-
02-07-2015, 08:30 PM
#8031
EZ, this is interesting. Your team needs to understand these connections
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...706&ref=NZH_Tw
Each dot is a MP and the lines are the connections each has with other MPs
Somebody has noted that are too many Labour MPs (red dots) too close to Nat MPs (like too friendly)
Another said that MPs aren't really that connected with each other, even with their own party members 1 and that is not good if we want Parliament working for all us
Good graphic anyway - betcha CT are analysing an interactive version that's somewhere which shows the names
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
-
02-07-2015, 10:52 PM
#8032
That looks like a nice bouquet there winner CT may be trying to add names to dots but I would be interested to see them as well. Haha what will they come up with next!
-
03-07-2015, 07:42 AM
#8033
Originally Posted by winner69
EZ, this is interesting. Your team needs to understand these connections
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...706&ref=NZH_Tw
Each dot is a MP and the lines are the connections each has with other MPs
Somebody has noted that are too many Labour MPs (red dots) too close to Nat MPs (like too friendly)
Another said that MPs aren't really that connected with each other, even with their own party members 1 and that is not good if we want Parliament working for all us
Good graphic anyway - betcha CT are analysing an interactive version that's somewhere which shows the names
Yes, very interesting, looks like there is a lot of watching of opposition tweets, and some members must spend all their time compiling their tweets. I was intrigued that Winston Peters appears much more connected with Labour than National, all good. Some of the strongest MPs don't bother 'following', it's either mutual links, or they are being watched.
Reporters in the Regions are starting to wake up.
3/7/2015 — General
Alarm bells at the RBNZ?
By Simon Hartley
Alarm Bells will be ringing with the Reserve Bank with May having been a “whopping” $1.5 billion mortgage lending month, and some economists now picking up to three more cuts to the interest driving official cash rate (OCR) this year - back to the record low 2.5%.
The economy is proving a double-edged sword for the Reserve Bank, with Auckland's heated housing bubble fuelled by the low OCR, while dairying's downward spiral rips cash from dairy farmers, regional economies and trade receipts.
ASB senior economist Nick Tuffley said overall the country's credit growth was running at its fastest pace since the global financial crisis hit, during 2008/09.
“Mortgage lending had a whopping month in excess of $1.5 B of net lending growth,” Tuffley said earlier in the week.
However, following the eighth consecutive decline in the global dairy auction yesterday, of 6% overall and 10% to the crucial whole milk powder component, Tuffley predicted the Reserve Bank would cut the OCR a further 75 basis points; in July, September and October, to a low of 2.5%.
He said four key reasons was the weakening in the dairy auction, business confidence and consumer confidence in dairy-focussed reasons, and now a revised review to there being a slower recovery in dairy prices.
“There are some uncertainties around when or if the last cut [October] cut will be delivered,” Tuffley said.
Similarly, ANZ chief economist Cameron Bagrie said there was little on the horizon to suggest there will be a meaningful turnaround in international milk powder prices anytime soon.
Having previously forecast the OCR down to 2.75%, Bagrie yesterday revised that down a further 25 basis points to 2.5% also.
“Following a 25 basis point cut later this month, we forecast the Reserve Bank to deliver a third consecutive cut in September,” he said.
However, Bagrie said “the economy is not grinding to a halt just yet,” noting the extent of New Zealand dollar depreciation seen to date, and key positive economic pillars which still existed, such as net migration, tourism and net wealth gains.
On the questions of the country's rising credit, Tuffley said housing credit would be the aspect catching the Reserve Bank's attention the most.
“It is clear that, even before the Reserve Bank cut the OCR in June, past falls in interest rates were already fuelling mortgage borrowing demand,” he said.
Mortgage lending was at its strongest dollar value growth since November 2007.
“The temperature remains high in the Auckland housing market, with signs of lifting activity elsewhere,” Tuffley said.
Recent declines in mortgage rates were likely to be playing a part in stimulating the added lending growth.
*Simon Hartley is senior business reporter and assistant chief reporter for the Otago Daily Times.
More on the housing bubble in Auckland.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ay+3+July+2015
Last edited by elZorro; 03-07-2015 at 07:52 AM.
-
03-07-2015, 08:19 AM
#8034
EZ, you'll love this. Nats manipulating iPredict and in a Rodney's Raving Nat supporters 'manipulating' the Business Confidence Survey.
I post a link to the article when he puts it up on his web site. Interest.co.nz might publish it as well.
Just a teaser -
However, after Labour came to power in late-1999 and introduced some not so business-friendly legislation in 2000, the survey began to provide a much too negative indication of near-term GDP growth prospects. This is reflected by the massive gap opening up between the survey and GDP growth between 2001 and early-2008. Based on the survey, the economy should have headed into deep recession in 2006 but instead GDP growth improved to 3.5%. Not all business people are National supporters, but during Labour's terms in office between 1999 and 2008 a significant number of survey respondents were ticking the negative boxes as a form of political protest. Such behaviour is not uncommon with surveys that get lots of media coverage (i.e. the extensive media coverage the survey gets makes it more prone to be used and abused for "political" and other ends).
After National came to power in 2008 and implemented some business-friendly legislation, the survey improved much more than justified by the post-crisis rebound in economic growth in 2009/10 and it consistently provided an overly optimistic indication of near-term economic growth prospects from 2011 to 2014. Some of the respondents were ticking the positives boxes in the survey as a way of expressing political support for National. That is, until Governor Wheeler opened the door to business people ticking the negative boxes in the survey as a means to get lower interest rates and a lower exchange rate.
What do I keep telling you about perception equals reality. Your team is always on the back foot I fear.
Last edited by winner69; 03-07-2015 at 08:21 AM.
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
-
03-07-2015, 08:33 PM
#8035
with the perception of Europe going down the toilet and china slipping on a banana skin.....
and the perception that the right wing isnt the best "socially" "equal" sort of government....
but it is country wise a cornerstone of "not falling into the toilet" ....
what does this mean for the left wing of "living wage" and "green taxes" and "share the WFF benefits to non workers" etc........
it seems the perception of the left wing handouts is becoming a worry to the handout recipients.
thanks to the greek issues on mainstream tv.
interesting times ahead.
-
03-07-2015, 09:16 PM
#8036
Originally Posted by winner69
EZ, you'll love this. Nats manipulating iPredict and in a Rodney's Raving Nat supporters 'manipulating' the Business Confidence Survey.
I post a link to the article when he puts it up on his web site. Interest.co.nz might publish it as well.
Just a teaser -
However, after Labour came to power in late-1999 and introduced some not so business-friendly legislation in 2000, the survey began to provide a much too negative indication of near-term GDP growth prospects. This is reflected by the massive gap opening up between the survey and GDP growth between 2001 and early-2008. Based on the survey, the economy should have headed into deep recession in 2006 but instead GDP growth improved to 3.5%. Not all business people are National supporters, but during Labour's terms in office between 1999 and 2008 a significant number of survey respondents were ticking the negative boxes as a form of political protest. Such behaviour is not uncommon with surveys that get lots of media coverage (i.e. the extensive media coverage the survey gets makes it more prone to be used and abused for "political" and other ends).
After National came to power in 2008 and implemented some business-friendly legislation, the survey improved much more than justified by the post-crisis rebound in economic growth in 2009/10 and it consistently provided an overly optimistic indication of near-term economic growth prospects from 2011 to 2014. Some of the respondents were ticking the positives boxes in the survey as a way of expressing political support for National. That is, until Governor Wheeler opened the door to business people ticking the negative boxes in the survey as a means to get lower interest rates and a lower exchange rate.
What do I keep telling you about perception equals reality. Your team is always on the back foot I fear.
You're probably right about the back-foot part, both parties know that perception is an important part of marketing a message. Labour just have to use their strength of numbers to get funding sorted out, and then they can change perceptions, that's the easier part. But I am seeing a lack of get-up-and-go in the local electorate from party members (and even from paid head office staff, which is worse).
I've always thought that the business perception surveys were heavily weighted in favour of National policies, supportive of govt and positive when National were in, critical and pessimistic when Labour were in. The tax take says it all really, businesses actually do better in general when Labour are in power, the economy is grown. National have been busy since 2008 trying to offshore the economy, and doing generally destructive things like selling off assets.
-
03-07-2015, 09:48 PM
#8037
Originally Posted by winner69
It's not a shocking figure, this is the cumulative student debt and some interest building up over time. In my generation we all had virtually free tertiary education, somehow the tax take was sufficient to cover it, and most of us have paid income taxes since, to help pay that forward. I think it's a bit rude that the older generations who had that benefit of free tertiary education didn't ensure it stayed that way- now it's only subsidised by about 70% for NZers.
Wealthier families can reduce the burden on any of their children who attend tertiary courses, poorer families cannot. This all just helps to widen the gap between the haves and the have-nots. Neopole II was saying (I think) that we have to be careful not to become like the Greeks.
Not much chance of that, we have always been a country of hard workers. But now we have to be smart too, we have to gear up, create an asset base, an edge, be more savvy. If we're not all that qualified, we need enough others who are, to employ or support us in well-paid jobs earning more overseas exchange. You have to wonder if charging students for a hefty portion of their tertiary education, and then crippling the economy and job prospects so that nearly everyone needs a degree just to get their first proper job, is that great an outcome.
-
04-07-2015, 12:03 PM
#8038
EZ, here's that thing on Nat supporters 'manipulating' those surveys.
http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/76...-survey-supply
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
-
04-07-2015, 12:06 PM
#8039
Originally Posted by elZorro
You're probably right about the back-foot part, both parties know that perception is an important part of marketing a message. Labour just have to use their strength of numbers to get funding sorted out, and then they can change perceptions, that's the easier part. But I am seeing a lack of get-up-and-go in the local electorate from party members (and even from paid head office staff, which is worse).
That last sentence is pretty damming - you must be getting awfully frustrated
Just over 24 months to go .....need to their proverbial into gear
”When investors are euphoric, they are incapable of recognising euphoria itself “
-
04-07-2015, 12:08 PM
#8040
No you can't help when you are born, but individual decisions put together create a general outcome.
Such an election for instance. But I agree put blame aside & look to make change for the good & that includes not paying the pension or taxpayer money to those who clearly don't need it.
Re the double income, not its not an unjustified generalization because it is a common occurrence.
So I would suggest its perfectly valid especially when compared with previous generations as we were discussing, the baby boomers.
The massive increase in women in the work force in the last 40 years or so is another reason why wages have been kept in check as the pool of labour has grown substantially. I'm not blaming anyone, its just an outcome.
of nationhood and goodwill than those that involve the crude and sometimes cruel objectification of an entire generation. “Gen Y kids are too sheltered.” ”Baby boomers are greedy.” None of us has any say over when we are born. Most of us do our best with the set of socio-economic cards we’re dealt. How we get on, singly or en masse, is not even necessarily within our control.
That's an unjustified generalisation. Plenty of families are on a single income. Some even headed by a sole parent. Perhaps it is harder in Auckland but a lot of people live in cheaper areas. Families on one minimum wage (or even two) will be able to get taxpayer top ups via Working for Families, child care, accommodation supplement.[/QUOTE]
Hopefully you find my posts helpful, but in no way should they be construed as advice. Make your own decision.
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks