Comments by "John Donwood" (@johndonwood4305) on "Q+A with Jack Tame" channel.

  1. 157
  2. 16
  3. 14
  4. 14
  5. 12
  6. 12
  7. 11
  8. 8
  9. 8
  10. 7
  11. 7
  12. 7
  13. 7
  14. 6
  15. 6
  16. Very narrow debate. Firstly, if people stopped sleeping around and were more responsible, then abortion wouldn't be such a problem. Secondly, people have been demoralised and degraded by a decadent culture pushed on them by big media that has made certain lifestyles previously considered immoral decades ago now acceptable. Thirdly, the abortion industry is worth millions in the US and aborted baby fetuses are important to big food because aborted fetuses are added to foods for flavour (Senomyx HEK293). Then there is the fact that doctors/GPs are on the payroll of big pharma and it is certain that Dr Knowles is too. More to the point is that we are a society that does not value life, not only of the unborn but also of the living as well. When many hardworking kiwis are living in poverty and in conditions of squalor, then it becomes very easy to view the next generation of human beings as disposable. Indeed, New Zealand's birth rate is low and the suicide rate is high. New Zealand's birth rate is so low that it has got to the point where the government has decided to "import" kiwis. This is the result of the global depopulation agenda 21/2030. I find it interesting that at 4:33 Dr Knowles claims not to be an "ethicist" when doctors swear by the Hippocratic oath to do no harm which just shows the absolute disregard of human life. Dr Knowles represents the tyrrany of bureaucracy because the very essence of the law is the standard by which bureaucracies operate. Thus the abortion dillemma is not necessarily about pro-life or pro-choice but that the very life of humans is now the life of bureaucracies and this is evident in how much of what Dr Knowles says reflects not her personal opinion but that of big pharma and big medical.
    6
  17. 6
  18. 5
  19. 5
  20. 5
  21. 5
  22. 4
  23. 4
  24. She seems bitter about Trump who appeared interested in moving into politics and then backing out. Clark has been opposition leader for a few years until she was elected Prime Minister in 1999 while Trump's entrance into politics was successful. The reason why she seems troubled by Trump's use of social media is because he speaks directly to the electorate and not through the press. Why should the media have the monopoly of news and information? After her time at the UN, Clark seems keen to do what the other nations are doing but this means that government policy does not reflect the distinct (distinct, but deteriorating) New Zealand culture. Clark seems more focussed on New Zealand as within a region of the world THAN as a sovereign nation. What other countries are doing politically at present is the result of what they've done in the past. Clark only suggests what doesn't work by comparing what the government is doing to what is being done overseas. What is happening in New Zealand? The high teen pregnancy rate? High suicide rate? High mental illness rate? High reoffending rate? When the previous government shut down schools and hospitals, they also shut down the communities built around them. Society (which Thatcher said doesn't exist) was left to fend for itself and the result was more dependance on this government. People were left to do as they please as long as they didn't break the law and it's the decadence and decay that resulted now puts pressure on the police and the justice system. Why complain about the decandent society when morals and ethics, religious or secular, have been heavily criticised by films, television, popular academics? The last government used the NCEA system and national standards to create a culture of mediocrity. PhDs are given out for almost anything these days as long as they don't question the status quo. I know of one professor who didn't even know what conservative politics was. The public and the system are both rotting.
    4
  25. 4
  26. 4
  27. 4
  28. 4
  29. 4
  30. 4
  31. 4
  32. So when National demands a think tank, it's forward thinking. But when Labour, Greens and NZ First do the same, it's a talk-fest. Whatever. National wants a business approach but the Greens want a public consensus. Can't trust Muller at 5:50, his party under Key denied Mike Joy's warning that the rivers and lakes were toxic during an interview with the BBC. There's no point in trying to make New Zealand's meat and dairy environmentally safe when sending them on container ships around the world actually harms the environment. I don't mind a bipartisan approach but Muller seems excited and that makes me feel like he has an ulterior motive. The concern is that by working alongside businesses, the plan is to let businesses gradually take control of the project off the government's hands in order to increase profits over sustainability. On the other hand, working with business ensures progress considering the huge unpopularity of the Clark government's "Fart tax". They both are interested in cooperating but for different reasons. Muller seems to think that if the project succeeds it could be used to turn back on the government and let National take all the credit. It's clear that they differ in their intentions; Shaw at 9:54 wants to deal only with the problems that have arisen while Muller at 10:38 wants to proceed quickly to innovation and technology. The fact that Muller says that New Zealand produces a high amount of food suggests that he is profit driven. It seems that this "independent" working group that Muller suggested at the start of the interview seems biased against the government already. Muller is protecting the gentry from any real discomfort, political or otherwise by getting businesses as a partner which Shaw correctly diganoses at 12:47. Basically the impression one gets from Muller at 13:31 is to hand everything over to the private sector to "wrestle emissions down by sector" by taking executive authority over future governments. What exactly is Muller getting at? Shaw, don't trust Muller too much.
    4
  33. 4
  34. 4
  35. 4
  36. 4
  37. 4
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3