Jamie Whyte

Liam Hehir on Gareth Morgan

Liam Hehir writes at the Manawatu?Standard:

Two seemingly unrelated things that happened in the last couple of weeks strike me as a good illustration of the problems with how we talk to each other in relation to public affairs.

The first involved Gareth Morgan. A little while ago, the economist-turned-politician proposed taxing all house owners on the equity in their home. Unsurprisingly, more than a few people objected to this idea.

One of those people was former ACT leader Jamie Whyte, who penned a critique of the plan. The nub of the criticism was that Morgan had been operating under a category error by classifying the benefit of home ownership as income rather than consumption. Whyte argued the logic of Morgan’s tax would have silly and impractical applications for the wider economy. And referring to an earlier televised debate between Morgan and Paul Henry on the subject, Whyte argued Henry had the better of the discussion. ? Read more »

It’s a scandal! Man holds same views for ten years. Outrage!

The NZ Herald has attacked Jamie Whyte for the apparent crime of being self-plagiarising.?How does that even become a problem?

You can’t plagiarise yourself.

You really do have to wonder at the sanctimony of a newspaper who has been running repeat articles all holidays moaning like a whore that hasn’t been paid about someone who it seems holds the same views he held ten years ago.

What’s worse? Jamie Whyte holding the same views he did 10 years ago, or the Herald going all in on a misleading story from a drunk slapper who claimed she’d been hit because she spoke Te Reo?

Think about the outrage here for a moment. If a politician changes his views 10 years later he’s a screaming hypocrite, but if he espouses the same views ten years later he’s a self-plagiarist?

Our readers are onto it.

Metalinwood says:

What rubbish by the herald. They often pull out articles that have already been published and republish them again a year later. What is the difference?

Or when they take an article from a british newspaper and it looks like it was written locally because its not clear where it came from other than the author that you would have to look up to know?

How many political articles by John Armstrong over the years are the same thing, self plagiarism? Plenty. Amazed to hear them say they would not take it on if they had known.

It appears if you want to make comment about a situation in different countries you will have to choose which country you want to write about first as the second will just be plain plagiarism of the first!

Read more »

There is no poverty in New Zealand


Seems that it’s not just me who has the balls the say it. ?But Jamie Whyte goes the extra mile by articulating exactly why this is so.

There is no poverty in New Zealand. Misery, depravity, hopelessness, yes; but no poverty.

The poorest in New Zealand are the unemployed. They receive free medical care, free education for their children and enough cash to pay for basic food, clothing and (subsidised) housing. Most have televisions, refrigerators and ovens. Many even own cars.

That isn’t poverty.

It certainly isn’t. ?Especially when poverty is defined as something where you can’t afford a takeaway once a month, you have no access to the Internet from home and you can’t afford a basic holiday each year. ?I mean, that’s just getting absurd. ? Read more »


When it is holiday, the minor MPs will play

Stuart Nash has used the media’s thirst for content to push various messages of late, one of them being that the Overseas Investment’s Office needs to implement audits on foreigners who bought properties under the condition it would generate an economic benefit to the country.

On the surface of it, this seems entirely fair, until you think it through a little, and come to the penalty or enforcement portion: ?do you take the properties off them again? ? Nash, cleverly, left that unsaid.

ACT’s ex-candidate Jamie White equally brought joy to media still on holiday skeleton crews when he penned a response to Nash’s proposal.

If you want to sell your farm to a foreigner, you must get permission from the Overseas Investment Office (OIO). They usually give it. Indeed, they decline only 1.5% of requests.

According to Stuart Nash, the new Labour MP for Napier, they should decline more, because allowing foreigners to take profits out of the country is a ?dead end street.”

Last week William Rolleston, president of the Federated Farmers expressed agreement with Mr Nash.

Both are confused, as was David Cunliffe and many other politicians who peddled the same idea during the election campaign.

When a foreigner buys a New Zealand business, all the expected future profits of the business come into the country in the purchase price. When the actual future profits then go out to the new owner overseas, there is no net loss.

In fact, the transaction must involve a net gain for New Zealand. By hypothesis, no New Zealander valued the future profits as high as the foreigner did. Otherwise the foreigner would not have been the highest bidder. So the amount any foreign purchaser pays for a farm or other business must exceed the present value of its future earnings to any New Zealander.

In other words, there must be a net gain to the country. And this gain is easily measured: it is the difference between what the foreigner paid and the highest bid from a Kiwi.

Read more »


Whyte quits ACT leadership [UPDATED]

?Today I announce that I have tendered, and the Board has accepted, my resignation as Leader of ACT New Zealand,” Dr Whyte said in a statement.

?Clearly I make this announcement with regret, however the election result is clear, and I must now turn to my career and my family.

?I stood to lead ACT because I believe in the party?s ideas.? I will continue to advance these ideas both inside and outside the Party.? I do not rule out returning to a substantial role with ACT in the future.?

I’m sorry for Jamie, but I’m glad that apart from the idiots that voted for the Conservative Party, at least ACT party voters knew the pain of splitting their vote and watching a left Government sail down the middle.

ACT has been on life support for some time. ?If it wants to live for the next election, it must start campaigning now. ?Whyte resigning is not the right move.

Read more »

Poverty on the rise, income gap widening? Nope. Just a left mantra without a basis in fact

I have to admit, ACT are actually doing what the media should be doing – researching opposition claims and countering them with hard facts. ?Try this one on for size:

?A Roy Morgan poll shows that the issue people are most concerned about is income inequality. This just goes to show how the persistent repetition of a lie bewilders the public. Income inequality is not in fact rising. And the child poverty rate has been declining for nearly 20 years, falling from 35% in 1994 to 16% in 2007 and recently returning to pre-global financial crisis levels in 2012? said Dr Whyte.

?Those who advocate socialism have exploited the public?s concern about a rising number of people being trapped into a cycle of dependency. The Left?s repeated claims that New Zealand is getting more unequal are simply false and divert attention from policies that would help people out of dependency.

?Prior to the recent recession, there were 15 years of steady growth in median household incomes driven, in part, by the steady increase in the number of two-parent households where both parents are in paid employment (3% pa).


Read more »

ACT’s at the Conservative’s throat again – but with good reason


It’s getting tense for the far right conservative and liberal votes. ?And it doesn’t help that Coling Craig can’t use a calculator

?Colin Craig?s tax plan is to have two rates of income tax: 0% up to $20,000 and 25% above that. This will leave a $6.4 billion hole in the budget even before the new spending proposed by the Conservatives. The Conservative tax promises are dishonest? said Dr Jamie Whyte.
?Using Treasury figures, ACT calculated that to get the same revenues with a tax-free threshold of $20,000 the rate above $20,000 would have to be 34%, a significant tax increase for middle New Zealand. Read more »

ACT go feral on Colin Craig

Heh. ?One shitty poll result and Jamie Whyte’s losing his lunch. ? This is beautiful:

Colin Craig is deluded and dangerous

?Colin Craig is proposing a radical transformation of our constitution. The Conservatives are proposing to overthrow of one hundred and fifty odd years of parliamentary democracy and replace it with binding referenda? said ACT Leader Dr Jamie Whyte.

?Yet Craig does not want a referendum to make this change. He has said repeatedly he will support a Labour/Green government if they will agree to binding referendum. In other words, Colin Craig thinks that if he gets just 5% of the vote, he should be able to overthrow our form of government.?

?If anything should be put to a referendum, it is a significant change to our constitution.?

?The media should stop mocking Craig?s loopy ideas about ?chem-trails? and the American moon landings being faked and instead examine his much more radical political ideas? said Dr Whyte.

?Binding referendums have destroyed California.? It has gone from being the powerhouse of America to being ungovernable.?

?The problem with government by referendum can be seen in Colin Craig?s own policy platform.? He says totally contradictory things.?

The Conservative Party have made Citizen Initiated Binding Referenda a “bottom line” issue. ?That is, they won’t form a coalition with any party unless that party agrees to bring in CIBRs. ? Read more »

Rodney Hide writes to Susan Devoy

Rodney is disappointed and writes to Susan Devoy to tell her why:

Dear Dame Susan,

I cheered from the sidelines when you were named Race Relations Commissioner. I thought you would bring sense to a nonsense job.

Having you as commissioner was the next best thing to eliminating the role.

But now you have used your office to attack ACT leader Jamie Whyte. That?s an abuse of your position and resources. You must have figured ACT was a soft target.

Your attack demonstrated the stupidity of your role. You called Dr Whyte?s reasoning for justice to be blind to skin colour ?grotesque and inflammatory.?

In your topsy-turvy world calling for an end to racism is racist.

It was a bizarre statement, more likely than not prepared by some muppet for her to sign off.

We are not all the same. We vary in our genes and our dispositions. The difference makes life interesting. A world of clones would be a dull old affair.

And some people through talent, hard work and luck do better than others. You should know this better than anyone.

You won the British Open Squash Championship eight times. We didn?t say it?s time for Australia to have a win and give Liz Irving a three-point start. Or worse, that everyone should be ?exactly the same? and not keep score.

There would be no drama, no interest, no striving, no achievement. No one would train or put in any effort. There would be no point.

That?s the trouble with trying to make everyone the same. Killing individuality kills initiative.

Read more »

So, turns out, ACT is still a farce

A while ago I wrote an article on why I no longer vote ACT. ?On paper I am an ACT voter. ?But I have found two basic problems with it over the years. ?One, I, among other ACT voters, probably?let a Labour Government sneak in by not voting for National. ?And two, the infighting and basic lack of skill of its personnel have been plain for all to see.

Jamie Whyte has been signaled as ACTs savior. ?The ‘resurrector’ of the ACT party.

It all didn’t start out very well when he philosophically mused about cousins marrying cousins… which, incidentally, would align with ACT’s principles of staying out of people’s lives. ?But it showed a political immaturity that knocked him down before the bell for the first round had even rung.

I do think the voters as well as the media gave ACT and Jamie a chance to redeem themselves. ? A process that was hard going but progressing in the right direction.

Until this week.

Act leader Jamie Whyte says his speech outlining his party’s opposition to the legal privilege it claims Maori enjoy should have come as no surprise to anybody, least of all Dunedin North candidate Guy McCallum, who has quit over the matter.

Mr McCallum yesterday confirmed Otago University student magazine Critic’s report he had resigned from Act’s board and as Dunedin North candidate over the speech and was considering resigning his membership. He also told the Herald others in the party were uncomfortable with the “one-law-for-all” policy articulated by Dr Whyte. Read more »