View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 18th November 2009, 11:25 PM
Bruce Bruce is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 51
Default

I think I've figured, part of it at least, out. The reason John Key is so determined to pass this legislation - perhaps at the cost of his career - is that he is being blackmailed.

I think that is what this little paragraph in a news item of today, is saying:

"Key told farmers at the council meeting that they needed to realise that unless New Zealand had an ETS that included agriculture then international consumers would boycott their products".


However, it said something else as well, something that most of us have known only too well for some time now:

"Taxpayers are yet to wake up to the fact that the ETS is a three-letter word for tax,''

This is amazing. How selfish and greedy can you get? He is expecting farmers to pay to "cover his butt", and he is telling them "it is 'ONLY' $3000 that is being stolen from you for this stupid scam that we are too obsequious and weak-kneed to stand up against. Now we could steal more, so just be happy that we're not". Remind you of Al Cappone and his protection racket?

This attitude is just about as greedy as Helen Clark's famously silly statement when she signed the Kyoto protocol of "NZ doesn't want to miss out".

However, I found his other statements incredible, especially this one:

"The ETS would only cost the average farmer about $3000 a year by 2020 under latest estimates, Key said, which was less than the average farm would pay in ACC levies. "I think you should be much more relaxed about that."

And you know what's even more amazing? He went on to claim that the ET scam is really all about "environmentalism".

Either John Key is incredibly stupid (far too stupid to be prime minister) or he is a skilled and calculating liar. I don't know which is worse.

Here's the link to the news story that I got this from:

Fed Farmers president slams emissions scheme | Stuff.co.nz

Last edited by Bruce; 18th November 2009 at 11:29 PM.
Reply With Quote