Key’s badly dented “political antennae” took another solid beating yesterday, with his second high-profile bungle involving a waitress. This time, thankfully, the waitress was only hypothetical:
John Key draws flak after questioning why waitresses’ taxes should fund students
Prime Minister John Key has drawn a barrage of criticism after questioning if Labour’s fee free study policy was fair on waitresses who would be paying tax to subsidise students.
His comments also drew a quick response from some critics on social media who drew the link with Key’s repeated pulling of Auckland cafe waitress Amanda Bailey’s ponytail.
Key has made his attitude to waitresses clear, so it was both hypocritical and stupid of him to pose one as an example and invite a revisiting of his ponytail pulling harassment.
Speaking on TVNZ’s Breakfast show Key asked: “How much should the waitress … how much of her taxes should go to a student who will absolutely earn a lot more?”
…
Labour leader Andrew Little said Key should tell waitresses why they weren’t part of his ambitions for New Zealand.“In reality waitresses – and indeed waiters – will be among the big winners in our Working Futures Plan. It is low-wage workers who are turned off training and study because of the mountain of debt they will come out with.” Like many workers they faced uncertain futures and many would want or need to retrain. “For years the Prime Minister has been telling us he is ‘ambitious for New Zealand’. Waitresses should be part of that.”
An obvious and appropriate response. As is the question for Key – why should the hypothetical worker’s taxes be used to fund roads they may never drive on, services they may never need, excessive politician’s wages and the like (in short it’s a silly game to play).
Henry Maddocks Tweeted “How much should the waitress pay for the salary of the millionaire PM who’s is going to pull her hair?”, while Josh Barr Tweeted: “if all the waitresses are at uni, there’ll be no ponytails around to pull”.
But Key said at his post cabinet press conference on Tuesday: “Well I’m not not going to not talk about waitresses for the rest of the time, I am Prime Minister.”
Keep reminding people of your crappy behaviour and inviting ridicule? Sure, sounds like a great idea to me…
PM: "I'm not going to NOT talk about waitresses for the rest of the time I'm Prime Minister". OK then.
— stories from the city (@mizjwilliams) February 2, 2016
obviously no student ever waited tables, and no waitress (waiters obviously needn’t apply) ever went to study.
Give the man a ponytail. He needs a bit of tug play.
And n waitress has ever had children who have been deterred from going to university because of the cost.
I agree with John Key – it is important we increase the tax burden on multi-millionaires like him, not waitresses, to pay for free education.
Looks like the nats have had their first focus group meetings and huddle with the PR firms. Strategy 1 is to peddle the ‘tax is theft’ line while implying tax must come from poor people, not the under-taxed rich.
Wait a couple of days for strategy 2…
and getting Labour to state categorically that they will be raising taxes…..which will be the meme…..Labour ,the tax and spend party….as opposed to the tax cut and fiscally responsible party (never mind the lack of public services or deficit)
Yes, one day soon Labour or the Greens should have honest and open discussion about tax and services. Labour tends to minimise the obvious connection between services and tax, presumably from fear of the right’s vacuous but effective PR machine. Instead we get the nonsense of the government miraculously providing services, while in an unrelated matter, stealing tax.
“Tax and spend” is an empty and derisory slogan that ignores the fact that levying taxes and providing services is an essential part of a decent society. Bernie Sanders is opening some honest discussion on this, hopefully it spreads to NZ.
If you want examples of low tax and small government – look to the third world.
+1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP
Have a look at some of the work the GP has done on tax. They’re developing new ways of taxing that are fairer, but also relevant to the way the economy and society works now.
IMO they can’t run on a big tax increase for their first election term. After 3 terms of National, and a strong National PR machine, Labour can’t risk looking like the big-taxing party. However, when they are campaigning for their 2nd term, I think they should be promising major tax increases on the wealthy and strong increases in spending on public services.
Little has said that they will be conducting a tax review in their 1st term based on fairness, and will then take the policies to voters in 2020. Which is fair enough.
+1 UncookedSelachimorpha – although I am more worried about the undertaxed corporates….. and even more so about the corporate welfare….
PM has obviously never worked in hospo. Sees them (especially the female workers) as a lower class of NZers.
“J Key, bringing up a subject then refusing to talk about it since 2006”
Funny, I’m sure I remember Bill English making political mileage out of his assertion that low-waged workers don’t pay tax at all.
This from Hansard:
Perhaps the Prime Minister is, y’know, lying.
What I couldn’t get over is – surely the dolt remembered the scathing attacks he had over pulling the waitress ponytail ? Why on earth did he use a waitress description to slag against Labour’s education policy ? Maybe a psychologist could give us an answer !
Probably a psychologist or strategist in a well-paid PR firm made this decision…it might not be a coincidence.
John Key – every Waitress’s new best friend.
freudian slip
John Key plays the long game, the left are just too impatient. As an example remember when just prior to the budget John Key was making noises about having no money in the budget and Little started going on about how poor National were
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/68502332/Andrew-Little-Government-recklessly-complacent
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11451927
and then Bill English pulls this out:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/68742199/Budget-2015-Benefits-rise-in-bid-to-tackle-child-poverty
So in one fell swoop Labour and Andrew Little are made to look foolish (again) so in this I see something similar happening.
The soundbite people will remember from this is under Labour hairdressers will be paying for other peoples tertiary education but and its a pretty big but it won’t be the last thing mentioned on this and John Key will keep drip feeding everything wrong with the policy and it’ll build up in peoples minds
Then National will unveil an improved version and the voters will be convinced that the nice Mr Key and the competent Mr English have a firm grip on the levers of power
But hey you guys keep letting yourselves get distracted by trivialities its all good
“Hairdressers”? Do you like the PM have ponytails on your mind 24/7? I think when the PM mentions waitresses most people remember the PM likes to pull their ponytails.
Turns out adding to this site and trying to work at the same time doesn’t always work out the way I think it will
Just sub waitress for hair dresser
So we now know what the next line will be, the poor old hairdressers are paying for tertiary education too! Next will be the builders & plumbers, service station attendants and so on…
and the left will be side tracked (again) and john Key wins another term and the left will wonder why they didn’t win
and so it goes
Then we will drown in debt and be serfs to our corporate overlords who will zoom around in their air chariots and eat and drink only the most expensive champagne and caviar.
http://i.bittwiddlers.org/b/K7G
http://i.bittwiddlers.org/b/L0A
I actually laughed over that
Glad to have made your day :p
I reckon that just because people disagree on politics doesn’t when you can’t share a laugh over something funny
http://imgur.com/lywLXdV
So you think hairdressers who get their training at a Polytech won’t benefit from not having to pay for their own tertiary education?
Yeah but that’s not the point, the point that John Key is wanting to stick in peoples minds is that under Labour poorer people will be paying for people to get better careers
And he’s correct, because that’s exactly what Labour’s proposal means.
Yes, under Labour’s proposal, poor people will be paying for people to get better careers (and so will rich people) and also not paying to give rich people more money.
Of course the people getting a better career are generally those same poor people paying for it, but now they can afford it (as they are paying no additional tax.) Unless I missed the bit in Little’s speech where he said that people on minimum wage won’t be eligible? Or was there a bit where he said he would raise taxes on the poor and not the rich? Must of missed those points…
What Labour have said is that everyone will forgo tax cuts to pay for universal tertiary education. Everyone. Put simply, a labourer will pay more tax so that Russell Coutts’ kids can get a free tertiary education.
no – EVERYONE will pay THE SAME tax so that EVERYONES kids can go to uni for free
you dont pay more tax by not getting a reduction
isnt this the second time in this thread youve tried that line?
“…you dont pay more tax by not getting a reduction”
Yes, you do. If the choice is between a tax cut or not to subsidise wealthy peoples kids education, that is paying more.
Not only that, but taxes will almost certainly have to increase to fund the likelihood that Labour have underestimated the cost.
“… to subdise everyone’s education..”
Fixed it for you
The only reason that the cost will balloon is if more people than expected take it up, which would indicate that it was indeed an excellent policy.
Agree, I’d think the labourer would definitely prefer a tax cut, especially with how expensive it is to rent these days.
More money in his/her back pocket the better.
Coutts’ kids can pay their own way.
Pity said labourer can’t pay for his own kid to go to uni with his extra $20 from the tax cut. He will just have to build the Coutts’s new house as they play their new play station and go on luxury holidays with their extra $5000 they get in the tax breaks…
yep the Labourer is really winning on the deal from national!
His kid may not want to go to uni
This may come as a shock to many on here, but not every one can or wants to go to university.
Some people like to work with their hands, do more physical work or they’re more than happy doing cleaning or other less mentally taxing stuff.
You know, all those working class people the left likes to champion.
Why should they pay for someone else to go to uni?
That maybe, but not all kids of labourers will also want to just use their hands; and in any case as these people grow up they may want to retrain or change careers, and now they can do so without massing a big debt.
Unless of course some other party comes along and scraps it all; then yes these hypothetical people of yours will have paid for rich people to go to uni, and then will pay for rich people to get a tax cut and will pay for rich people to go to hospital and pay for rich people to go on holiday. But then again they do all this now anyway…
their own kid can have a chance to get an free apprenticeship or a tertiary education.
Fixed your stupid misunderstanding.
Ooh I can’t wait for my $5 extra a week while the people on $200 k get $100 out of a national tax cut.
“His kid may not want to go to uni”
its called a technical institute ya clown
you know full of mechanics,builders, engineers all those “handsy” jobs
Yeah – National’s tax cuts will be structured to favour high earners.
But Labour leaves itself open to BM’s silly meme about the poor paying for the education of the rich, by not stating that taxation will also be made more progressive. So 3 years free tertiary is universal, no problem. If in time tertiary education leads to individuals earning higher incomes (which we hope it does) they will pay a little more tax to fund the next generation through their tertiary education.
This produces inter-generational fairness, and a society with a long-term focus on the well-being of all its citizens.
The mind-set of short-term acquisitiveness characterised by BM has done so much damage already – it has to stop.
tertiary education included apprenticeships it doesn’t mean university
“Yeah but that’s not the point
Surely you’re going to get tired of seeing politics as a game soon and go get another hobby?
http://bit.ly/johnkeysociopath
I really think if you are going to put the idea of dating Key in people’s mind you should post a warning first.
I went home with the waitress
Just like I always do
How was I to know
She was with the Russians too
Now I’m Hiding in Hawaii
I’m a desperate man
Send lawyers guns and money
The shit has hit the fan.
Warren Zevon
I like SM
Waitresses and waiters also pay tax towards buying multi million dollar NZ residences in New York and Hawaii and Saudi sheep farms and abattoirs. But that’s quite ok apparently.
Key is testing new attack lines to give his internal pollsters something to work with. I figure it is 18 months to the next election, tops.
And probably more like 16 months.
“Key calls snap election on the waitress issue” – great epitaph.
Hmmm, probably not far from the mark.
Key will be watching economic indicators, most especially house sales in Auckland, like a hawk. And launching election on that basis. For sure.
He wouldn’t want it to be after or during the trial of a certain prominent New Zealander whose name is -mmmmph mmmmmph!
What I’d love to know is if the choice of waitress was intentional or if it was Key’s sociopathic hubris channeling through.
Yesterday I asked one of his social media promotional team, Puckish Rogue (Fisiani is on leave), how the choice of waitress fitted in with Key’s alleged genius and master plan, but he has yet to answer.
Copied from above (though I subbed waitress for hairdresser)
John Key plays the long game, the left are just too impatient. As an example remember when just prior to the budget John Key was making noises about having no money in the budget and Little started going on about how poor National were
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/68502332/Andrew-Little-Government-recklessly-complacent
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11451927
and then Bill English pulls this out:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/68742199/Budget-2015-Benefits-rise-in-bid-to-tackle-child-poverty
So in one fell swoop Labour and Andrew Little are made to look foolish (again) so in this I see something similar happening.
The soundbite people will remember from this is under Labour waitresses will be paying for other peoples tertiary education but and its a pretty big but it won’t be the last thing mentioned on this and John Key will keep drip feeding everything wrong with the policy and it’ll build up in peoples minds
Then National will unveil an improved version and the voters will be convinced that the nice Mr Key and the competent Mr English have a firm grip on the levers of power
But hey you guys keep letting yourselves get distracted by trivialities its all good
But in regards to the waitress thing specifically my guess is that its a job that requires minimum training, no qualifications and its a job most people can relate to through either doing the job or being served
ffs, you can’t ignore the Ponytail in the living room. My request for an explanation of the genius masterplan is entirely in that context.
on that front – i reckon your right
I mean its not hard to figure if you’ve watched any politics at all over the last 15 years or so
But will Labour be able to counter National, I hope so because it’ll make the run up to the election more interesting
What do you mean, should Labour follow Gnat’s line but go one better. They could go around houses of wealthy young women not just waitresses, chanting ‘Rapunzel Rapunzel let down your hair’. (All the women have long hair these days – just watch Castle on TV – soon it will be down to their knees)
It’d be an improvement on what Labour have been doing for the last couple of years
Nah he’s like a puerile schoolboy smirking at what he can get away with.
The quoting of Nazi “nothing to fear, nothing to hide” when increasing surveillance
The use of the phrase “intimate knowledge” when talking about a sexual assault
It’s a particularly nasty and cruel form of wankiness. The humour of those who are bastards in charge in charge is not normally pleasant.
I’ve come across it many times – he’s just another one.
Yay we can make more money
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2778523/Gas-boss-jokes-about-making-more-money-as-energy-prices-soar.html
Be creative
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/feb/05/enron.usnews
Burn, baby burn
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/enron-traders-caught-on-tape/
Racist jokes
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11568617
Hunger games
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/clothing-boss-who-mocked-sacked-5917792
gotta wonder when was the last time the PM had a coffee WITHOUT any extra “fluid” in it ?
“Waitress, there’s a hair in my coffee!”
“I’m sorry – do you want more?”
rofl.
so glad you are back Rhinocrates.
Served in this:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/M%C3%A9ret_Oppenheim_Object.jpg
Train spotting style!!
How many Waitress taxes going to prop up the Saudi Business sheep farms?
“How many Waitress taxes going to prop up the Saudi Business sheep farms?
Or SCF, rio tinto
Watching the ADHD children of the left hyperactively jumping around from manufactured waitress outrage to manufactured Waitangi outrage to manufactured something else outrage while arrangements are quietly being made to sign the TPPA literally in the centre of Auckland.
+1 Magisterium – totally agree – think it should be the ONLY thing on the blogs – don’t give in to distraction tactics!
Nothing more ‘manufactured’ than Nationals ‘dirty politics’.
magisterium@12.26pm
Even if something is signed in the centre of Auckland it has no real meaning yet as regards the TPPA, (see clip of Lori Wallach on open mike 1.2.16). Unless it means something to the conniving nats. in that they have found a way to change more laws to suit themselves.
There will also be a peaceful protest march down Queen Street to Britomart tomorrow meeting at Aotea Square @ 12noon for a 12.30pm start for both adults and their actual gorgeous children.
Please go to TPPlegal.com to see the really greedy and unscrupulous children in this…
Messrs. Key, Groser and co.
Q:Why do we have long living Rock Stars
A: So we dont have to suffer the arrogance of politicians forever ,esp
John F Key
Can someone translate?
An idiot with foot and mouth disease. One thing you got to give Helen, she was far more professional than that.
Typical hun brained statement from a person who is trained to have all boxes working independently of each other so that they cant be inclusive of each other as a whole
IE The waitress might also be a student who will not pull up the ladder after she becomes better off and able to influence the life of others in a more just way than some we know who cant even see that the world is not flat and that there politics in relation to humanity could be put on the head of a pin and hopefully prick her balloon arsed brain
And ponytail pullin idiots who are suppose to represent leadership should stop trying to stir shit by using their own shortcomings as a pathway to some viability in their shortsighted alcohol soaked personality that I wouldnt give 2bucks to a single sound byte of their inadequate leadership of this nation
Just goes to show=you can indeed be an idiot AND get a college education