If National wins ...

[elZorro]

I don't think Craic is keen on a charity, and that is fine. I will probably donate any winnings to the Labour Party coffers. It would be a sizeable donation, equivalent to a lot of sausage sizzling

Here's one economist who's not so sure on the rock-star economy. I still believe that you can make your own luck with hard work, but I don't like being told by the incumbent party that everything's fine, when it has been getting worse for the last five years. I'm becoming wary of the words 'improvement' 'rapid rise' and other phrases designed to disguise the fact that we are dragging ourselves out of a hole.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/mone...ing-confidence

[slimwin]

See,thats not a charity, thats an ideaology. And surely not needed if your party has already won?

Personally I would have thought the bet would be a whole lot more noble to go to the needy.(cue the joke about labour actually being very needy!)

How about Ronald Mcdonald house or something? Not that I like mc donalds but supporting sick kids families appeals to me. Not everybodies cup of tea of course..

[slimwin]

Although I do like the irony of a donation going to Labour that is the proceed of gambling...

[elZorro]

Although I do like the irony of a donation going to Labour that is the proceed of gambling...

Maybe you're right, Slimwin. I am very keen on the Maungatautari inland sanctuary (MEIT), and Helen Clark ensured that this was part funded by the govt when she was in. It was a crucial donation that helped get it going. It would be a suitable charity.

[slimwin]

Now I like your thinking...

[Major von Tempsky]

MEIT? Is that the one at Eketahuna?

[Major von Tempsky]

Beware of treating all "economists" equally. There's Rosenberg of the Unions who comes out with some very strange statements for an economist.

But I particularly laughed when I read the observation that "there is only 1 person in the Venezuelan Cabinet who has had any economics training, and that was in East Berlin before the Wall fell".

Maybe it applies to Labour's Shadow Cabinet....

[Cuzzie]

I'm not a betting man at all. I haven't work harder then smarter all my life without handouts even when I had to stop work all together for 18 months due to an illness to risk throwing it all away. I refused the sickness benefit and started a new business instead when I was a very sick chappy. Maybe if some of the Labour lay-abouts had some pride in themselves and a bit of get up and go, our economy would not need fixing every time National came into power.

Anyway regardless, I do admire both craic & EZ putting their money where there mouth is. I do feel that EZ is making all the calls in his favor though. Surly the loser should pay $1000 into the winning party on the day - not theirs. If that is unsatisfactory then appoint one charity like Kids Cancer. The loser should not win by adding to their party of choice, the loser should feel the pain of loosing and paying out to the party that won. After all betting is all about winning & losing, why should the party that lost - win 1k? Make sense yes?
Maybe we should go to a vote. Thoughts?

[elZorro]

Beware of treating all "economists" equally. There's Rosenberg of the Unions who comes out with some very strange statements for an economist.

But I particularly laughed when I read the observation that "there is only 1 person in the Venezuelan Cabinet who has had any economics training, and that was in East Berlin before the Wall fell".

Maybe it applies to Labour's Shadow Cabinet....

I'm just reading "The NZ Experiment", the part where it shows that the people like Douglas and Ruth Richardson were captivated by a small subset of economic theory from Chicago, USA. This was neoliberal by nature, backed by numerous big-business funded think tanks. Treasury were also the power behind even Douglas's policy. He didn't think of it all. Treasury swapped staff with the US while they wrote the 1983 and later policy documents, that the politicians lapped up. Because all the simple but far-reaching policy was laid out and there was a self-engineered run on the currency in 1984, it got kickstarted, and it was a long time before commonsense prevailed again.

[Major von Tempsky]

Very droll EZ, you are most amusing. Your hold on reality and economic history is tenuous to say the least.

You must be quite upset that NZ has a floating dollar, is approaching a Budget surplus, is paying down its debt, and shrinking it's government departments and reducing red tape. In fact were you to study economics these days you would find that far from being a small subset it is mainstream economics. Have a look at the IMF approach for example.