn't. There are far far fewer people who are productive enough to earn sensible salaries than there are bludgers and losers and whingers who "envy" them. Income of only NZD 1M or NZD 10M is really quite small by world standards.

This just goes to show that bludgers and whingers and the rest shouldn't be allowed near a ballot box