If National wins ...

[craic]

The bet is for one thousand NZ dollars. My bet is that: Following the next general election, in2014, NZ will be governed by a National Party Prime Minister and his party and associates and that the opposition will be led by a Labour Party leader and his associates. The money is to be deposited with your nominee by 31 August 2014 or earlier if changes to the election dictate an earlier date. I suggest you nominate a referee, possibly from this site.

[Cuzzie]

Breaking news ........... Seven major Hollywood movie studios have filed a massive copyright infringement lawsuit against Megaupload and its founder Kim Dotcom.

The film companies filed the legal action through the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), which made the announcement this morning New Zealand time.

He is personally named in the indictment, which claims Megaupload and its key operators "facilitated, encouraged, and profited from massive copyright infringement of movies and television shows'' before it was shut down in 2012.

Dotcom is already facing extradition to the United States on criminal copyright and racketeering charges in relation to the now defunct file sharing website.

Today major studios 20th Century Fox, Disney, Paramount, Universal, Columbia Pictures and Warner Bros filed claims in the Virginia federal court.

It named the defendants as Megaupload, majority shareholder Vester Ltd, Dotcom, chief technical officer Mathias Ortmann, and programmer Bram van der Kolk.

"When Megaupload.com was shut down in 2012 by US law enforcement, it was by all estimates the largest and most active infringing website targeting creative content in the world,'' MPAA global general counsel Steven Fabrizio said in a statement.

"Infringing content on Megaupload.com and its affiliates was available in at least 20 languages, targeting a broad global audience. According to the government's indictment, the site reported more than US$175 million in criminal proceeds and cost US copyright owners more than half a billion dollars.''

The companies are seeking profits and maximum statutory damages.

Megaupload was built on an incentive system which rewarded users for uploading the most popular content on the site, "which was almost always stolen movies, TV shows and other commercial entertainment content'', Mr Fabrizio continued.

"Megaupload wasn't a cloud storage service at all, it was an unlawful hub for mass distribution.

"To be clear, if a user uploaded his term paper to store it, he got nothing ... But if that same user uploaded a stolen full-length film that was repeatedly infringed, he was paid for his efforts.

"That's not a storage facility; that's a business model designed to encourage theft - and make its owners very rich in the process.

"There's nothing new or innovative about that. That's just a profiteer using existing technology to try to get rich off of someone else's hard work.''

Dotcom has tweeted about the new lawsuit, saying: "Breaking: The @MPAA is suing me & #Megaupload.''

He included a link to a white paper written by his defence team, entitled Megaupload, the Copyright Lobby and the Future of Digital Rights.

[Sgt Pepper]

This policy on foreign investment from WP is yet another play on racism, nothing else. Any policy to do what he proposes would be so full of holes that it would be unworkable and costly to administer. It would achieve nothing.

I really fail to see how you can possibly believe that WP can work effectively in a serious Government alongside the Greens. He may dislike John Key but he hates the Greens and everything they claim to stand for. Do you really think he will play 2nd fiddle to them, assuming they may have double the MPs Winston will have ?
Personally I am not convinced the WP party will even make it into Parliament but a long way to go yet and many things can happen.

How will WP and Labour reconcile his biggest issue/policy, not to raise the retirement age ? After all that's the group where he gets most of his votes from.

Iceman

lets look at the psychology here. Winston Peters doesn,t just dislike John Key, he HATES him. perhaps because JK is the incarnation of what he aspired to in the early 1990s. Winston Peters wanted to be leader of the National Party, instead this mantle was inherited by the mediocre Jim Bulger and the awful and incompetent Jenny Shipley. Also don,t underestimate John Keys vanity and his post political career aspirations
Prediction
WP will hold the balance of power

WP will propose to National that the Prime Ministership will transfer to him mid term

In exchange John Key/ National will get a third term and thus cement in his legacy,

Mid term John Key upon handing over to WP, will get a Knighthood, depart, and be High Commissioner to London

[iceman]

No chance that your prediction will come true SP. I think it is more likely that this will happen in reverse and WP will be shipped off to be High Commissioner in London

[elZorro]

The bet is for one thousand NZ dollars. My bet is that: Following the next general election, in2014, NZ will be governed by a National Party Prime Minister and his party and associates and that the opposition will be led by a Labour Party leader and his associates. The money is to be deposited with your nominee by 31 August 2014 or earlier if changes to the election dictate an earlier date. I suggest you nominate a referee, possibly from this site.

Hi Craic, OK, that's clear enough for me. How about Slimwin as a referee, he/she is centrist, could vote either way, and posts on this thread. Is donating to a cause, an option you are happy with?

[craic]

Hi Craic, OK, that's clear enough for me. How about Slimwin as a referee, he/she is centrist, could vote either way, and posts on this thread. Is donating to a cause, an option you are happy with?

I am happy with anyone who accepts the role, as to donations to charity, I am a gambler. I win and lose, sometimes so what you do with your winnings does not concern me. I have about $180 in TAB credits from last Saturday in my wallet and next Saturday they will probably go back through the machine. Your money would follow a similar course. It's Poppy Day shortly but I can't even buy one of those - I have a briefcase full already - for the next veterans funeral. Maybe a sack of dog biscuits for the SPCA.

[elZorro]

I am happy with anyone who accepts the role, as to donations to charity, I am a gambler. I win and lose, sometimes so what you do with your winnings does not concern me. I have about $180 in TAB credits from last Saturday in my wallet and next Saturday they will probably go back through the machine. Your money would follow a similar course. It's Poppy Day shortly but I can't even buy one of those - I have a briefcase full already - for the next veterans funeral. Maybe a sack of dog biscuits for the SPCA.

Craic, I take it you want two lots of $1000 to end up with a referee, $1000 from each of us, and after the election the winner gets $2000 back in their own bank account. OK, will wait to hear from Slimwin.

[elZorro]

In NZResources today, an article on the compulsory superannuation Norman Kirk started. Once again, the right-leaning commentators feeding NZResources try not to give Labour too much air.

9/4/2014 — Economics, Politics and Government
Labour brings out the ghost of Kirk’s superannuation proposal
By Dene Mackenzie
The Labour Party has pulled together what could be seen as three unrelated events into a platform to again push for compulsory superannuation through Kiwisaver.
Thanks to the launch of the book on former Labour prime minister Norman Kirk - The Mighty Totara, the Life and Times of Norman Kirk - and the serendipitous release of an Infometric report on how New Zealand would look had Kirk's superannuation scheme not been canned by a Rob Muldoon-led National administration, Labour finance spokesman David Parker had a chance to shine.
In yet another third coincidence, the Infometric report was released by Financial Services Council head Peter Neilson, a former Labour revenue minister and associate SOE and finance minister.
The report was funded by the Financial Services Council, in an election year when Labour wants to campaign on compulsory superannuation.
Given National's continued high polling in various popularity contests this year, Labour has to find a way of getting the attention of voters.
Kirk still casts a long shadow over the country for older voters, particularly those in Labour who feel his time at the top was cut short.
Norman Kirk set up a form of compulsory superannuation which Infometrics said would be worth $278 billion by April 1, 2015, had the scheme continued.
An election year can give rise to a strange set of coincidences and yesterday was one of those days when they all came together.
The Infometrics report also estimated someone on the “average wage,” saving over 40 years would have had a retirement nest egg of $256,000 at age 65 by April 1 next year.
The fund was built on 8% contributions - 4% from employers and 4% from employers – invested half in New Zealand bonds and half in NZ shares.
The nest egg invested in a bank term deposit earning 5.5% would fund a “comfortable” retirement, adding $234 a week after tax on top of the New Zealand super pensions which was currently $282 a week after tax for each person eligible in a married, civil or de facto relationship.
“This helps explain why three out of four adult New Zealanders think it was a mistake to scrap the 1974 superannuation scheme,” Neilson said.
Super fund investors would own a substantial proportion of New Zealand listed companies and the country would have a lower dollar, more New Zealanders on higher wages and fewer fast growing companies would have to sell equity to foreigners to be able to grow, he said.
Was that a blow against the Government's asset sale programme?
David Parker managed to take a swipe at National for canning the scheme back in 1975 and pointed to “clear evidence” why New Zealand needed universal superannuation.
And let's not forget Labour had other chances to reinstate compulsory superannuation under David Lange and others (six years) and Helen Clark (nine years) and failed to do so.
Parker served as a cabinet minister in Helen Clark's government. However, the Financial Services Council, Infometrics and Neilson should be now wary about public perception. Any thought the council and Neilson had on being seen as neutral, just disappeared.
Every utterance between now and the September 20 election will now be scrutinised closely for the hidden Labour-related messages.
*Dene Mackenzie is political editor of the Otago Daily Times.

[craic]

As I was involved in the workforce, Kirks scheme was impossible for me and others. I was in the Government Superannuation Scheme as it existed at that time. I compared it to Mutual Funds and other market alternatives and found that it fell short. If I lived a long and happy retirement, it wasn't bad. If I died the day after retirement my wife, if she was still alive, finished up with about half the rate and if she died, all my hard earned super went back into the scheme. I chose a private scheme That gave me 10% of my accumulated funds per annum for ten years or more if I lived longer. If I croaked after less than ten years then the residue of the ten years payments went to my estate. When Kirk started his scheme I was forced to join. The private scheme I, and many others were on, was an approved scheme but because it was not a scheme run by my employers, it didn't qualify and I was forced to pay into both. With three young children, I was very happy when RM scrapped the scheme and gave me back my money.

[Cuzzie]

EZ, Craic is right - New Zealanders have freedom and choices as we are not a Communist state. Norman Kirk made it compulsory to join a scheme and Rob Muldoon quite rightly removed it. Being a union member was also compulsory & another communist bill that was removed by National. Good thing too, I for one like freedom of choice and have not joined Kiwi Saver. I don't trust future Governments and I have stayed out. I get to utilize my money when I like where I like and can not for the life of me would think why anybody would let multiple Govts. control your money, plus I'd give myself a A+ for saving. Remember Cullen gambling with tax payers money and loosing millions? If you liked being controlled, move to China, North Korea or Russia.
This is one of the main reasons I have never voted for Labour and never will, Freedom of Choice. Labour need to control you and your money to help pay the useless & bludgers amongst us. The way I see it, the unemployed & the unemployable have made their freedom of choice, they made a decision long ago and now must accept its consequences. Those that can not work due to an accident or illness are different and support any help they receive.
Labour are the ultimate Nana party doing what's good for you. That's the opposite to Freedom of choice. Add the Green party to Labour and if their running the country we would have a turbo charged Nana state. Here is a scenario, building a new home. Throw in your locale council & iwi to the mix and I'll leave you to ponder what might happen. We don't wont to go back to the Norman Kirk days, we need to look to the future and that includes freedom of choice