Todays rant - right wing BS - ACT

ACT is NZs most liberal party and shares most right wing with NZ First.

It wants neo liberalism on steroids. More privatisation and less government regulation. You know all the things thats made economies worse under neo liberalism.

But they cant say that and have to use emotive flowery stories rather than fact to sway people into more bad ides.

Ive described why hes wrong on his Treaty Principals Bill separately.

Lets look at this video Labour have moved radically left

This is what i detest about these lying right wing pricks esp ACT and NZ First

@9m15s - taxing wealth in capital is couched as "your problems are the success of others and they are ill gotten gains and the system must be torn down and its not evolutionary but revolutionary" - This is right wing rhetoric and lies that are emotional populist garbage designed to appeal to the ignorant and stupid.

Its not surprising studys show those on the right have lower emotional intelligence and its appealing to this.

Taxing capital is good . Its just not good for rich people . He can disagree and honestly argue that taxing capital is bad but hes not. He uses vague fear mongering narratives that arent factual or can be debated but just called BULLSHIT . I would be happy if Labour and greens are socialist but they are not - Socialists would tear down the capitalism to make an economy that is commonly owned - but Labour and Greens only want to reform capitalism . Neither party have the common ownership of the means of production distribution and exchange in their constitution as a goal.

Yes the socialists are radical as thats how the left are defined -radical and progressive - but NZ Labour party isnt radical or progressive . The Greens certainly arent radical. Just as Bernie Sanders who called himself a socialist, wasnt a socialist as he advocated no socialist policys but USA was too politically illiterate to recognise that.

Not even the most radical Karl Marx who described the rotten capitalist system (Seymour wants more of) did not describe it that way. He describe private property as power , that capitalists accumulated that wealth because they were in a broken system just as much as the wage slave and had to compete to survive. It was neither a moral or emotional argument .

As outlined here https://www.act.org.nz/democracy

David Seymour's School Lunch Rhetoric

It seems ACT leader David Seymour is adopting US right-wing derogatory rhetoric, a move previously associated more with NZ First.  Its a manipulation tactic. He's labelled aspects of the government school lunch program as "woke," which is a concerning turn.

One new Is sushi mainstream? Foodies on Seymour's 'woke foods' remark

NZ Herald Editorial: School lunches smack of beggars can’t be choosers

Problems with his Seymour's rhetoric;

1. Misuse of terminology: Applying the term "woke" to food demonstrates a misunderstanding or intentional misuse of the term. Food simply isn't "woke."

2. Lack of substantive critique: By relying on buzzwords, Seymour fails to provide a fact-based argument against the current lunch program.

3. Potential for misleading rhetoric: This approach mirrors tactics used by right-wing groups in the US and NZ First, potentially manipulating public opinion without actually addressing any real issues.

Nutritional Concerns

The arguments not about health its about cost to taxpayers. Seymour has not provided what he said he would ie fruit and sandwich's.  Ironically, some of the alternatives proposed by Seymour are less healthy. With concerns about the quality of ingredients, particularly the use of non-organic chicken that  contain harmful additives.