Sunday, July 16, 2017

SO THE GREENS ARE LED BY A SELF CONFESSED FRAUDSTER

Amazing the revelation by the Greens co-leader Metiria Turei that she lied to Work and Income to get a benefit she wasn't entitled to while she was studying for a law degree.

Many questions arise.   Did Turei declare her fraud to the Green Party when she first stood as a candidate?    If she didn't, do the Greens still consider her a right and proper person to represent them in  Parliament and, more importantly, to be their co-leader?   What moral authority would she possess as a  minister in a Labour/Greens coalition government and finally, is she going to pay the money back (with interest)?

Turei represents the 'entitlement culture' possessed by many of those who inhabit the dark side of the political divide.   Clearly she felt she was 'entitled' to rip off the taxpayer.    Not much of a difference between her and an ex colleague of hers, Pam Corkery, outed this week for ripping off vulnerable old ladies.  

Will Turei do a Barclay?   Doubt it.   Double standards anyone?



29 comments:

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Not much of a difference between her..... and a certain black bastard who was born in Kenya when he needed too steal a scholarship and born in Hawaii when he needed to steal an election.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Who knows? One day she might reveal she actually is not a citizen of NZ. When she became a citizen of Lala Land she renounce her Kiwi citizenship.

A terrible oversight, commonly made by people from Palmerston North, it seems.

The Veteran said...

Adolf ... I think equating Turei with Trump is a little unfair to ...... (your call).

BTW ... my contacts tell me that Turei 'outing' herself and crying 'poor' was a preemptive strike against disaffected elements in the Greens who were planning a hit on her because of their assessment that she is an electoral liability for them. They see her as 'off message' who compares unfavourably with her more rationale (for the Greens) and business friendly (for the Greens) co-leader.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Vet, you need Specsavers. It was Obama, not Trump. Different shape, different colour, One has ability while the other is full of bullshit like "you can still have your own doctor."

David said...

Glad you have finally seen the light, Adolf. Trump's "healthcare reforms" will deprive 22 million Americans of the chance to see a doctor, any doctor, their own or not. All in the name of tax cuts for the 0.01%

As to the rest, just your usual alt-right bullshit from Reddit. What scholarship did Obama "steal"? You don't know, you've just heard others tell the lie.

Fake news Adolf, fake news.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

God but you do talk crap David, just like a good Democrat.

The 22 million to whom you refer are those who didn't want to buy insurance in the first place but were forced to by Obama in order to provide the money to provide health insurance for Obama's uninsurable democrat voters. Along with all the ladies over 60 years of age who were forced to buy obstetrics cover, even if they had had a hysterectomy.

Psycho Milt said...

Turei represents the 'entitlement culture' possessed by many of those who inhabit the dark side of the political divide. Clearly she felt she was 'entitled' to rip off the taxpayer.?

Meh. The well-off do all kinds of things to avoid paying the amount of tax they should actually be paying, which is why there's always a big lump of income earners just under the top tax bracket. We can draw a couple of conclusions from Turei's admission today:

1. If you cut benefits to the point they're impossible to get by on unless you lie to the authorities, people will lie to the authorities. People who want to make some kind of integrity argument out of that should consider what arguments they'd make against increasing the top tax rate - if those arguments include a reduction in compliance, think again about why you're whinging about reductions in compliance when benefits are cut.

2. Turei is more honest than the great majority of the nation's MPs, most of whom will have an accountant ensuring they pay as little tax as possible.

Psycho Milt said...

BTW ... my contacts tell me that Turei 'outing' herself and crying 'poor' was a preemptive strike against disaffected elements in the Greens who were planning a hit on her because of their assessment that she is an electoral liability for them.

Dutifully contributing to the government's propaganda, I see. This remarkable piece of bullshit might play well among National supporters who don't really understand the Green Party, but to those who do understand it's just comical. To get an idea of how comical, picture Labour running a line that there was a split in ACT between the ideologues and the people who might be interested in working with Labour - not really a goer, is it?

Anonymous said...

Never let the facts spoil a good hate speech......

http://healthcare.findlaw.com/patient-rights/obamacare-basics-understanding-the-affordable-care-act.html

I can print it in four languages including stupid.

Lord Egbut

The Veteran said...

PM ... so, in 'Greenland' claiming what you are entitled to by way of a tax deduction is no different to rorting the system to get a benefit you're not entitled too. Have to say that's a novel defence. Whether it would impress a Judge is perhaps a moot point.

My sources are NOT of the interviewing ones typewriter variety.

Adolf ... second time in two days. A certain disconnect between mind and fingers. Was still mulling over your worry that PM was poaching my poll on Trump.

Psycho Milt said...

The government, consisting as it does of people who want to avoid paying taxes to the extent possible, provides plenty of mechanisms for the wealthy to avoid taxes. It doesn't, of course, consist of beneficiaries, so the poor are presented with no legal mechanisms for making a benefit actually stretch to be enough to live on in the post-Richardson era. And yet, make it stretch they must. Bury your head in the sand if you like, but reality still exists above the sand.

Gerald said...

I wonder if she thought it was better to admit it before announcing the policy after the Paula Bennet Facebook attack?

Waikikamukau News said...

Adolf, insurance does not work the way you seem to think it does.

If you have house insurance, you will have purchased cover for a lawnmower, even though you don't own one.

If you have car insurance, you will have purchased cover for a Ferrari, even though you own a beat up Corolla.

If you have life insurance, you will have purchased cover for people who die, even though you are still living.

That's how insurance works, pooling resources, spreading the risk.

You are drinking from the same poisoned chalice as John Shimkus (R-IL).

"Shimkus was responding to a question from Rep. Michael Doyle (D-PA), who asked a different colleague which mandates in Obamacare he took issue with.

“What about men having to purchase prenatal care?” Shimkus butted in. “Is that not correct? And should they?”

Says a man who benefited from prenatal care, who has a wife and children who similarly benefited.

He is in good company with Scott Perry, R-Dillsburg, who wants to pull up the drawbridge behind him.

"I don't want maternity care," Perry said during a recent meeting with Alissa Packer from Indivisible Action PA 4th and insurance actuary Stephanie Gray. "I have two children, and we're not having any more. I don't want to pay for maternity care."

Is there any one more self righteous, less human, and with a greater loathing of women than American Republicans? The only case I can think of is men who treat their wives as household slaves, referring to them as "The Cook".

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Kauwhaka you are a dickhead. Worse, you are a know nothing dickhead.

I think after twenty years as a broker I might know a little about the underlying principles. Clearly you don't.

The Veteran said...

PM ... are you arguing that a person claiming as a tax deduction money contributed to a charity with tax deductible status is on a par with a person claiming a welfare benefit they're not entitled to ... interesting logic.

Psycho Milt said...

I'm arguing that, just as when you make the top tax rate too high you get an increase in people finding ways to avoid paying so much tax, when you make benefits too low you get an increase in people finding ways to avoid having their benefits cut. The difference is that a wealthy person has a choice when it comes to whether they're going to find ways to avoid paying taxes or not - a beneficiary tossing up whether to be honest with WINZ or have enough to feed their kid effectively doesn't have a choice. The story here should be about the government inflicting that non-choice on beneficiaries, not the unsurprising fact that the beneficiaries go with feeding their kids over being honest with WINZ.

The most significant take-home message from this is that Metiria Turei is more honest than Paula Bennett about her time on the DPB.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Milt, as twists and turns go, that's a gold medal performance.

Psycho Milt said...

If benefits aren't enough to live on, beneficiaries will find ways to make ends meet. It's not a complicated or difficult concept, no matter how much you'd like to pretend it is.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

"If benefits aren't enough to live on, beneficiaries will find ways to make ends meet"

I take it you mean by giving up fast food, smoking, pokies and six stubbies per day?

Ciaron said...

... handed to them was taken FROM a person or company that earned it first,...

grumble grumble, no edit feature grumble grumble

Ciaron said...

If benefits aren't enough to live on, beneficiaries will find ways to make ends meet. It's not a complicated or difficult concept, no matter how much you'd like to pretend it is.

You're right... it's not a difficult concept. But then again neither is prioritizing your spending and going without luxuries so you can clothe the kids and keep the house warm. (I find it hard to believe that WINZ does not provide at least this level of assistance)

I'm not advocating the view that beneficiaries should live a life devoid of any pleasure, but it seems to me you are saying they have a right to be provided with a lifestyle that many people have to work their arse off for. lets not forget that every dollar handed to them was taken from a person or company that earned it first, and for a while there borrowed from foreign soil, and a bit of responsibility and gratitude wouldn't go amiss... make a change from "muh benefits" and "muh entitlements", cue shot of state house with sky dish, $10k+ car on finance with flash rims and kids with the latest PS/XBox.... sure, it's not all of them... but a good majority of the ones that I grew up around and went to school with.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

There you go, Ciaron. Fixed it for you.

Psycho Milt said...

That's a lovely fantasy, but it mostly depends on benefits being the 'day job' that covers for the actual money-making enterprises. You may find it hard to believe that beneficiaries who aren't part-time criminals can't make ends meet if WINZ goes docking their benefits, but you should believe it because it's happening all the time and beneficiaries do their best to prevent it happening. I notice Paula Bennett's been very careful with her wording in talking about this.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

so pray tell, Milt, why would WINZ dock their benefits?

Psycho Milt said...

Many and varied reasons, any of which could mean failing to pay the rent or failing to put food on the table. People who have lawyers and accountants fiddling their taxes for them find this kind of thing difficult to comprehend, for obvious reasons, but they also have no business looking down their noses at anybody. At least beneficiaries have a reason other than greed for trying to maximise their income.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Milt, you've missed your true vocation. Comedy calls.

If you want the classic example of greed, look no further than the corpulent co leader of the Greens party.

Anonymous said...

Ms Turei had no choice but to come clean! The axe above her head was held, not by another a Greenie fruit-loop but by NZ First.
There was nothing honourable nor dignified in her confession.

Cadwallader

The Realist said...

Her position within the Greens is untenable. I don't trust anyone with a law degree anyway

The Veteran said...

Realist ... got that on your 'Shingle' ... just askin.