If National wins ...

[iceman]

A good article from Rodney and I think he is spot on !
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11195560

[elZorro]

A good article from Rodney and I think he is spot on !
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11195560

Rodney says the Green Party are more red than green, again this is just propaganda. He is right to point out that the Greens and Labour need to get themselves organised so as to deny National the chance to get any headlines about fringe policy. The Greens have heaps of sensible policy.

The latest report from the Land and Water Forum (http://www.landandwater.org.nz/Site/About_Us/Forum_Members.aspx) (NOF) proposes allowing ten times the current maximum Nitrogen levels in freshwater streams, that is how they are solving the problem of water pollution in NZ. If a waterway in NZ hits the proposed upper limit of nitrogen, it will be higher concentration than the lower Mississippi River, worse than the Yangtze River at Shanghai, and similar to the River Thames (the worst river in the OECD) according to Dr Mike Joy, senior lecturer in sustainability, Massey university. The forum members have made some progress, but when arable, drystock and dairy farmers need more production quickly, they use Nitrogen predominantly, assuming other minerals are present. If they are allowed these new limits, they will certainly exploit them. Dr Joy says that the proposed standards are set so low, that virtually no rivers will fail the new weakened limits, and many will get much worse.

A vote for either Labour or the Greens should stop that sort of sabotage in our country. Vote Act if you like Iceman, but what if they don't get enough votes?

[iceman]

A vote for either Labour or the Greens should stop that sort of sabotage in our country. Vote Act if you like Iceman, but what if they don't get enough votes?

I am sure you would have liked Matt McCarten's article in todays Herald. He is a very angry Leftie who can not accept NZ has moved on far away from his political agenda.

I've never said I'm an ACT voter EZ but definitely will not be voting for the very red Greens ! I think we have several parties in the coming election that may not make it into parliament and votes on them will be wasted. I don't think ACT will be one of them.

[elZorro]

I am sure you would have liked Matt McCarten's article in todays Herald. He is a very angry Leftie who can not accept NZ has moved on far away from his political agenda.

I've never said I'm an ACT voter EZ but definitely will not be voting for the very red Greens ! I think we have several parties in the coming election that may not make it into parliament and votes on them will be wasted. I don't think ACT will be one of them.

I'll have to get a copy Iceman.

I have spent 30 mins on the web and finally found the water quality document Dr. Joy mentions. Here it is.

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/water/proposed-amendments-nps-freshwater-management/proposed-amendments-nps-freshwater-management.pdf

Anyone can make a submission on this, for the next 2 days or so. In Appendix 2 is the real meat of this document. The proposed National Bottom Line levels for pollutants in freshwater are set at just above the point where aquatic animals die, not 50% of the way there, but right on the edge. Algal blooms will occur much earlier than this. Appendix 2 also spells out the ABCD thresholds, (D) being not acceptable.

Total Nitrogen would be allowed to go as high as 0.75g/tonne water, P is 0.5g/tonne, and NO3-N or Nitrate-Nitrogen appears to be at 6.9g per tonne. The guidelines being used at the moment for some of these nutrient levels must be a lot lower.

Note the very small masses of nutrients in water causing these effects. Point source and leaching runoff from farms is widespread, every bit of externally sourced nutrient that a farmer purchases but doesn't export off the farm, could potentially end up in waterways.

Belgarion, I agree that more people voting would certainly help Labour's chances. Labour will need to run a very good campaign, but they do have plenty of data on their side.

[fungus pudding]

Vote Act if you like Iceman, but what if they don't get enough votes?

They will.

[Minerbarejet]

God forbid. I remember them so well - every part of them was absolute junk right down to the Skoda motor
What I loved about the Trekka was its automatic centre of gravity raising system brought about by a
transverse rear spring on independent suspension- on cornering it had a tendency to tuck the the inside rear wheel in and reducing the track width by quite a margin. Quite handy on the side of a hill- had a few OMG moments -I'm still here though - the Trekka is not.:)

[craic]

I will never forgive the Trekka (NZ Forest Service) that I was driving, in town with my visiting Wellington boss as a passenger. I had just spotted a very extreme version of the latest fashion, the miniskirt, and I was gazing intently at this wonder when the Trella decided to bury its left windscreen pillar in the corner of the deck of a flat deck truck that was double parked to unload. Later it was to drop its sump plug on State Highway 50 walking distance from Ongaonga.

[elZorro]

That's two good NZ Made Trekkas written off. I took the liberty of having a look on TradeMe, there are none for sale. Must be a collector's item then. BTW Craic, you appear to be accident prone . :)

Hounded by her parliamentary colleagues, Metiria Turei has shown the press through her $137,000 castle in Dunedin, complete with a truck tyre for a window frame.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11195535 She's a hard case by the look of it.

I read the McCarten article Iceman, I didn't find it angry, more informative.

The tables on the stats website show that the percentage of participation in the workforce is about the same, the unemployment rate is stubbornly higher after reaching a new level of near 7% in December 2009 (from a low of 3.3%). The Labour Force survey of 15,000 households gives the unemployed number in Sept 3013 as about 148,000, plus or minus 10,000. The official stats show..

http://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLECODE7080 About the same number officially unemployed. But the count of NZ's working age population is another 200,000 higher since Labour was in power, and of those an extra 100,000 are not seeking work or are outside the stats coverage (outside the labour force). The figure here is 1.1mill people outside the labour force. A big voting bloc if they could be won over.

The Green Party has an online submission form for clean rivers (send off by 4th Feb), they are very organised in this, just one example of how committed they are.

https://www.greens.org.nz/takeaction/submissionguides/rivers-are-swimming

The Greens would like the target to be that you can swim in the rivers. Federated Farmers President, Bruce Wills, on water quality in the SST and on their website 11th Dec 2011:


For the record, I don't define ‘clean water' as the ability to drink straight out of the Tamaki River, but the ability to see your hands in water without falling ill afterwards. When you look at all of your daily uses of water, where it goes and what happens to it, what does clean water mean to you?


Which is more like a target that you could approach and touch a river with caution, and that'll be OK. The media release is, unsurprisingly, missing from the achives now.

http://www.fedfarm.org.nz/publications/Media-Releases/2011/Default.asp

[craic]

The clean water bit is overdone. Our water land on a variety of sheds proceeds through large amounts of debris, half rotten leaves, possum and bird droppings and the odd dead sparrow or whatever through various pipes to a tank from where it is pumped back into the house. Twenty years of drinking this soup has only made me fatter. My dog, on the other hand, prefers a more stagnant brew from stray containers about the property. A couple of goats I had in the past refused to drink any water from any source at any time. Just for the record, I sometimes walk along the Thames around Mortlake and the amount of rubbish in that waterway is incredible, but, there are plenty of serious swimmers in the water from time to time.

[elZorro]

The clean water bit is overdone. Our water land on a variety of sheds proceeds through large amounts of debris, half rotten leaves, possum and bird droppings and the odd dead sparrow or whatever through various pipes to a tank from where it is pumped back into the house. Twenty years of drinking this soup has only made me fatter. My dog, on the other hand, prefers a more stagnant brew from stray containers about the property. A couple of goats I had in the past refused to drink any water from any source at any time. Just for the record, I sometimes walk along the Thames around Mortlake and the amount of rubbish in that waterway is incredible, but, there are plenty of serious swimmers in the water from time to time.

It's the thin edge of the wedge though, Craic. I'd hate to see Taupo look like Rotorua, even though it's a far bigger and deeper lake. A regional councillor I spoke to last week said that they have made some good headway in the Rotorua lakes by seeding them with alum to drop out the extra nutrients into the sediment. It's still there on the bottom however. Even Taupo now has enough weed at the southern end to support rogue catfish.

FP, Cuzzie and Iceman, I feel for you. ACT voters are a rare species by all accounts. Mr Boscowan is not in the running, that must have been an interesting internal vote considering he probably saved the party from financial ruin. So now the press turns its attention to Winston Peters, and John key has been a bit offhand to him in the past. A brutal election year ahead I think.

[Cuzzie]

One gets the feeling ACT will always shoot themselves in the foot. Don Brash did it back in 2011 with Rodney Hide and now the ACT Board has done it with John Boscawen. Two good men pushed off to the side. John's downfall I believe is that he is just too much of a Gentleman. Never mind, he has worked hard all his life and now at least he can enjoy his riches. That would be rewards for working hard EZ & berg. something Labour hates.
EZ, I will concede that the election race just got a little tighter without Boscawen there for ACT. It's a good day for you, enjoy while you can.

[elZorro]

One gets the feeling ACT will always shoot themselves in the foot. Don Brash did it back in 2011 with Rodney Hide and now the ACT Board has done it with John Boscawen. Two good men pushed off to the side. John's downfall I believe is that he is just too much of a Gentleman. Never mind, he has worked hard all his life and now at least he can enjoy his riches. That would be rewards for working hard EZ & berg. something Labour hates.
EZ, I will concede that the election race just got a little tighter without Boscawen there for ACT. It's a good day for you, enjoy while you can.

(Not one typo in that Cuzzie)?? David Cunliffe has a long way to go in the PM stakes still.

I watched Pure NZ on Prime tonight, all about the freshwater problems. Mostly a sad situation, with some local efforts being made. There is a huge problem ahead of us if we want to get most of our rivers and lakes back into reasonably good condition.

[Cuzzie]

(Not one typo in that Cuzzie)?? David Cunliffe has a long way to go in the PM stakes still.

I watched Pure NZ on Prime tonight, all about the freshwater problems. Mostly a sad situation, with some local efforts being made. There is a huge problem ahead of us if we want to get most of our rivers and lakes back into reasonably good condition.
No spelling mistakes and an honest statement to boot. I thought I was clear enough in my post too EZ, somehow you misunderstood it. I said the election race just got a little tighter, nothing about Cunliffe winning. I meant tighter as in the final result not quite as large as I thought it would of been with Boscawen in the race.
I see the Greens are up to 12% in the latest poll. More power to the Greens less power for Cunliffe if they do win. That equals more center voters heading to the right. That's not good for Cunliffe. BTW, a very smart move by Key last week by keeping Peters in the mix, NZ First are polling higher too.


All that been said, I also think some of the more liberal Green voters will move back towards Labour as and when they see the light. One thing I do know is, "thank God National does not have to partner up with the likes of the Greens"!!!

[fungus pudding]

FP, Cuzzie and Iceman, I feel for you.

No need to feel for me eZ. I think Act's decision is the wrong one and lessens their chances dramatically, therefore leaving National in a weakened position. National with Winston first will be a backward step. However, I have plenty of options to pursue if the negative Labour/Green mob gain the treasury benches.

[iceman]

One gets the feeling ACT will always shoot themselves in the foot. Don Brash did it back in 2011 with Rodney Hide and now the ACT Board has done it with John Boscawen. Two good men pushed off to the side. John's downfall I believe is that he is just too much of a Gentleman. Never mind, he has worked hard all his life and now at least he can enjoy his riches. That would be rewards for working hard EZ & berg. something Labour hates.
EZ, I will concede that the election race just got a little tighter without Boscawen there for ACT. It's a good day for you, enjoy while you can.

John Armstrong believes this was the best and only option for ACT http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11195807

Ho often seems to have his finger on the pulse. I think ACT will definitely win Epsom again. My biggest fear for the upcoming election is the possibility of Winston being the kingmaker ! But I just can not imagine him, say with 5-6% of the vote, going into a Labour/Green Government where the Greens would hold much more influential portfolios and be much stronger than Winston First. Except of course he was offered an Ambassador posting in London or USA. But he wouldn't fall for the "baubles of office" would he ? (insert Tui ad)

[elZorro]

No need to feel for me eZ. I think Act's decision is the wrong one and lessens their chances dramatically, therefore leaving National in a weakened position. National with Winston first will be a backward step. However, I have plenty of options to pursue if the negative Labour/Green mob gain the treasury benches.

Yes, think of the new businesses and the pickup in the retail sector as rebuilding govt departments help rejuvenate inner cities. Quite a few people who have been left on National's scrapheap will be hoping for a change of government. Along with parents of young adults who have yet to find their first job.

I'd like to think that Winston Peters will put NZ First and side with the Labour-Green coalition when he gets the chance. He did force the Winebox Enquiry. Maybe the changing of the super qualification age would be an issue, but that is down the track. Winston will get quite a few votes from superannuitants and a section of taxpayers, nothing wrong with that. They want to see how well he'll poke the borax at either National or Labour. Or one of the parties, it probably doesn't matter much.

I built up a spreadsheet of a snapshot of employment data from the Stats website for NZ. Since Sept 2007, about another 200,000 people were added to the working age population. The trend has been for the unemployment level and those outside the workforce to increase, not always in proportion. The number of employed hasn't risen as fast as it needed to, but there have been more jobs created by Sept 2013, the last data point.

There are a lot more people choosing to stay outside the workforce (or who feel they have no choice), than are collecting the unemployment benefit.

Some are ill, or are solo parents. As at early 2013, there were less people on all benefits than in 2009, the total being about 310,000 people. Which means that there has probably been direct or indirect pressure put on some people to be out of the labour force and not claim any govt benefit.


http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/132758/unclear-if-former-beneficiaries-now-have-income

Of course this data is not showing the total hours worked in NZ each year. Anyone working at least an hour a week, paid or unpaid, is "employed". It's not a FTE position in all cases, but I wonder what the averages have been.


Hours worked in employment is the total number of hours worked in employment per week by all people meeting the definition of employment given in the standard for labour force status, that is, all people aged 15 and over who during the survey reference period:


worked for one hour or more for pay, profit or payment in kind in a job, business, farm or professional practice
worked without pay for one hour or more in work which contributed directly to the operation of a farm, business or professional practice operated by a relative
had a job or business they were temporarily absent from.



The average number of hours per week worked in NZ by employed people is about 34 hrs at present.

Here's a good writeup on how the recession affected jobs.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/employment_and_unemployment/labour-market-outcomes-men-women-recession.aspx

[elZorro]

Just an example of how National sees the world: John Key at the reopening of SCA's robotic plant in Kawerau. An extra 10 people were employed, adding to 200 already there.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11194474

But the full story mentions that a Hamilton plant they owned was partly closed down last year, with the loss of 140 manufacturing jobs and all the downstream effects that entailed. They have more than doubled output in Kawerau for toilet tissue, by using robots and a faster retooling process, at a cost of $60mill.

This is supposedly to combat cheaper Asian imported paper. But most of us don't buy those weird brands, we buy established, recognised products.

SCA is a multinational company from Sweden. They now own (by acquisition) (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/5155895/Toilet-paper-maker-still-loses-money)the Sorbent, Tork, Treasures, Purex, Libra, Teena, Handee brands, amongst others. In other words they have a big chunk of the supermarket facings. But they are not NZ owned, and like any big company their main objective is profits. Not in being NZ's biggest employer.

So a question for John Key to answer, is where are 140 Hamilton people going to find new manufacturing jobs? Is the importing of hi-tech equipment into NZ to displace workers inevitable in that business, and what will the govt or NZ get out of that process? Cheaper toilet tissue?

Even if you think that this is good business, and it might be, there will need to be lots of new businesses and enterprises moving through to take up the spare employees, or the taxpayer will be supporting them instead of collecting taxes from them. But National doesn't spend time with SMEs, they especially are not showy enough in election year.

[Harvey Specter]

This is supposedly to combat cheaper Asian imported paper. But most of us don't buy those weird brands, we buy established, recognised products.Are you sure. What was stopping SCA from importing paper for its large, popular brands (provided they weren't cutting down rain forests, it wouldn't have got bad PR).

Its sad that those 140 jobs were lost but at least the other 200 werent lost as well. Hopefully they are successful and with good access to raw product from teh local forestry industry, they will be able to use those robots (or additional ones) to start exporting finished goods.

[elZorro]

Are you sure. What was stopping SCA from importing paper for its large, popular brands (provided they weren't cutting down rain forests, it wouldn't have got bad PR).

Its sad that those 140 jobs were lost but at least the other 200 werent lost as well. Hopefully they are successful and with good access to raw product from teh local forestry industry, they will be able to use those robots (or additional ones) to start exporting finished goods.

Good points Harvey. But considering the cost of a roll of toilet paper is often under a dollar at retail with GST added, they won't want to be shipping them too far in volume. Neither will the international firm be too keen on moving out of their core business. They've already sold off their packaging assets over the years. That big robot will be firmly stuck in Kawerau making paper towel products for a long time yet. Mainly for domestic production I'd think. Caxton's brands and factory equipment in Auckland was sold to SCA , and the site is now printing newsprint, with another owner. This is a picture of consolidation of SCA's new and old assets beside the huge Tasman plant in Kawerau, which makes sense. But all these big brands that we recognise in the supermarket and elsewhere, they are often held in clusters by big overseas corporates.

Part of the scene in Kawerau. The Tarawera River helpfully flows close to the Tasman pulp factory.

http://blog.greens.org.nz/2011/02/04/the-taniwha-of-the-tarawera/

In 2009, the EBOP allowed Norkse Skog's plant to continue (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK0910/S00238.htm)with a high level of discharge into the Tarawera River for another 25 years. I'm not drawing a direct line to the National Govt, but downstream of Kawerau the river often looks black in colour. It starts off fine at Lake Tarawera. Apparently contaminants have been brought down into acceptable ranges over the years, but a lot of the dye colouring from pulp-making remains in the expelled water, and that is costly to fully extract.

On the TV tonight, most people are not too happy with the idea of National trying to gift seats to the Conservatives or ACT. Over 50% don't agree. Except if you're a National voter, 61% of them agree with the idea. Maybe the rules should be modified so that each party that has broad representation in Parliament before the election, has to field a candidate in every seat.

[elZorro]

Remember Buy NZ made? They are still there, it's just been a fairly quiet operation over the last few years. Have a look at their website, you won't see what all of the mechandising products look like, or the prices. That's partly because you have to be a paid-up member to buy them, but that's not helpful in keeping a high profile.

They usually have branded flags for flying from the top of buildings, but have none in stock, and when they do get them in from NZ manufacturers in small volume, they are quite expensive. So it appears that Buy NZ don't even feel up to making an investment in banners and flags to share with their membership.


http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.buynz.org.nz%2F&ei=bjLxUpn8C4epkgXu64HYAw&usg=AFQjCNGv3NwNgKGi8RMGFNPzGmefJ7sLPA&bvm=bv.60444564,d.dGI


The Australians are, however, becoming more proactive in looking after their own.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9685723/Supermarket-stoush-sours-CER

[blackcap]

Remember Buy NZ made? They are still there, it's just been a fairly quiet operation over the last few years. Have a look at their website, you won't see what the mechandising products look like, the prices, or anything. That's partly because you have to be a paid-up member to buy them, but that's not helpful in keeping a high profile.

http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.buynz.org.nz%2F&ei=bjLxUpn8C4epkgXu64HYAw&usg=AFQjCNGv3NwNgKGi8RMGFNPzGmefJ7sLPA&bvm=bv.60444564,d.dGI


The Australians are, however, becoming more proactive in looking after their own.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9685723/Supermarket-stoush-sours-CER

Ahha I finally get it. EZ you are a national socialist :P (btw for the uniformed: :P = tongue in cheek).

[elZorro]

Ahha I finally get it. EZ you are a national socialist :P (btw for the uniformed: :P = tongue in cheek).

Blackcap, I'm not sure what one of those looks like. I don't like the first part of the expression..

I guess I'm hopeful for NZ jobs and productivity, and sustainability at the same time. And when public or industry bodies are in place to help with that, they need to be organised.

Landcorp Farming half-year report is out. They don't have only dairy farms, but on the back of a high milksolids payout, their 137 farms are looking to return an annual profit (3x last year's) of about..$255,000 per farm average. That's a lot of capital tied up there.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11196541

[Harvey Specter]

That's a lot of capital tied up there.Are you suggesting the mixed ownership model should be applied ;)

More seriously, why not. Limit ownership to NZ residents.

[Harvey Specter]

But considering the cost of a roll of toilet paper is often under a dollar at retail with GST added, they won't want to be shipping them too far in volume.You could be correct. though one look around a two dollar shop shows the value of the product doesn't exclude it from being imported.

The real issue here is why do NZer always sell stuff off to overseas investors. Why do we invest so much into housing, yet dont see the value that the big multinationals like SCA see. There is no tax advantage to property tough there is a financing advantage. One 'solution' I have seen, which I think is done in Isreal and other places is for the LVR requirements to increase the more properties you own. So your first house, presumably your PPOR you can borrow 80-90% but after that you can only borrow 70%, then 50% then 40% etc.

[Cuzzie]

It's heading in the right direction.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11197049

[Harvey Specter]

It's heading in the right direction.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11197049
No doubt Key will have his finger on the trigger for a snap election should Labour look like they are in disarray.

[slimwin]

Oh no. EZ doesn't like positive news for the country

[iceman]

Oh no. EZ doesn't like positive news for the country

No need to worry. He is well capable of finding one way or another to describe this news as very bad for the Government and country

[elZorro]

No need to worry. He is well capable of finding one way or another to describe this news as very bad for the Government and country

Let's say the trend is in the right direction for once. National still have to beat Labour's record of 3.3% unemployed, from sometime in 2007. There are another extra 100,000 people who are not engaged in the labour force since that time, and we already know that there are less non-dole beneficiaries than there were, so that's not the answer, that they are all bludgers.

Average wage inflation has been very small so far, which means it's still hard to find a job generally. A few more employed in the manufacturing sector, that's a better sign.

Are you guys saying that if Labour was in, the country would be a cot-case with a lot more unemployed? I think it would have recovered more quickly.

Harvey, I agree with your idea for LVRs for house purchases. About farming, I was more making the point that even a highly organised farm operator with plenty of feedback and opportunities for economies of scale, has trouble making a dollar on average.

[iceman]

Average wage inflation has been very small so far, which means it's still hard to find a job generally. A few more employed in the manufacturing sector, that's a better sign.
Are you guys saying that if Labour was in, the country would be a cot-case with a lot more unemployed? I think it would have recovered more quickly.


I agree EZ that wage growth has been low in the last few years while battling the GFC, but after tax wage growth has on average exceeded inflation. Importantly though is that we have had wage growth, including annual increases each and every year in the minimum wage. Now with strong and continued growth in the employment rate and a fairly fast growing economy, hopefully wage growth will also increase well ahead of inflation.

[fungus pudding]

Let's say the trend is in the right direction for once. National still have to beat Labour's record of 3.3% unemployed, from sometime in 2007. There are another extra 100,000 people who are not engaged in the labour force since that time, and we already know that there are less non-dole beneficiaries than there were, so that's not the answer, that they are all bludgers.

Average wage inflation has been very small so far, which means it's still hard to find a job generally. A few more employed in the manufacturing sector, that's a better sign.

Are you guys saying that if Labour was in, the country would be a cot-case with a lot more unemployed? I think it would have recovered more quickly.

Harvey, I agree with your idea for LVRs for house purchases.

So tell us, where has that worked? How do you go about outlawing private lending, and loan companies springing up? Banks are about the only thing that can be controlled.

[iceman]

This from Tony Alexander today:

"Wages growth will soon accelerate however as firms start to compete more aggressively for staff. The more
interesting phase will come when staff realise that for the first time since 2007 they are in a strong
bargaining position and start demanding much more generous remuneration. In the absence of a
productivity-driving surge of business investment this will naturally concern the Reserve Bank (too bad), and
be one factor producing upside risk to interest rates this cycle "

[elZorro]

So tell us, where has that worked? How do you go about outlawing private lending, and loan companies springing up? Banks are about the only thing that can be controlled.

I was agreeing with the idea of making it harder to buy multiple properties. Higher interest costs from second and third tier lenders would also work. A CGT will be a lot easier, and should push more investment into business enterprises, where more jobs would be created in general.

[Cuzzie]

Oh no. EZ doesn't like positive news for the country
Does he not, I wonder how he would cope with this lot then:

Business confidence on a high -
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9680215/Business-confidence-on-a-high (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9680215/Business-confidence-on-a-high)

Strong results at Karaka 2014 - http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1402/S00048/strong-results-at-karaka-2014.htm

Health insurers' pulse stronger after four-year lull -
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9681533/Health-insurers-pulse-stronger-after-four-year-lull

2014 New Vehicle Registrations Off to a Rip Roaring Start -
http://business.scoop.co.nz/2014/02/03/2014-new-vehicle-registrations-off-to-a-rip-roaring-start/

Aussie firms told to eye NZ -
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/better-business/9661647/Aussie-firms-told-to-eye-NZ



Looks like more than just something is going right for NZ. That's all good news for all of us..

[fungus pudding]

I was agreeing with the idea of making it harder to buy multiple properties. Higher interest costs from second and third tier lenders would also work. A CGT will be a lot easier, and should push more investment into business enterprises, where more jobs would be created in general.

How could you force second and third tier lenders to charge higher interest? There are plenty of people who buy houses with cash anyway.
Not sure why CGT would push money into businesses. Labour's proposal covers businesses, shares, holiday homes, gold, silver, art, vehicles, any investments including collectables - there are no exemptions as I understand it. And don't think for a moment CGT will lower property prices or demand. It never has anywhere else,

[craic]

So my collectables will be taxed. I have five or six penny blacks, together worth more than several Remuera homes. I put them in an envelope and take them to USA/UK or somewhere and sell them - how in hell can they tax that? (I do have a stamp collection but few valuable stamps). All the Goldies will be gone from NZ as soon as this lunacy starts. My shares will be sold and replaced by foreign investments - but don't worry, it will never happen - The fat hun made certain of thet today with his vitriolic attack on Key

[couta1]

If you insure them and/or use them as security they will find you. When you bring the money back into NZ you'll get a nice "please explain" letter. Mafia used to think doing this was untraceable but in actual fact its simple to trace.
And I suppose they are going to be as onto it regarding this as controlling the 10 billion dollar a year black economy in NZ,yeah right pass another Tui

[fungus pudding]

So my collectables will be taxed. I have five or six penny blacks, together worth more than several Remuera homes. I put them in an envelope and take them to USA/UK or somewhere and sell them - how in hell can they tax that? (I do have a stamp collection but few valuable stamps). All the Goldies will be gone from NZ as soon as this lunacy starts. My shares will be sold and replaced by foreign investments - but don't worry, it will never happen - The fat hun made certain of thet today with his vitriolic attack on Key

Probably anything owned prior to introduction of CGT will be exempt. That's how it was done in Australia. Not sure about anywhere else.

[iceman]

Not sure why CGT would push money into businesses. Labour's proposal covers businesses, shares, holiday homes, gold, silver, art, vehicles, any investments including collectables - there are no exemptions as I understand it. And don't think for a moment CGT will lower property prices or demand. It never has anywhere else,

Wrong FP. They propose to exempt the "family home". whatever that means. I think CGT or any other tax should be applied universally and without exemptions, like our very successful GST.

[Cuzzie]

Russel Norman is trying to make mileage out of the Govt. not finding enough oil & gas. Russel, give them a chance, it is coming. You don't want to see the Govt. to find more oil, so what's your problem. I feel sorry for the Greenies who will have to protest down off the Otago coastline in winter as opposed to the North Islands East coast in Summer - not.

This from ZB's website/
The Government is being told it's failed to deliver on its promises when it comes to the oil and gas industry.

The accusation's being levelled by the Green Party, a bitter opponent of initiatives the Government's allowed around deep sea energy prospecting.

Party Co-leader Russel Norman is citing Statistics New Zealand figures that show exports of oil and related products have fallen by almost 50 percent since 2008.

"They're talking about this industry as the great economic nirvana or savior for New Zealand and we're simply pointing to the facts, which is that it can't be the economic savior and nirvana for New Zealand. Just look at the numbers."


Click moaning Norman (http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbpol/59232827-greens-say-govt-s-failed-to-deliver-on-oil-and-gas) for the direct link.

[fungus pudding]

Wrong FP. They propose to exempt the "family home". whatever that means. I think CGT or any other tax should be applied universally and without exemptions, like our very successful GST.

Yes. I should have mentioned that. I can see good and bad in a CGT. It definitely should have a repatriation clause, or it stops things happening, and it should include the family home, be it a packing case on a swamp or a gold plated mansion. Otherwise it's nonsense. Many countries tax only that amount in excess of the inflation rate, and there's an argument to support that. It's an extremely tricky tax and will still have that difficulty of deciding where the line is drawn between what is to be taxed as income and what is taxed as capital gain.

[iceman]

Yes. I should have mentioned that. I can see good and bad in a CGT. It definitely should have a repatriation clause, or it stops things happening, and it should include the family home, be it a packing case on a swamp or a gold plated mansion. Otherwise it's nonsense. Many countries tax only that amount in excess of the inflation rate, and there's an argument to support that. It's an extremely tricky tax and will still have that difficulty of deciding where the line is drawn between what is to be taxed as income and what is taxed as capital gain.

Some countries also only apply the tax "at exit" so do not tax you as long as you reinvest the money within a certain time frame. I like that idea.

[fungus pudding]

Some countries also only apply the tax "at exit" so do not tax you as long as you reinvest the money within a certain time frame. I like that idea.

That's what I mean by a repatriation clause. I agree that it is a good idea; or more specifically a bad idea to not allow it.

[iceman]

Article in today's Herald about CGT !

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11197320

[winner69]

Great move by Mr Rabbit this week

All the things John might have talked about not that important if we stroke John's ego and invite him to G20 .....and tell the world John is his new mentor

Classy stuff .......and John is happy as

[elZorro]

That's what I mean by a repatriation clause. I agree that it is a good idea; or more specifically a bad idea to not allow it.

That sounds like the CGT you have when you're not having a CGT. Sam Morgan sells a new TradeMe in the future, pays no tax yet again, because he simply finds another investment to move into. Who wouldn't?

I can see where you guys are coming from. Add in the family home, and a CGT will never get over the line. Or make it easy to bypass the whole thing at the end, and there will be no effect anyway.

The family home can be left out of the CGT, as long as it is below a certain value depending on the region of NZ. It would be rare for a family home to do very well, after people have paid their tax-paid income across in interest and capital repayments, updated an older house because they are living in it, putting their own labour in.

But a rental is a different kettle of fish. The interest comes off the income, other costs are defrayed against tax due, and rentals are notorious for having less spent on upkeep. If that was not the case, the insulation figures for NZ would be a lot better. Commercial buildings are similar, with the landlord only needing to keep the place watertight, a good water and power supply, and the tenant usually has to cover all internal upgrades on top of the longer-term lease. This situation is written into the standard lease agreements.

So please don't insult the left's intelligence by stating that a CGT has to include the family home. It can stay out, that would be only fair. And a repatriation clause undermines the whole thing. If you make a good clean profit on a business sale or additional property sale, you need to pay some tax on it, to be fair to everyone else. End of story.

It has been a great few days for NZ. We won the Sevens in Wellington, and Metiria Turei became the first female politician to speak on Te Tii Marae, a full 16 years after Helen Clark was denied the privilege. It shows that progress is being made, it's slow, but we are moving towards a more equal society, where everyone gets a fair go.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9685572/Metiria-Turei-speaks-at-Te-Tii-Marae

[fungus pudding]

That sounds like the CGT you have when you're not having a CGT. Sam Morgan sells a new TradeMe in the future, pays no tax yet again, because he simply finds another investment to move into. Who wouldn't?



Any profit from business, land and buildings should be taxed only on exit. It's unrealistic to call it taxable profit if it goes straight into another venture likely to further taxable income, as opposed to payable on exit when it becomes free to spend on personal matters. So what if Sam Morgan's next business venture absorbs all his money from previous sale? Sounds like he's doing his bit.
I've just sold a small vacant commercial building - try as I might I could not find tenants because it is the last remaining commercial building in what has become a student residential area (in Dunedin). I was able to sell the site for student flat development at a price a bit below its theoretical commercial value. I am about to buy another property to replace my lost income. To do that will cost me just on $100,000 more. Question: Have I made a profit?

P.S. I understand Sam Morgan did not repatriate a large % of the sale of trademe, but paid out a lot to shareholders which may or may not have been reinvested. I have no argument with that being taxed - if CGT is introduced. Overall I hope it isn't. It does have a nasty downside.

[elZorro]

Any profit from business, land and buildings should be taxed only on exit. It's unrealistic to call it taxable profit if it goes straight into another venture likely to further taxable income, as opposed to payable on exit when it becomes free to spend on personal matters. So what if Sam Morgan's next business venture absorbs all his money from previous sale? Sounds like he's doing his bit.
I've just sold a small vacant commercial building - try as I might I could not find tenants because it is the last remaining commercial building in what has become a student residential area (in Dunedin). I was able to sell the site for student flat development at a price a bit below its theoretical commercial value. I am about to buy another property to replace my lost income. To do that will cost me just on $100,000 more. Question: Have I made a profit?

P.S. I understand Sam Morgan did not repatriate a large % of the sale of trademe, but paid out a lot to shareholders which may or may not have been reinvested. I have no argument with that being taxed - if CGT is introduced. Overall I hope it isn't. It does have a nasty downside.

I guess the property situation will be a complex beast: on one side there is a trading situation which may have been in loss for a period, giving a tax rebate of about 30%, offsetting other income tax due. On the capital side, there would have been a capital gain over time, so presumably what has now paid itself off with income and inflation, is still not quite able to meet the cost of a particular replacement building.

What is not clear is how profitable the first commercial building was over the period of ownership, therefore what the criteria are for the new building. In any case, a $100,000 shortfall for a commercial building might cost just 7% interest, or $7,000 a year. There would be no immediate need to pay out the capital shortfall, and in any case most of the capital needed for the building is already there.

Assuming that the renovation on the first commercial property is all carried out by the next owner, and that you have decided it is not as good an investment idea as a replacement commercial property lease, and the latter is preferable to simply holding the cash proceeds in a bank account, then I think the situation is clear. The sale of the building is really the sale of a business, you might buy another business to replace its income, but at this point in time the first business will have made a capital gain.

Ensuring investors keep rolling their funds into new projects is not a big issue. Farms and businesses are being sold all the time, that money has to go somewhere. The investor still gets to keep most of the gains with a CGT.

[fungus pudding]

I guess the property situation will be a complex beast: on one side there is a trading situation which may have been in loss for a period, giving a tax rebate of about 30%, offsetting other income tax due. On the capital side, there would have been a capital gain over time, so presumably what has now paid itself off with income and inflation, is still not quite able to meet the cost of a particular replacement building.

What is not clear is how profitable the first commercial building was over the period of ownership, therefore what the criteria are for the new building. In any case, a $100,000 shortfall for a commercial building might cost just 7% interest, or $7,000 a year. There would be no immediate need to pay out the capital shortfall, and in any case most of the capital needed for the building is already there.

Assuming that the renovation on the first commercial property is all carried out by the next owner, and that you have decided it is not as good an investment idea as a replacement commercial property lease, and the latter is preferable to simply holding the cash proceeds in a bank account, then I think the situation is clear. The sale of the building is really the sale of a business, you might buy another business to replace its income, but at this point in time the first business will have made a capital gain.

Ensuring investors keep rolling their funds into new projects is not a big issue. Farms and businesses are being sold all the time, that money has to go somewhere. The investor still gets to keep most of the gains with a CGT.


What on earth does all that mean? My building, which I had owned for 18 years, has had no deductible expenses. Tenants paid everything - no interest because I haven't used mortgages for decades. The building will be demolished by new owner. So you appear to think that had I been able to keep that building with a tenant I should not be liable for tax, but if I acquire another building by reusing the capital I should pay tax. That is not logical. In the first case, I have made a profit but not realised it (by not selling it). In the second case, I have made the same profit, but having to pay tax because I have moved it from one pocket to another.
Here is another one. Young fellow I know has moved from Christchurch to Dunedin because his firm relocated after losing their building in the earthquake. He owned an old house in flats in Ch-ch but found he was having to make frequent trips there to put out the inevitable fires that come with residential tenants. So he sold at a considerable 'profit'. He has purchased a similar property in Dunedin to maintain his long term goal of long term ownership to supplement his income and for eventual retirement. Believe me, with sales commission and legal fees for both transactions, valuations and other due diligence costs, he is well and truly out of pocket. Under current tax law the IRD would not tax him on the sale. Under your scheme, you would prefer he was taxed even though he is no better off (has not profited) . Hard to see what that achieves.

[elZorro]

What on earth does all that mean? My building, which I had owned for 18 years, has had no deductible expenses. Tenants paid everything - no interest because I haven't used mortgages for decades. The building will be demolished by new owner. So you appear to think that had I been able to keep that building with a tenant I should not be liable for tax, but if I acquire another building by reusing the capital I should pay tax. That is not logical. In the first case, I have made a profit but not realised it (by not selling it). In the second case, I have made the same profit, but having to pay tax because I have moved it from one pocket to another.
Here is another one. Young fellow I know has moved from Christchurch to Dunedin because his firm relocated after losing their building in the earthquake. He owned an old house in flats in Ch-ch but found he was having to make frequent trips there to put out the inevitable fires that come with residential tenants. So he sold at a considerable 'profit'. He has purchased a similar property in Dunedin to maintain his long term goal of long term ownership to supplement his income and for eventual retirement. Believe me, with sales commission and legal fees for both transactions, valuations and other due diligence costs, he is well and truly out of pocket. Under current tax law the IRD would not tax him on the sale. Under your scheme, you would prefer he was taxed even though he is no better off (has not profited) . Hard to see what that achieves.

FP, you have confirmed my view of some landlords. You owned a building for 18 years and had to do no upkeep on your side of the lease agreement? Obviously it was not tidied up enough to interest a new tenant. And now it is to be demolished, so you were land-banking with that asset. Your situation and the one the younger investor sees, are different. In one, the capital gain must have been quite small if it didn't cover the selling and buying costs. So he would have little CGT to bother about.

Your ownership of the first building was mainly concerned with the appreciation of the land value over time, otherwise you'd have tried to ensure the building was too useful as a business premises to be pulled down.

Now that the property has been sold, there is a real market valuation on it, the cash is there, and that is the only time in 18 years that a CGT could realistically be levelled. All those employee suckers out there, who pay tax on all of their income, and most of their spending, quite rightfully think that capital investment profits are overdue for a tax, to match other countries.

[fungus pudding]

FP, you have confirmed my view of some landlords. You owned a building for 18 years and had to do no upkeep on your side of the lease agreement? Obviously it was not tidied up enough to interest a new tenant. And now it is to be demolished, so you were land-banking with that asset. Your situation and the one the younger investor sees, are different. In one, the capital gain must have been quite small if it didn't cover the selling and buying costs. So he would have little CGT to bother about.

Your ownership of the first building was mainly concerned with the appreciation of the land value over time, otherwise you'd have tried to ensure the building was too useful as a business premises to be pulled down.



The reason my building did not attract a new tenant, and why the last tenant moved was because it had become surrounded by multi-storeyed student accommodation. My intention was to own it forever, but the area changed. Damned if I know where land baking comes into it. All my investing is for permanent income - always has been. I am worse off from selling it.
In the other example, as stated there was a massive so-called profit from selling the Ch-ch property. It was replacing it - Dunedin prices had risen just as much - and all the associated costs that ate up all that profit. Don't be too hung up on CGT. Go and spend a year in Australia and see if you still think it's a good thing. As I have stated before, CGT, if not well designed, e.g. Australian system, is a bad tax. It will certainly harm the NZ share market, but will not affect real estate prices.

[elZorro]

The reason my building did not attract a new tenant, and why the last tenant moved was because it had become surrounded by multi-storeyed student accommodation. My intention was to own it forever, but the area changed. Damned if I know where land baking comes into it. All my investing is for permanent income - always has been. I am worse off from selling it.
In the other example, as stated there was a massive so-called profit from selling the Ch-ch property. It was replacing it - Dunedin prices had risen just as much - and all the associated costs that ate up all that profit. Don't be too hung up on CGT. Go and spend a year in Australia and see if you still think it's a good thing. As I have stated before, CGT, if not well designed, e.g. Australian system, is a bad tax. It will certainly harm the NZ share market, but will not affect real estate prices.

The Australian system is to treat the capital gains as they occur, as normal income in a given year. The family home is exempted as long as it's on land less than 2Ha. There is a 50% discount for individuals, no discount for companies. The tax rate on part of it could be near 40% if that is the bracket that the income moves the entity into.

http://www.ato.gov.au/General/Capital-gains-tax/

Here, the CGT proposal is to levy a flat and lower rate of tax on it. The family home will still be exempt. Any CGT will not affect property or assets already owned before the CGT comes into force. Losses in a given transaction will more likely be carried forward to offset against future capital gains.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5284832/Labour-confirms-capital-gains-tax-new-rate

The Australian system is a bit messy with exemptions for some people (older business owners) and not others, and the tax rate can be quite high. So a 15% flat rate is quite acceptable in comparison. I don't think the CGT's reason for being is to lower property prices or clobber the sharemarket. It's to make things fairer in NZ.

[Harvey Specter]

The Australian system is to treat the capital gains as they occur, as normal income in a given year.

So a 15% flat rate is quite acceptable in comparison. I don't think the CGT's reason for being is to lower property prices or clobber the sharemarket. It's to make things fairer in NZ.Just want to pick up on these two.

The gains are taxed as they are realised, not an unrealised basis. (I am sure you meant that but the work occur is a bit ambiguous).

Why should someone who earns all their income from capital gains have a lower tax rate than someone who earns through effort. I am not refer to 'passive' capital gains but active capital gains like a spec builder, share trader or as Buffet once said, why should he pay a lower tax rate than his secretary?

ON that last point, I would like to see CGT, if introduced, being revenue neutral - that is at the same rate as income tax but the income from the CGT used to lower the tax rate. Eg. CGT will take 10 years to earn sufficient tax so we will drop the top tax rate (and changes to the lower rates as well) 1% per year for the next year. EDIT: ultimately end up on say a $5k tax free, 10% up to $40k and 25% after that. I dont know if that would be revenue neutral but you get the idea.

[Harvey Specter]

Roll over relief seems to be missing from this discussion. Anyone who has read a Robert Kiyosaki book should know how this works in the US. Sell a property but buy a more expensive property and that gain gets rolled over into the next purchase, effectively deferring the tax until the gain is ultimately realised.

[fungus pudding]

The Australian system is to treat the capital gains as they occur, as normal income in a given year. The family home is exempted as long as it's on land less than 2Ha. There is a 50% discount for individuals, no discount for companies. The tax rate on part of it could be near 40% if that is the bracket that the income moves the entity into.

http://www.ato.gov.au/General/Capital-gains-tax/

Here, the CGT proposal is to levy a flat and lower rate of tax on it. The family home will still be exempt. Any CGT will not affect property or assets already owned before the CGT comes into force. Losses in a given transaction will more likely be carried forward to offset against future capital gains.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/5284832/Labour-confirms-capital-gains-tax-new-rate

The Australian system is a bit messy with exemptions for some people (older business owners) and not others, and the tax rate can be quite high. So a 15% flat rate is quite acceptable in comparison. I don't think the CGT's reason for being is to lower property prices or clobber the sharemarket. It's to make things fairer in NZ.

Yes, yes, we know all that. If the tax was levied if and when sale proceeds were used for personal expenditure it would be fairer and less likely to stop things happening - that is the big problem in Australia which you would know if you'd ever had experience in the Australian R.E. market. All taxes slow activity, but to put blocks that stifle expansion, as in trading up, in the way of a trading enterprise is plain nuts. I have no doubt we'll end up with a CGT within a decade, so it's important to get it right. The current proposal is not good.

[elZorro]

Harvey, thanks for the correction, it wasn't clear, as you say. Spec builders and sharemarket people who are active traders are already picked up in the current system, taxed at normal rates. I would think that the 15% rate is there so it's more likely to be accepted by the public at large.

If a capital gain on investments had been earned slowly over several years, and its effect on a tax rate would have been less if it was settled every year like normal business income, then I think it is punitive to put all the capital gain into one year's income when it is sold, and tax a fair bit of it, at what is likely to be the highest tax rate. Most of us will not be selling off capital assets very frequently. 15% is a low figure, but of course it might be like the GST rate, it was 10% and now it's 15%.

I don't agree with a repatriation clause or rollover clause though. That is just the old boys network getting away with it again. If you're smart enough to make a capital gain on a sale alongside other income streams, you can afford to allow for a CGT payment in the financial year in which it settles. Take 85% of the gain and do it all again, it's still appealing.

R&D grants don't always work out. Some NZers made a good capital gain here on a sale, the govt later granted funds to the Canadian-owned business, and now it's going to be wound down.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11198551

[Harvey Specter]

If a capital gain on investments had been earned slowly over several years, and its effect on a tax rate would have been less if it was settled every year like normal business income, then I think it is punitive to put all the capital gain into one year's income when it is sold, and tax a fair bit of it, at what is likely to be the highest tax rate. Most of us will not be selling off capital assets very frequently. I am in the top tax rate (it isn't hard to be a the moment though DC may bump it up with a $150k limit) and hope to be for the rest of my working life. So why do I get a discount for making a capital gain.

I also note that somehow hedge funds treat the carry interest as a capital gain. HOw they do that is anyones guess but shows that the it is the rich that will benefit from a lower CGT rate.

Maybe they need a rule where you can elect to do an additional calc which effectively spreads the income over the past 6 years should you be in a lower tax bracket.

[Cuzzie]

Prime Minister John Key has called Labour leader David Cunliffe an "idiot" over his comments about Kiwis' entitlements in Australia. Read it here. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11199327)

[Harvey Specter]

Agreed. But to make this work quickly there need to be no exemptions. I find this to be completely reasonable.If they really want to 'exempt' the family home, why not roll over releif or a cap (ie. first $350k only)

[fungus pudding]

Still distorting ... e.g. Aucklanders would all move to the South Island to minimise their tax bills ... I'd not want that ... Would you? :)

We South Islanders wouldn't want that either. Not that we don't like North Islanders. We just like them better when they are there.

[elZorro]

I drove right through two thirds of the South Island in one day, it just looked like road to me. It's cold down there and it snows too often.:eek2:

Seriously though, the CGT has the potential to earn the govt about 2 billion a year at the 15% tax rate. This is only one 30th of their revenue, not a major item. So you can't expect them to drop income tax by much at the same time.

I had another thought today (yes, and it was a lonely one) - the capital gain calculation is made on the current sale price less the actual dollars first invested. Inflation is not taken into account. In other words, not all of the capital gain is real. It looks good on paper, but if inflation was put into the result, it might be a far different story. Australia tried that method for nearly 10 years, then dropped it. I guess that is why there is a 50% discount for private persons, which brings the maximum tax rate back to about 20% effectively.

I still say exempt the family home, because private people use their tax-paid dollars to pay the interest, and cannot claim that back, or their overheads. Plus they put their own efforts into the building upkeep and don't pay themselves for it. There could be a limit on the value of the home for such purposes, or use land as the measure like Australia did. That might be easier.

A rollover or repatriation is a bad idea that would cut the entire policy down at the knees before it got started.

[elZorro]

Prime Minister John Key has called Labour leader David Cunliffe an "idiot" over his comments about Kiwis' entitlements in Australia. Read it here. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11199327)



John Key looks very tired in the second photo. I hope he gets some rest before the elections, Cuzzie.

John was erudite as usual.
"Great if it is, because if it is, we can take the case. But that doesn't appear to be the case."

David Cunliffe has offered a sensible opinion on the importance of sorting out the supermarket stoush. After all, these Aussie supermarkets (who also sell us a lot of food here) are reducing facings for NZ-made products or NZ content foodstuffs, and that is the hard part in selling goods at retail in Australia. One advantage we have is that we can sell them fruit and veges guaranteed to be free of fruitfly. Hundreds of millions of annual exports, that's worth following up on.

I think if you go back to 2001 (http://www.immi.gov.au/allforms/travel-documents/new-zealand.htm), there would be some good deals offered to NZ by Australia that balanced out the other changes that didn't help. In any case, NZ has never been overrun with Aussies (or Americans), so we have to be realistic about that. Our costs in looking after Australian nationals are not a great factor in helping to balance it out.

[fungus pudding]

A rollover or repatriation is a bad idea that would cut the entire policy down at the knees before it got started.

No it wouldn't.

[elZorro]

No it wouldn't.

Yes it would FP, as well you know. It'll take a few years before any major tax revenue and hence lever on the economy occurs, even without repatriation. If nearly everyone rolled over their asset investments for their lifetimes, the effect would be minimal for a generation. I'm not sure what the Labour proposal is regarding CGT, when an estate is wound up.

Edit: Here's a document I should have read earlier, spelling out a lot of the thoughts behind the CGT. They have already looked at overseas results and experiences.

https://www.labour.org.nz/sites/default/files/CGTWebdoct%20July%202011.pdf

Heirs of an estate can receive large assets with no CGT at the time, it will be levied once they are sold. The CGT applies from a "V-day" valuation (unsure how that will be ascertained) so there will be some CGT levied in the first year of any scheme, but it will be a few million only.

They have thought of everything. If you are using your normal home partly to run a business, and claim say 20% of the costs because of the space used, then on any house sale you'd need to pay CGT on 20% of any capital gain. Can't have it both ways.

The family bach, if sold, will attract CGT.

However, on page 13 it states that there may be a CGT rollover allowed (tested) if the seller of an asset buys a similar class asset with the proceeds.


Rollover Provisions
The Expert Panel will be asked to give advice on the circumstances in which rollover provisions should apply.
Many countries have rollover provisions which provide for a deferral of CGT beyond the year in which the asset is transferred or disposed of. Apart from relationship break-ups and death, the issue of when rollovers should be allowed is complex and technical.
They may apply where the transfer of an asset class is between taxpayer entities (e.g. from one arm of a business to another). They may also apply when a taxpayer disposes of one asset, and replaces it with a similar asset.

[fungus pudding]

Yes it would FP, as well you know. It'll take a few years before any major tax revenue and hence lever on the economy occurs, even without repatriation. If nearly everyone rolled over their asset investments for their lifetimes, the effect would be minimal for a generation. I'm not sure what the Labour proposal is regarding CGT, when an estate is wound up.

I can assure you there are a squillion different reasons why people sell. Probably the most common with residential is many people find they are unsuited to dealing with tenants. I doubt that a repatriation period of one year for reinvestment would make 10% difference. It's simply about fairness. Buy a new car, travel round the planet, upgrade the house etc, then fair enough, pay some tax, but improving your business, increasing your taxable income, should not incur tax. Anyway Labour have said it's not about revenue and have often stated cgt will help lower real estate prices. It won't. And with all you said about exempting the family home, you should be advocating exempting a holiday home as well for the same reasons. Incidentally you say that home owners cannot claim interest back. Here's some news for you - neither can anyone else. They have to pay it themselves.

[elZorro]

I can assure you there are a squillion different reasons why people sell. Probably the most common with residential is many people find they are unsuited to dealing with tenants. I doubt that a repatriation period of one year for reinvestment would make 10% difference. It's simply about fairness. Buy a new car, travel round the planet, upgrade the house etc, then fair enough, pay some tax, but improving your business, increasing your taxable income, should not incur tax. Anyway Labour have said it's not about revenue and have often stated cgt will help lower real estate prices. It won't. And with all you said about exempting the family home, you should be advocating exempting a holiday home as well for the same reasons. Incidentally you say that home owners cannot claim interest back. Here's some news for you - neither can anyone else. They have to pay it themselves.

A bach that hasn't been handed down through the family is normally an investment primarily, as it is either not used for much of the year, or is rented out for some of the year for income. If it is sold and not passed on as an inheritance, it should be subject to CGT. But I agree, the difference is that if it is for private use only, this asset type is usually supported by interest payments that cannot be claimed in a tax return as an expense. It will make baches less exciting to own as a shorter-term investment.

Farmers, businesses, large and small tenanted property owners, all get to put the interest payments from their loans and overdrafts as an expense in their ledgers. Perhaps you forgot this FP, as you don't pay interest. I do, I'm trying to wean myself off it.

In that case, the interest cost (and all other valid expense) is effectively reduced by say 30% if they were due to pay some income tax in a given financial year. This situation is a big advantage to larger investors compared to normal homeowners, who may take decades to pay off the home, paying interest all the time yet with no ability to defray it.

[iceman]

I drove right through two thirds of the South Island in one day, it just looked like road to me. It's cold down there and it snows too often.:eek2:


I am aware you have the blinkers on quite often and that you are unable to smell the roses at times, but to drive through 2/3 of the stunningly beautiful Mainland without taking your blinkers off is just plain silly and dangerous ;)

[elZorro]

I am aware you have the blinkers on quite often and that you are unable to smell the roses at times, but to drive through 2/3 of the stunningly beautiful Mainland without taking your blinkers off is just plain silly and dangerous ;)

In my defence, I had to catch the ferry, but there were so many places I'd have liked to stop at, and next time I'll allow a few more days. I did feel like the dumbest person on the planet at the time. :)

Colin James has a bit of insight into the Aussie supermarket situation.


A low-wage downside and the "living wage"

New Zealand wages are around 30 per cent below Australian wages. That makes our goods competitive in Australia -- too competitive for some Australians. Their solution: a non-tariff trade barrier.

Horticulture farmers here have for a year or so been muttering sotto voce that Australian supermarkets were switching sourcing for their own-brand food from New Zealand to Australian producers. It is justified on a "buy Australia" campaign -- and props up uncompetitive Australian suppliers. Add that to the near-prohibitive biosecurity procedures on New Zealand apples. Underarm bowlers are in action.

Contrast a call on Thursday by Anglo-Australian miner BHP Billiton's boss Andrew Mackenzie for "vigilance" and "an evangelism" to promote free trade and stop "steps backwards" into "protectionism".

Mackenzie -- as a Scot made BHP chief only in 2013, he is not yet a paid-up underarm bowler -- heads the B20 of big businesses feeding into Australia's development of the agenda for the G20 heavyweight countries' summit in Brisbane in November, at which Australia will argue the virtues of free trade -- even while still subsidising some of its firms, a form of non-tariff protection.

Australia is in good company. Countries have been slipping in non-tariff trade barriers on a range of pretexts, which in time are likely to include climate change.

So New Zealand producers and exporters will likely find here and there blockages to entry that contravene free trade agreements in spirit if not in the fine print -- as the Australian supermarkets are doing with CER.

What is the answer? Bill English has in the past noted the lower-wage-cost contribution to New Zealand competitiveness in Australia. But the supermarkets' lesson is that low wages are not always a one-way advantage. There may be an economic cost.

Low wages are, of course, a cost to the low-waged: constrained lives for them and their families. There are also costs to society in less cohesion and to the economy in lower purchasing power which reduces demand for local goods as well as imported ones. In countries with reasonable social security, there are income and other support costs.

So some economists, for example, Jared Bernstein in the New York Times, and right-of-centre columnists, for example, Edward Luce of the Financial Times, argue for a higher United States federal minimum wage, now $US7.25 -- in real terms 23 per cent lower than in 1968 and, at about $NZ8.80, way below our $13.75 minimum, soon to go to around $14.

A recent New York Times editorial quoted an Economic Policy Institute calculation that the Democrats' proposed minimum wage lift to $US10.10 ($NZ12.25) would add $35 billion in wages up to 2016 and "the resulting increase in gross domestic product would create 85,000 new jobs".

Opposing economists, for example, Harvard University's Gregory Mankiw in the New York Times, echo our Treasury's line: that wage rises cut employers' profits and, if not matched by higher worker productivity, cost jobs.

Job losses was English's Treasury-based line last November when he savaged proposals for a "living wage". He treated it as a version of a minimum wage and said most of those on the minimum do not have dependents and in any case Working For Families and other programmes help families on low incomes.

"Living wage" proponents say it is calculated to buy the "basic necessities of life and enable workers to live with dignity and participate as active citizens in society". At $18.40 it is not exactly luxury for a one-income family of four.

Backing for a living wage continues to gain momentum. The Wellington City Council has applied it to its direct employees and aims to add employees of council-owned companies from next year and put contractors in its 2015 plan. The Christchurch City Council (positively) and some district health boards are considering it. Labour and the Greens say they will apply it to direct public service employees.

Next Monday the living wage coalition of 100-plus organisations will update the $18.40 and launch an employer accreditation scheme. A bunch of soon-to-be-accredited employers will be there. Firms joining say better pay lifts employee loyalty and gives the firms branding for socially-conscious consumers who, for example, buy "fair trade" and "organic" goods.

There is another dimension, which worries opponents: lifting the minimum wage also pushes up wages of those not far above the minimum. Might the living wage do the same?

The implication for New Zealand producers' low-labour-cost competitiveness in Australia is obvious. And in the 2010s tightly enmeshed global economy there are limits to what a small export-dependent economy like ours can do without killing jobs. Also, more consumption means more imports.

But the Australian supermarket lesson is that low-wage-based competitiveness is not a one-way bet. Nor are low wages an obvious path to high-value-based competitiveness which can make us a sustainably high-wage country.



Colin James, Synapsis Ltd, 04-384 7030, 021-438 434, fax 04-384 7195, P O Box 9494, Marion Square, Wellington 6141, ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000011/!x-usc:mailto:ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz), website www.ColinJames.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000011/!x-usc:http://www.colinjames.co.nz/)



The right-wing Business NZ commissions a report on the Labour/Greens power proposal, with predictable results. Bryan Leyland is not 100% behind it either, but does see some merit.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9706027/Critics-slam-power-report

[fungus pudding]

Farmers, businesses, large and small tenanted property owners, all get to put the interest payments from their loans and overdrafts as an expense in their ledgers. Perhaps you forgot this FP, as you don't pay interest. I do, I'm trying to wean myself off it.



That is very different from claiming back the interest. Of course they do not pay tax on the amount paid as interest. They are taxed on profit - not turnover.

[elZorro]

That is very different from claiming back the interest. Of course they do not pay tax on the amount paid as interest. They are taxed on profit - not turnover.

But surely you see what I mean - interest is a business expense, so the tax situation effectively reduces the cash outlay to borrow money, used to set up capital gains in the first place. A private person pays tax on their main income, and then fronts the full interest cost for their home (if they can afford one) on what is left over.

More bad news for the food manufacturing sector in Hamilton, the Huttons plant in Frankton is closing with the immediate loss of 125 jobs. Goodman Fielder, who appear to be selling off non-core assets to reduce debt, have sold the Kiwi Bacon and Huttons Sausages business to Hellers, who are based in Christchurch and don't need the Hamilton factory site. At least it's a NZ buyer. Wonder if we'll see the brands disappear, but I suspect not. Adds to facings in the supermarket chillers.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11183276

[Harvey Specter]

Seriously though, the CGT has the potential to earn the govt about 2 billion a year at the 15% tax rate. This is only one 30th of their revenue, not a major item. So you can't expect them to drop income tax by much at the same time.Thats because you arent txing people at their marginal rate and you are exempting peoples main asset - the family home.

[Cuzzie]

But surely you see what I mean - interest is a business expense, so the tax situation effectively reduces the cash outlay to borrow money, used to set up capital gains in the first place. A private person pays tax on their main income, and then fronts the full interest cost for their home (if they can afford one) on what is left over.

More bad news for the food manufacturing sector in Hamilton, the Huttons plant in Frankton is closing with the immediate loss of 125 jobs. Goodman Fielder, who appear to be selling off non-core assets to reduce debt, have sold the Kiwi Bacon and Huttons Sausages business to Hellers, who are based in Christchurch and don't need the Hamilton factory site. At least it's a NZ buyer. Wonder if we'll see the brands disappear, but I suspect not. Adds to facings in the supermarket chillers.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11183276
EZ, here is some more business news from this week so far.

Latest Roy Morgan poll shows National Party climbing to 47%% support; Kim Dotcom likely to struggle...
http://www.interest.co.nz/news/68369/latest-roy-morgan-poll-shows-national-party-climbing-47-support-kim-dotcom-likely-struggl (http://www.interest.co.nz/news/68369/latest-roy-morgan-poll-shows-national-party-climbing-47-support-kim-dotcom-likely-struggl)

No guarantee of low prices from Labour, Greens power policy. Power prices could be expected to rise if the Labour and Green parties’ electricity policy is adopted using the high historic cost of building some of the country’s largest hydro dams, a research paper prepared for Business New Zealand claims.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1402/S00245/no-guarantee-of-low-prices-from-labour-greens-power-policy.htm (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1402/S00245/no-guarantee-of-low-prices-from-labour-greens-power-policy.htm)

ANZ economists caution against complacency as the NZ economy strengthens. ANZ economists are warning against what they term the 'croc' effect, which they say could undermine the promising economic recovery.In their weekly "Market Focus" the economists said that in the wake of further encouraging economic statistics released last week they were left with little doubt about prospects for the New Zealand economy."We’re into an expansion with real legs
http://www.interest.co.nz/news/68400/anz-economists-caution-against-complacency-nz-economy-strengthens (http://www.interest.co.nz/news/68400/anz-economists-caution-against-complacency-nz-economy-strengthens)

Strong retail spend continues into 2014. New Zealanders strong Christmas retail spending on credit and debit cards has continued into January according to Paymark figures.Paymark, which processes around 75 per cent of all electronic transactions in New Zealand, said that the total value of January spending through its network was up 7.9 per cent from 12 months ago.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11199387 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11199387)

Is Australia’s milk war becoming the NZ Product War? Federated Farmers of New Zealand believes Australian consumers will ultimately say it’s not fair dinkum to remove New Zealand products from the shelves of Coles and Woolworths supermarkets in Australia.“
http://business.scoop.co.nz/2014/02/10/is-australias-milk-war-becoming-the-nz-product-war/ (http://business.scoop.co.nz/2014/02/10/is-australias-milk-war-becoming-the-nz-product-war/)

Good news start to the week for our economy again. National is on the rise and the Green Labour party is slipping. I'm happy.

Interesting article from the ANZ economists with caution against complacency as the NZ economy strengthens, but a good point. The good times are here as stated by the ANZ, but we need to keep our “rock-star” economy booming and as it does more of our last Labour Govt. debt can be payed off and then maybe productivity and income levels will finally start to rise. Of coarse we can always take that backward step and vote a far Left Labour/Greens Govt. in and just give everyone a wage increase and tax cut straight off, nosediving our economy for another decade or so.

[Cuzzie]

More good news just in:

Westpac raises NZ growth forecasts

Westpac has revised up its New Zealand growth forecast for 2014 to 4.2 per cent from its previous forecast of 3.8 per cent, based on the country's high terms of trade performance. More here (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11200025)


Oh, and this just in too: Cunliffe's chief of staff Wendy Brandon resigns
Click me for the link. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11200043)

[fungus pudding]

But surely you see what I mean - interest is a business expense,

Precisely.

[elZorro]

Precisely.

And I have always encouraged people I met who had a bit of get-up-and-go, to start a business sometime. Anything.

Partly because of the advantages, including tax issues, but also because they'll generally be more productive, and who knows where it will lead. They might even be (shock horror), employers of other people.

Interest is an acceptable expense if you're running a business, but it's an out-of-pocket semi-rort if you're paying it with private funds. Even when inflation is high, the true cost of owning your own home, the interest, free labour and repairs, updating and renovating , use of money costs, mean that it's unlikely you'll do better than have a compulsory saving period. So there is a good reason for excluding the average family home from a CGT, because most of us are not smart enough or dedicated enough to make a true capital gain on the home we live in.

Property investors, who chose property they wouldn't live or trade in themselves generally, might do a lot better, and some work the system for all it's worth. In this case a CGT at a reasonable rate, levied soon after the sale date, is appropriate.

Labour has tried to get transparency on the finalised TPP agreement text, before signing takes place. No luck as yet.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9708400/Labour-TPP-transparency-push-blocked

[winner69]

EZ .....hope your man keeps pushing for more transparency around this trans pacific trade agreement

But it is so so secret it going to hurt all nzer's but it make the rich even richer


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article37600.htm

[Harvey Specter]

Labour has tried to get transparency on the finalised TPP agreement text, before signing takes place. No luck as yet.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9708400/Labour-TPP-transparency-push-blockedThat's BS. It has never worked like that and DC is either showing huge naivety or is just playing games with the general populations naivety.

It gets negotiated behind closed doors until signed. If you dont comply with this you get kicked out and no one will trust you going forward (DC probably doens't understand this as no one trusts him now). However, opposition will be fully briefed.

Once signed, then it becomes public but it doesn't take effect till it is ratified.

[elZorro]

Shane Jones in the news today with a massive scoop, (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11200838)although I think people in the retail food business will know this already. Back in 2010, the culture differences between Foodstuffs (NZ New World, Pak N Save, 4 Square etc) and Progressive (owned by Australia's Woolworths giant, owning NZ's Countdown supermarkets) was being noted. (Not always favourably in Foodstuff's case)


In August 2006, not long after Woolworths bought Progressive, negotiations broke down between the company and the National Distribution Union over the union's demands for a national collective agreement. More than 500 staff were locked out and large gaps appeared on its shelves. The dispute dragged on for a month and became big national news.
Some claim the company is still suffering from the market share it lost at that time.



The latest is that it appears Progressive are asking for backdated cheques from suppliers to cover low operational profits, not in writing, but at special face-to-face meetings. The threat is that their facings will be taken away if they don't comply. It could be that these are conditions placed on big suppliers at the time they sign up with Progressive. Something similar happens in other trade areas, where stock is bought on consignment, or after the sales are made to end users, the actual supplier of the goods is asked to send a cheque to the retailer for a top-up payment based on a percentage of the sales made, which effectively increases the retailer's margin. But this is all arranged in advance. If Progressive have not arranged anything in advance on paper, then they are certainly in trouble I'd hope.

Quite a meaty find for Labour, it will be interesting in parliament tomorrow.

[fungus pudding]

The latest is that it appears Progressive are asking for backdated cheques from suppliers to cover low operational profits, not in writing, but at special face-to-face meetings. advance on paper, then they are certainly in trouble I'd hope.



Why would they want a back-dated cheque? Has Shane got a bit out of focus watching funny movies perhaps.

[elZorro]

Why would they want a back-dated cheque? Has Shane got a bit out of focus watching funny movies perhaps.

Maybe FP, I think the wording of his speech was carefully calculated. It had resonance, that's for sure. In actual fact Progressive probably asked for credit notes to be applied against their current purchases. I've just had a look at their website. The biggest employer in NZ (maybe not of FTEs). Very organised store handling of incoming goods with barcodes and transport roller belts. Lots of processes and no doubt a document to cover everything. While it might look deceptively simple when you're in the supermarket buying the weekly groceries, all of those goods that fill the shelves were transported there from some far-flung area. If we ran out of diesel over here, those shops would be empty fairly quickly.

I suspect supermarkets usually make good margins on the greens area, butchery/deli as well, but the non-perishable standard lines might be harder. Our hort farmers don't make a lot of profit unless they are super organised, so suppliers are probably screwed down across the board. Those who supply on a large scale, the owners of those businesses, seem to do OK in the end, and won't want to rock the boat. But this is the very top part of a pyramid, and virtually all of their employees might get fairly average pay to allow for the low supplier margins.

Maybe the consumer wins out of all this in the end? The race to the bottom.

[fungus pudding]

Maybe FP, I think the wording of his speech was carefully calculated. It had resonance, that's for sure. In actual fact Progressive probably asked for credit notes to be applied against their current purchases. I've just had a look at their website. The biggest employer in NZ (maybe not of FTEs). Very organised store handling of incoming goods with barcodes and transport roller belts. Lots of processes and no doubt a document to cover everything. While it might look deceptively simple when you're in the supermarket buying the weekly groceries, all of those goods that fill the shelves were transported there from some far-flung area. If we ran out of diesel over here, those shops would be empty fairly quickly.

I suspect supermarkets usually make good margins on the greens area, butchery/deli as well, but the non-perishable standard lines might be harder. Our hort farmers don't make a lot of profit unless they are super organised, so suppliers are probably screwed down across the board. Those who supply on a large scale, the owners of those businesses, seem to do OK in the end, and won't want to rock the boat. But this is the very top part of a pyramid, and virtually all of their employees might get fairly average pay to allow for the low supplier margins.

Maybe the consumer wins out of all this in the end? The race to the bottom.

The FMCG market has always worked on the value of shelf space, aisle ends etc. A discount or rebate will get you the best spot for your goods - that's perfectly fair. Only a mug retailer would favour the lines with a small mark-up. And yes - the consumer wins. So does the supermarket, and the supplier. It is the way the world works. Amen.

[elZorro]

The FMCG market has always worked on the value of shelf space, aisle ends etc. A discount or rebate will get you the best spot for your goods - that's perfectly fair. Only a mug retailer would favour the lines with a small mark-up. And yes - the consumer wins. So does the supermarket, and the supplier. It is the way the world works. Amen.

Yes, it's probably OK to buy veges at market auction at a price that allows only capital-intensive growers of tidy produce to make a wage of any kind, and then resell them at often 3-4 times the price, even allowing for spoilage, and it's OK to force some suppliers to provide their own staff to restock the shelves and do their merchandising and aisle sampling booths for the store, and for every bit of shelf space to effectively be rented out, unless it's their own-brand goods? Not to mention the specials, discounts, kickbacks, advert payments for letterbox leaflets. If you're a big producer of goods with lots of staff, you have to keep turnover up at least. The supermarket chains use that to their advantage.

Supermarkets also have a never-ending supply of cheap student labour. Student loans to repay, and a lack of other more career-oriented casual jobs, help with that. I don't think many students get over $16 an hour gross from the retail sector, even if they are supervising. But this has improved, at Progressive, from under $10 an hour just a few years ago.

2011 profit looked OK (http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/latest-edition/6258700/Probe-call-as-supermarket-profits-exceed-food-costs), much higher gross margin than in the UK.

On another note, the OECD and Australian govt are putting forward some ideas for collecting appropriate corporate taxes.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9709222/IRD-gets-more-ammo-to-fight-multinationals

[craic]

I see that the beloved Australian Govt. is to sell off state-owned assets. Takes them a bit of time to catch up. I was - we were - regular Countdown customers until we tried to have a Christmas fund with them - sure it's fine! - as long as you are prepared to front up at the checkout with the cash - we were not. Pak'n Save have a direct credit system. Xmas came and we had a pile of cash, sheets of vouchers ($25 meat packs for $15 limit 4 per customer etc) a bit of interest on our deposits etc. We were still Countdown customers - last visit on Tuesday - but thats the end. I am happy to shop at Pak'N Save and I will not be buying Australian made. Conversely, we have just booked a couple of weeks holiday in Brisbane. Any suggestions for good (cheap) accommodation for a couple of oldies would be gratefully received.
PS as an Irishman, I happen to like Australians and Australia, they probably have the same percentage of ratbags as we have. here

[karen1]

Conversely, we have just booked a couple of weeks holiday in Brisbane. Any suggestions for good (cheap) accommodation for a couple of oldies would be gratefully received.

We thought this was reasonably priced when we spent a week there about 5 years back. Central situation, great for heading out for an early start with transit centre across the road.
Nothing flash, comfortable and more than adequate.

http://www.abbeyonroma.com.au/

[fungus pudding]

And I have always encouraged people I met who had a bit of get-up-and-go, to start a business sometime. Anything.


Looks like it's working.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11201460

[elZorro]

Looks like it's working.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11201460

This is a survey, not hard and fast metrics FP. It looks like domestic orders are up, have been for just over a year. But it has been several years since the GFC, and Christchurch is now being rebuilt. For most of that time, manufacturing has been in big trouble as an employer, and there are still jobs being lost as the owners of various brands amalgamate production in geographic clusters and close older small factories. This is always an ongoing process, but new jobs tend to be in the service industries rather than in manufacturing. Not a recipe to expand our exports.

There's a real groundswell around the Countdown issue (Craic etc), and it looks like the Dotcom mansion has a constant govt spywatch on it, trapping a couple of minor party leaders out. Some of that work could be done remotely by an IP camera with a program that captures car number plates, available off the shelf.

But these are the sorts of news items that might capture voting attention.

[elZorro]

Sue Kedgely with an article on the supermarket story. To be fair, the behaviour of both big chains would need to be investigated. From the comments, Foodstuffs don't have much to be worried about.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11201721

Patrick Smellie has an article on IT, I'd have to agree with it. NZ tends not to push the boundaries, and it may be a big part of the reason why we're not that productive in our SMEs.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1402/S00414/smellie-sniffs-the-breeze-shell-be-right-still-reigns.htm

I'm trying to get fibre ported over from a nearby school. They have fibre there as part of the govt rollout, but haven't bothered to connect to it yet. So ICT can't be a big part of their agenda.

[winner69]

EZ - is your man really this bad
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/cunliffes-four-fails-dc-151791

Pretty bad if any truth in this bit

. Wendy Brandon, a former Auckland Council lawyer and adviser to Mr Cunliffe when he was health minister, is said to have found it difficult to reconcile Mr Cunliffe’s supporters – including Labour’s now radicalised membership base – with a caucus that remains overwhelmingly hostile to him.

[elZorro]

EZ - is your man really this bad
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/cunliffes-four-fails-dc-151791

Pretty bad if any truth in this bit

. Wendy Brandon, a former Auckland Council lawyer and adviser to Mr Cunliffe when he was health minister, is said to have found it difficult to reconcile Mr Cunliffe’s supporters – including Labour’s now radicalised membership base – with a caucus that remains overwhelmingly hostile to him.



Maybe I have my blinkers on, W69, but this article is in the NBR, written by Matthew Hooten, so I am not going to expect a glowing endorsement of David Cunliffe in there. This is all part of the jockeying done in an election year. Mr Hooten will have to do a lot better for his National mates, after the week they've just had. And Wendy Brandon won't be in a great frame of mind, as shingles can go on for years and it is a very tiring and annoying condition, I've heard. If DC is so bad, why did Wendy Brandon work with him again, after having done so previously? http://www.clanzonline.org/qas-with-wendy-brandon-clanz-chapman-tripp-public-sector-in-house-lawyer-of-the-year/

I wonder if the opposition benches have saved up more scandals from the last few years of global-facing policy, for 2014. Shane Jones really did a good job this week, and even if nothing concrete comes out of it, NZ suppliers to the supermarkets will do a bit better from now on I'd think. In turn the whole sector will be better employers.

The sum total of NZ goods to Progressive's Aussie stores appears to be just $54mill p.a., so National's CER policy has not worked too well there. Maybe we should get ourselves a new NZ flag after all.

[craic]

ElZ you have missed the main point - "A caucus that remains overwhelmingly hostile to him". Even if this is heavily overstated, he is not popular with the caucus. I think that that is a fair criticism and a major obstacle for the party at the next election. It's not likely to result in voters changing allegiance but it will lead to abstentions, people who lose their enthusiasm and just stay home on the day.

e

[craic]

ElZ you have missed the main point - "A caucus that remains overwhelmingly hostile to him". Even if this is heavily overstated, he is not popular with the caucus. I think that that is a fair criticism and a major obstacle for the party at the next election. It's not likely to result in voters changing allegiance but it will lead to abstentions, people who lose their enthusiasm and just stay home on the day.

e

[elZorro]

ElZ you have missed the main point - "A caucus that remains overwhelmingly hostile to him". Even if this is heavily overstated, he is not popular with the caucus. I think that that is a fair criticism and a major obstacle for the party at the next election. It's not likely to result in voters changing allegiance but it will lead to abstentions, people who lose their enthusiasm and just stay home on the day.



Craic, I think Labour is up and away on the basis of last week. The next polls should show something. I had a bit of a look through the SST this morning. One news item I'd missed from two days ago was that John Key stated his source for Winston's visits to Kim Dotcom was Whaleoil blogger Cameron Slater. Which Cameron replied to saying "If he said so, then that's the case". National has in turn been accused of feeding data to right-leaning Whaleoil, and John Key calls Cameron up frequently. So Whaleoil is mostly an extension of their straight website, the latter being looked after by Enlighten Designs, a 50-person website developer firm here in Hamilton. They will be paid to do metrics on hits for the website, feeding all this back to the National Party.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9723130/Looks-like-Slater-is-Keys-Peters-source

But I still think that John Key would not have made a claim in parliament about Winston Peter's visits unless he'd had it verified. A tidy little hidden IP camera on the driveway or roads leading to the Coatesville mansion could do all of this work for a few thousand dollars, a one-off cost. Our motorways and some malls are already being monitored as normal procedure. Prices have dropped a lot over the last few years. (http://www.cctvcamerapros.com/License-Plate-Capture-Cameras-s/283.htm)


Adam Dudding had a perceptive article about Progressive Enterprises, also.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9727417/Behind-the-supermarket-bargains

Not naming this "hard-nosed" new senior executive from Australia, he points out that based on info from insider(s), a culture change for the worse has been noted after this person's arrival.

Progressive is a big firm, but this item popped up about a senior appointment late last year.

http://www.archivesearch.co.nz/?webid=fmc&articleid=66877

[Major von Tempsky]

After the continual pain of being regularly exposed to that ignoramus, card carrying member of the Labour Party Rod Oram, it is a complete joy to read Professor Keith Woodford on the dairy industry in the Business section of the Sunday Star Times today.

[elZorro]

After the continual pain of being regularly exposed to that ignoramus, card carrying member of the Labour Party Rod Oram, it is a complete joy to read Professor Keith Woodford on the dairy industry in the Business section of the Sunday Star Times today.

Mr Woodford might be correct in the shorter term, MVT. Brands are very difficult and expensive to establish. But the smaller dairy companies don't have as much product to sell each year, so are a more natural fit for consumer brand experimentation. Good to have a bit of both going on. The Chinese can build skyscrapers in a matter of weeks, so if they needed to, NZ style dairy farms wouldn't take long.


I thought Rod Oram's article on revisiting CER (that was a long time ago it was established, Muldoon in the photo) was fair enough.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/333542/CER-25-years-growth-from-bland-little-acorn

There must be some things we can do better than the Aussies, and some things they will do better, a partnership in some industries makes sense. John Key showed he was out of touch on foreign policy. Since when would NZers be "guest workers" in Australia? Rod Oram is paid to be a guest speaker at conferences, so perhaps not everyone thinks he is an ignoramus.

[fungus pudding]

But Rod Oram is paid to be a guest speaker at conferences, so perhaps not everyone thinks he is an ignoramus.

I have had the misfortune to be present at the odd Rod Oram speech. Never in my life have I encountered a more negative, pessimistic depressing speaker. His whole style is characterised by a boring, humourless presentation. If you are ever likely to attend any function where he is a speaker, check your pockets first for knives, razor blades or any similar objects that you could use for self harm. He's quite likely to push you over the edge.

[bottlerboy]

Since when would NZers be "guest workers" in Australia?

Come on EZ you know it has been ever since Helen Clark signed NZ up to it

[elZorro]

Come on EZ you know it has been ever since Helen Clark signed NZ up to it

If the intent of the overall policy is so bad, then it could have been corrected in the years since (http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/8258236/Australia-mulls-plan-for-Kiwis-residency). I think the point is in the numbers. Now 450,000 NZers are over there (most) trying to earn a living. They are mainly over there, because during the last few years, our productivity has not kept up with either Australia or the OECD average. Aussie happens to have a very high wage rate compared worldwide too. But as jobs are shed in Australia, those NZers who are sort of stuck over there, are finding that their taxes have not been enough to earn any kind of benefit should they fall on hard times, and that there is no subsidised higher education for their children, unless they've been there since about 8 years old. On the other hand, we have been civil to Australians when they turned up here.

Why don't NZers simply return here? For one thing, they would find a shortage of houses in urban areas, and a shortage of well-paid technical jobs of the kind they're used to. No guarantee they'd be better off here, although quite a few are returning, on average. Some NZers have gone to Australia to get out of family support payments, but I have no idea on the numbers.

I have not seen the National Govt mentioning anything about a special policy to encourage expats back to NZ. The 'market economy' will fix all of that apparently. We've been waiting the 30 years since 1984 when the globalisation experiment started, for the global economy to see us right.

[Major von Tempsky]

A continuing dose of 45 degrees in the summer and continued easing of the hard commodities will see them flooding back over here, its already started as a trickle.

[fungus pudding]

A continuing dose of 45 degrees in the summer and continued easing of the hard commodities will see them flooding back over here, its already started as a trickle.

Don't be suprised if it turns into a flood of Australians pouring in over the next few years as our economy continues to improve against theirs which is falling to bits - that has more of an influence on ditch-hopping than weather.
That's assuming Labour/Green don't get hold of the cheque book which would see NZers flee, perhaps to Haiti, Zimbabwe or Bangladesh, anywhere at all that has a better economic future than NZ under that frightening duo.

[Cuzzie]

Nope, that's a big nope.
Come on do the figures Russel, that's appalling.

So the Greens will loan households up to $15,000 at low interest rates to help them install solar power if the Greens get elected & an estimation would save a family $100 on electricity bills a year. Wow, save $100 a year for a $15,000 loan plus 4.1% interest ... really!
Wait it gets worse, they get to pay back this loan over 15 years. If calculated out at a flat rate of 4.1% over 15 years which it wont be, that works out to cost an extra $86.75 a month on top of their power bill for 15 years, all to save $100 a year. You have got to be kidding me. Don't forget your not going off grid here, so you will still have line and units used charged by your provider. Most of your units will be ticking over during the time your panels wont be working for you. What you really need is the batteries to work with you solar panels, but they are very expensive and the Greenies have left them out because it makes their scheme well and truly over priced. Funny that. Without the batteries solar energy wont save you money, it will cost you money. With the batteries it will take many decades to pay for the expense and by then your panels a failing. No brainier man, you should wait until green energy becomes more economical.

I do have solar panels, just two for Solar water heating. I pay them off each month interest free for $119.50. I save that same amount or thereabouts in energy units used - month in month out and the system pays for itself. It will be paid off in three years for a total of a five years contract (might be six) and zero money put up front by me. I save $1434 a year not a hundred bucks, it pays for itself and I put zero money into the Nova Energy plan.
That's what I call a solar power initiative Russel Norman, but you wont put yours or the Green Party name behind a scheme like that , because you did not think of it first. Kind of like Drug manufactures ignoring natural remedies because they can't trade mark it and make money out of the cure. That's why I left the Greenpeace movement back in the 80s and exactly why we should all see right through them now.

My Solar water heating plan is through Nova Energy and would highly recommend it to anyone. Our bill is high each month because we run a Spa Pool which can be $100 extra over the winter months and we found Nova Energy's scheme was the best way to save on energy.

My advise is to wait at least another five years before even considering solar panels for all your household electricity needs, the technology is there now but the price is just to high.

Here is the Heralds story on the Greens poor incentive. Greens launch new solar power initiative (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11203557)

Am I wrong?

[slimwin]

"We've been waiting the 30 years since 1984 when the globalisation experiment started, for the global economy to see us right"

Er, that's when I started working. I'd much rather be a young guy starting out nowdays with the choices they have. Our apprentices at work are buying houses. You couldn't even contemplate that back then. And the choice in the shops today is staggering. I remember having to save up six pays to buy a new pair of running shoes back then. Nowdays you just buy them.

As for the greens policy, it needs more financial incentives. How about take the GST off the imported hardware and services to install. Reasonably cost neutral as in the installation wouldn't have happened otherwise. 15 years is too long a payback as i
I'm sure the service life of the panel will not be what the salesman have quoted.

It also really depends where in NZ the installation is and if everybody is doing it, the power will all peak at the same time.

[slimwin]

They ran a scheme in Luxembourg like the greenies are proposing which did work. Only because the govt subsidised it to the value of half. It bought payback down to 8 years. Life of cells was considered 20 years. You sell all your power to the grid and buy back what you need. My boss did his whole barn out with them.

[elZorro]

Nope, that's a big nope.
Come on do the figures Russel, that's appalling.

So the Greens will loan households up to $15,000 at low interest rates to help them install solar power if the Greens get elected & an estimation would save a family $100 on electricity bills a year. Wow, save $100 a year for a $15,000 loan plus 4.1% interest ... really!
Wait it gets worse, they get to pay back this loan over 15 years. If calculated out at a flat rate of 4.1% over 15 years which it wont be, that works out to cost an extra $86.75 a month on top of their power bill for 15 years, all to save $100 a year. You have got to be kidding me. Don't forget your not going off grid here, so you will still have line and units used charged by your provider. Most of your units will be ticking over during the time your panels wont be working for you. What you really need is the batteries to work with you solar panels, but they are very expensive and the Greenies have left them out because it makes their scheme well and truly over priced. Funny that. Without the batteries solar energy wont save you money, it will cost you money. With the batteries it will take many decades to pay for the expense and by then your panels a failing. No brainier man, you should wait until green energy becomes more economical.

I do have solar panels, just two for Solar water heating. I pay them off each month interest free for $119.50. I save that same amount or thereabouts in energy units used - month in month out and the system pays for itself. It will be paid off in three years for a total of a five years contract (might be six) and zero money put up front by me. I save $1434 a year not a hundred bucks, it pays for itself and I put zero money into the Nova Energy plan.
That's what I call a solar power initiative Russel Norman, but you wont put yours or the Green Party name behind a scheme like that , because you did not think of it first. Kind of like Drug manufactures ignoring natural remedies because they can't trade mark it and make money out of the cure. That's why I left the Greenpeace movement back in the 80s and exactly why we should all see right through them now.

My Solar water heating plan is through Nova Energy and would highly recommend it to anyone. Our bill is high each month because we run a Spa Pool which can be $100 extra over the winter months and we found Nova Energy's scheme was the best way to save on energy.

My advise is to wait at least another five years before even considering solar panels for all your household electricity needs, the technology is there now but the price is just to high.

Here is the Heralds story on the Greens poor incentive. Greens launch new solar power initiative (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11203557)

Am I wrong?

Cuzzie, after the Greens loan is paid off, the saving is $1000 a year on power. $100 a year saved includes paying off the loan interest and capital. The reason you're doing better with a solar water heating system is that these are about 80% efficient, as opposed to 25-30% for PV panels (electricity). But solar PV is at an all-time low, $1 a watt for the panels themselves. It looks like another $2 a watt for the rest of the gear and installation in NZ.

But how much hot water do you need? It's running all the other home appliances that uses most of the energy consumed. Maybe the Greens should start with evacuated tube systems, the payback there would be a lot quicker as you say.

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, after the Greens loan is paid off, the saving is $1000 a year on power. $100 a year saved includes paying off the loan interest and capital. The reason you're doing better with a solar water heating system is that these are about 80% efficient, as opposed to 25-30% for PV panels (electricity). But solar PV is at an all-time low, $1 a watt for the panels themselves. It looks like another $2 a watt for the rest of the gear and installation in NZ.

But how much hot water do you need? It's running all the other home appliances that uses most of the energy consumed. Maybe the Greens should start with evacuated tube systems, the payback there would be a lot quicker as you say.
Don't get me wrong as I'm all for Green Power. I love the fact that you can generate your own power and save. Solar panels and the batteries needed for a full set up are getting cheaper each year, we are just not there yet. The quality of the panels & batteries are solid so the techno side of it is fine. Yes, they will save $1000.00 a year after 15 years, but is that a good investment on what you have paid(up to $15,000 plus interest) bearing in mind the panels only have less than a ten life span after you have paid them off. What Russel Norman has failed to add to strengthen his argument is that the panels will add value to your home, making the $100 saving far greater, but in my mind it is still not enough.

EZ, it's not how much hot water you need, it's the fact that Hot Water Cylinders is "25% plus", of your power bill. My system is plumbed straight into the existing H.W Cylinder which is far more efficient than the Cylinders on your roof. There is more hot water than I can handle, but that is not costing me. In fact, I might hook up my Spa Pool and that could save me even more.
Have a look at some of the solar water heating systems that are available already through Power Corps. This is the best way to save the most units used per month for the total outlay cost. Then in 5 years or so upgrade to a full solar power system. The new panels wont be burning up sunshine hours to run your hot water cylinder, they will be cheaper and have five more years of development engineered into them. The longer you leave Solar Panels for electricity the more you will save over the next 5 to 10 years. EZ, the Greens would be on a winner if they targeted Hot Water first.

[craic]

Hot waters the key - but I prefer the chainsaw and axe method. Saves a fortune in winter, cylinder is just two feet from the fire. Extreme exercise results in large savings on doctors, medicals etc. In emergency food can be cooked for days or weeks - try bacon and eggs in a frypan on a solar panel.

[couta1]

Hot waters the key - but I prefer the chainsaw and axe method. Saves a fortune in winter, cylinder is just two feet from the fire. Extreme exercise results in large savings on doctors, medicals etc. In emergency food can be cooked for days or weeks - try bacon and eggs in a frypan on a solar panel.
Agreed on the exercise front,can do a nice roast on the big block manifold after a good drive,whoops if the Greens have their way the big block V8 will become extinct actually most cars bigger than a sewing machine will,never mind we won't need cars to tow boats as the whole costal system will become one big marine reserve after all fish are only for looking at aren't they

[neopoleII]

so....... what happens on a sunny summer sunday when a million homes are pumping solar generated electricity into the national grid and the power companies are forced to buy it because of lab green policy ........ and no body want the trillion watts of power because its produced at the wrong time?
my guess is the solar power gets dumped, and then at 8.30 pm that same day a million households want power for lights and cooking and the power station that just "paid" for all that free power a few hours ago has to now spark up its own generators to supply power to the folks that they just paid that afternoon. and with the lab green price controls...... the power company will end up in negative profit.

if the greens backed up battery systems....... then all good...... but the price is several fold higher....

imagine a million households with a dozen dirty lead acid batteries each......

dam...... a coal fired power station sound clean compared with 10s of millions of batteries being recycled / exchanged / serviced....... etc.

solar power is great..... I run several units driving water pumps and night lights on the farm, but the missus likes her oven and dishwasher,
I like a late night shower and the big screen tv and surround sound on..... the sunday lunchtime solar power is not going to help in the evening.
and the power companies know it as well.

the greens really have no idea ....... they are just dreamers.

if the greens invent a solar storage system...... i will invest in them and vote for them.
until then they are just hoodwinking the general population.

[elZorro]

Don't get me wrong as I'm all for Green Power. I love the fact that you can generate your own power and save. Solar panels and the batteries needed for a full set up are getting cheaper each year, we are just not there yet. The quality of the panels & batteries are solid so the techno side of it is fine. Yes, they will save $1000.00 a year after 15 years, but is that a good investment on what you have paid(up to $15,000 plus interest) bearing in mind the panels only have less than a ten life span after you have paid them off. What Russel Norman has failed to add to strengthen his argument is that the panels will add value to your home, making the $100 saving far greater, but in my mind it is still not enough.

EZ, it's not how much hot water you need, it's the fact that Hot Water Cylinders is "25% plus", of your power bill. My system is plumbed straight into the existing H.W Cylinder which is far more efficient than the Cylinders on your roof. There is more hot water than I can handle, but that is not costing me. In fact, I might hook up my Spa Pool and that could save me even more.
Have a look at some of the solar water heating systems that are available already through Power Corps. This is the best way to save the most units used per month for the total outlay cost. Then in 5 years or so upgrade to a full solar power system. The new panels wont be burning up sunshine hours to run your hot water cylinder, they will be cheaper and have five more years of development engineered into them. The longer you leave Solar Panels for electricity the more you will save over the next 5 to 10 years. EZ, the Greens would be on a winner if they targeted Hot Water first.

You're probably right there Cuzzie, for some reason they're mentioning only the more expensive PV panels. Farmers use a lot of hot water in dairy sheds, they could use the same systems, or recycle heat from the back end of chillers.

I wish the Greens would start looking at why there is no subsidised system for the public and businesses to correctly dispose of alkaline, zinc-carbon, NiMH, NiCad, Lithium cells in NZ. At the moment, the correct way to dispose of common alkaline cells is to pay about $4 a kg for someone to encase them in concrete and send them to the dump. Other batteries cost more as they have to be sent overseas. Australia has a system, paid for by a fee on each battery sold.

Here is what I imagine an ACT voter behaves like in business (OK maybe he is just a baby-boomer gone off the rails). This thick-skinned Auckland sod called Denis (Dennis) Heath (he was on TV3 tonight again, John Campbell show) has been leaving a path of ripped-off investors and failed businesses for years. He was a bankrupt at one stage, but that has not stopped him. I have it on an assurance from others that this person will lie his way out of anything, and if he is suspected of something, he is almost certainly guilty of it. He doesn't know how to run a business and is not interested in that, he is just a scam artist . Cash comes in, he helps himself to some of it, and tries to keep the people it is owed to at bay for as long as possible. Including the IRD.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Cash-for-residency-My-Group-Ltd-owner-denies-knowledge/tabid/817/articleID/330228/Default.aspx

What we need in NZ is a govt that will sort out this kind of business person, and we need laws that stop them from trading. Permanently.

Tonight's video is great: here is the face of a scam artist - well spoken, measured tones, unflappable almost. He's a complete idiot when it comes to running a business, but he knows what money looks like.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Further-revelations-in-cash-for-residency-scam/tabid/367/articleID/332559/Default.aspx

[Cuzzie]

Here is what I imagine an ACT voter behaves like in business (OK maybe he is just a baby-boomer gone off the rails). This thick-skinned Auckland sod called Denis (Dennis) Heath (he was on TV3 tonight again, John Campbell show) has been leaving a path of ripped-off investors and failed businesses for years. He was a bankrupt at one stage, but that has not stopped him. I have it on an assurance from others that this person will lie his way out of anything, and if he is suspected of something, he is almost certainly guilty of it. He doesn't know how to run a business and is not interested in that, he is just a scam artist . Cash comes in, he helps himself to some of it, and tries to keep the people it is owed to at bay for as long as possible. Including the IRD.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Cash-for-residency-My-Group-Ltd-owner-denies-knowledge/tabid/817/articleID/330228/Default.aspx

What we need in NZ is a govt that will sort out this kind of business person, and we need laws that stop them from trading. Permanently.

Tonight's video is great: here is the face of a scam artist - well spoken, measured tones, unflappable almost. He's a complete idiot when it comes to running a business, but he knows what money looks like.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Further-revelations-in-cash-for-residency-scam/tabid/367/articleID/332559/Default.aspx I guess the answer to that is all Govt's, present & future should throw the book at him no matter who he votes for. Your right, scam artist should be targeted more including by our current Govt. It's on the increase and now is the time to up the punishment. Watched the last video & it sickens me that he was wearing a tee shirt of a club I played some footy for.

More worrying to me though is email scams that are becoming more and more sophisticated. International cooperation is at urgent status Globally right now & clearly there is a need for improvement with regards to consequences. A bullet in the head in China if found guilty as does happen would make you think twice. There is the answer EZ, export them to China.

[fungus pudding]

Here is what I imagine an ACT voter behaves like in business.


What a ridiculous comment.

[fungus pudding]

Here is what I imagine an ACT voter behaves like in business.


What a ridiculous comment.

[elZorro]

What a ridiculous comment.

You missed out the other half of the sentence when I retracted it, but I did draw a long bow FP. My apologies.

[elZorro]

A bit was made of the use of TVNZ premises by a Labour aspirant, Mr Taurima. This was even top of the news at one point. I have often thought that the Maori news programmes are somewhat anti-govt. This could be part of the reason. When I worked at a local tertiary institution, the paperwork for the Tainui claim was being done from campus offices, on campus networks, and I assume with the full permission of the institution. It worked, Tainui had the first payout, and they have transformed Hamilton with the proceeds, after a lot of hard work. They have more big investments in the pipeline.

It looks like the patience of TVNZ wore thin. After all, it is election year.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11204218

[iceman]

A bit was made of the use of TVNZ premises by a Labour aspirant, Mr Taurima. This was even top of the news at one point. I have often thought that the Maori news programmes are somewhat anti-govt. This could be part of the reason. When I worked at a local tertiary institution, the paperwork for the Tainui claim was being done from campus offices, on campus networks, and I assume with the full permission of the institution. It worked, Tainui had the first payout, and they have transformed Hamilton with the proceeds, after a lot of hard work. They have more big investments in the pipeline.

It looks like the patience of TVNZ wore thin. After all, it is election year.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11204218

Not sure what you're saying here EZ. Are you saying since it worked for Tainui to misuse the "tertiary institution's" premises, same should go for Labour and TVNZ. Not sure what the relevance in your point is.

TVNZ is a State Broadcaster that should be impartial, or at least try to be so. Allowing one political party use of the premises, emails and staff, is absolutely unacceptable. It does not matter what party it was. Their "patience"should not have worn thin, there should never have been any tolerance of this behaviour in the first place.

[elZorro]

Not sure what you're saying here EZ. Are you saying since it worked for Tainui to misuse the "tertiary institution's" premises, same should go for Labour and TVNZ. Not sure what the relevance in your point is.

TVNZ is a State Broadcaster that should be impartial, or at least try to be so. Allowing one political party use of the premises, emails and staff, is absolutely unacceptable. It does not matter what party it was. Their "patience"should not have worn thin, there should never have been any tolerance of this behaviour in the first place.

Iceman, I'm not sure of my point either. But good things can come out of political action, and having a power base to achieve it from makes a difference when you're working against the long-held establishment views. It turns out that one senior TVNZ staff member attended a hui in the offices last year.

But the point is journalists should be impartial. I doubt very much that Paul Henry votes Labour or Greens, he makes that obvious, but he still interviews people, and he's been brought back in election year by TV3. That would be just one example.

Using TVNZ servers to send emails related to a Labour campaign attempt is not smart, having a meeting right inside the building certainly wasn't. But in the early stages of this, enough of the management must have thought it was acceptable.

Anyway it's all sorted now, no real harm done to anybody.

[iceman]

The end is near for this megalomaniac. Hopefully he will be deported pronto as his whole being is based on lies and piracy of other peoples creations.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11205116

[elZorro]

The end is near for this megalomaniac. Hopefully he will be deported pronto as his whole being is based on lies and piracy of other peoples creations.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11205116

NZ is a small place, as Dotcom will be finding out. If he doesn't settle his bills, and with all this publicity, he'll soon find it hard to get anything on tick. Then we'll see how much bluster he can muster.

[craic]

He's waiting for his saviour, DC (not JC) to be elected.

[Cuzzie]

Deport Dot.com and be done with it. To be fair, I think even the Greens and Labour would not be too displeased.

Just going back to the Solar for a sec, I found this through reading the NBR this morning. http://vector.co.nz/solar That is what I call a solid program. It's a rental scheme that both you and Vector can and will win from. The important difference here is, it's a full set up including the Batteries. It is up and running now and there is no cost outlay, just savings. I like that, a power company showing the Greens how to be Green. This is where the Green Party fail, they are too busy telling everyone what to do and not enough time invested in coming up with anything that would actually work. They are hopelessly out of their own league. There's room for a new political party called "The Real Green Party", IMHO & if their policies were based on common sense Green issues, Russ & Co would be Gone-Burgers within a year. Nothing wrong with thinking Green and being Green, but there is nothing right with the Green movement in NZ since the 1980s. Less of the Green Hitler style and more with working with and for the people you are trying to control, will see some go forward for them, but that's not going to happen. That's why I see the Labour/Greens a very dangerous and explosive situation for all of us if they have the numbers to form a Govt. this year.

[Cuzzie]

Correction, there is a set-up fee from $2000 to $3000 depending on how many panels you run with.

[Harvey Specter]

But the point is journalists should be impartial. I doubt very much that Paul Henry votes Labour or Greens, he makes that obvious, but he still interviews people, and he's been brought back in election year by TV3. That would be just one example.Paul Henry is not on a state funded broadcaster. His show is also Entertainment, dressed up as news. He is also opennly bias. On his first show, while interviewing David Cunliffe, DC said
"I thought you were impartial" to which PH replied:


"Whatever gave you that idea"

[westerly]

Correction, there is a set-up fee from $2000 to $3000 depending on how many panels you run with.

Cuzzie, Cuzzie, apart from the predictable diatribe against Labour/Green and your also predictable omission of relevant facts you forgot to add the the $70 -115 monthly rentel charge to Vector just as you forgot to mention the Greens proposal also uses storage batteries.

westerly

[Harvey Specter]

Cuzzie, Cuzzie, apart from the predictable diatribe against Labour/Green and your also predictable omission of relevant facts you forgot to add the the $70 -115 monthly rentel charge to Vector just as you forgot to mention the Greens proposal also uses storage batteries.From what I have seen

Greens 3kw system $10k no battery
- $900 per year for $1000 saving

Vector 3kw system with battery - $2k upfront, $70pm
- Cost is slightly less pa plus an upfront cost.
- Savings should be more as you get to utilise the generation during peak demand.

NBR has an article comparing which I cant access so would be interesting to see what they say (they dont form a conclusion but quote a customer who says Vectors is better deal) but the Vector one looks better IMHO. For one, you dont have to rely on FIT to get the benefit as the battery ensures you the power, not sell it back to the grid. Plus it reduces strain on the transmission network during peak demand which the Greens proposal doesn't address.

The Greens proposal can include a battery system but definitely not for under $15k and definitely not with the same advanced technology Vector is using.

Edit: just got access to the NBR article so updated bits above

[artemis]

Not hearing much about 'kiwipower' these days. I wonder if the idea is quietly going onto the backburner, or alternatively whether Labour / Greens are beavering away tightening up the legislation, processes and costings pending a big push closer to the election. .

[Harvey Specter]

Not hearing much about 'kiwipower' these days. I wonder if the idea is quietly going onto the backburner, or alternatively whether Labour / Greens are beavering away tightening up the legislation, processes and costings pending a big push closer to the election. .Greens keep referring (it is refered in their NZSolar plan to it and Labour reaffirmed their support of it in the past couple of months as well so they are still all go despite the fact their US professor they are relying on has stated he doesn't support the proposal, recommending small tweaks to the current market driven policy.

[elZorro]

Greens keep referring (it is refered in their NZSolar plan to it and Labour reaffirmed their support of it in the past couple of months as well so they are still all go despite the fact their US professor they are relying on has stated he doesn't support the proposal, recommending small tweaks to the current market driven policy.

Harvey, the truth is that the govt is the main benefactor in any solar panel policy, or anything that cranks up the economy in NZ and gets us moving in the right direction.

NBR had a typically right-wing view of it. http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/greens-want-15k-loans-solar-panels-debt-attached-house-not-person-ck-151954

Put aside the possible cost of the policy, which is about $1mill a year to EECA. A net 1000 people go off the dole and are working, helping to install 10,000 setups each year. They all pay tax, the money cycles around. The loans are at govt cost, and after 15 years at the most they are paid off, and the panels will work fully paid off, for another ten years. A grid tie system doesn't need batteries, I don't think, so no worries there.

While we might not need too much extra power at the moment, that was not the case for the decades before this, and the price of power is always going up. The capital cost of these installs, won't. Solar panels have never been so cheap, there is a glut of them worldwide, and most manufacturers are losing money making them. I say buy a heap of them now.

[Minerbarejet]

Harvey, the truth is that the govt is the main benefactor in any solar panel policy, or anything that cranks up the economy in NZ and gets us moving in the right direction.

NBR had a typically right-wing view of it. http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/greens-want-15k-loans-solar-panels-debt-attached-house-not-person-ck-151954

Put aside the possible cost of the policy, which is about $1mill a year to EECA. A net 1000 people go off the dole and are working, helping to install 10,000 setups each year. They all pay tax, the money cycles around. The loans are at govt cost, and after 15 years at the most they are paid off, and the panels will work fully paid off, for another ten years. A grid tie system doesn't need batteries, I don't think, so no worries there.

While we might not need too much extra power at the moment, that was not the case for the decades before this, and the price of power is always going up. The capital cost of these installs, won't. Solar panels have never been so cheap, there is a glut of them worldwide, and most manufacturers are losing money making them. I say buy a heap of them now.
My understanding of solar generation is that batteries are an essential part. If you dont have one then electricity generation stops and starts with the appearance of the sun. As the early evening is usually the highest power usage time surely batteries are needed to reduce the usage through solar power installations. Having a battery would also allow more excess generation to be sold back through the grid tie during the day after the battery has been fully charged. Dont think we have seen the end of all this, new technologies are emerging, Dyesol DYE: ASX being one worth a look. I do have a small solar unit that charges a battery for a small pump. On occasions it gets left on overnight - it will still be going in the morning.

[elZorro]

My understanding of solar generation is that batteries are an essential part. If you dont have one then electricity generation stops and starts with the appearance of the sun. As the early evening is usually the highest power usage time surely batteries are needed to reduce the usage through solar power installations. Having a battery would also allow more excess generation to be sold back through the grid tie during the day after the battery has been fully charged. Dont think we have seen the end of all this, new technologies are emerging, Dyesol DYE: ASX being one worth a look. I do have a small solar unit that charges a battery for a small pump. On occasions it gets left on overnight - it will still be going in the morning.

I think grid tie, or that type of system, (http://www.cellpower.co.nz/shopping/pgm-more_information.php?id=335&=SID) has a smallish battery pack to run the monitoring gear. At each instant in time that solar power is generated, it can be used in the house or business (preferable) , or it is placed into the grid at what should be better than a wholesale price credit. A meter monitors this. That's because it is going to be used in premises nearby, there's not a lot of heat energy lost from it in cabling inefficiencies. Meridian did this for quite a while. (http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/grid-tied-pv-systems/why-consider-pv)Someone using this system at home could set up timers to run the washing machine during sunshine hours, ditto other gear if possible. If the power was all taken by the grid at (close to) normal retail, it wouldn't matter quite so much. Businesses do use a lot of power during sunshine hours, even if homes don't as much.

Lots of solar panels feeding the grid in many different locations would be helpful in dry months, still weather, and could remove the need for thermal stations if the respite for our hydro lakes was enough to keep plenty of them in reserve. Many PV panels have a guarantee of 20 years, I suspect they'd keep working for a lot longer, but I don't know for sure. 35-40 years is expected with say 20% lower output by then, but there are hardly any systems worldwide that have been running for longer than 30 years, to check.

Some figures from Wikipedia:


Crystalline silicon solar cell prices have fallen from $76.67/Watt in 1977 to an estimated $0.74/Watt in 2013.[42] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-Econ1-42) This is seen as evidence supporting Swanson's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swanson%27s_law), an observation similar to the famous Moore's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_Law) that states that solar cell prices fall 20% for every doubling of industry capacity.[42] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-Econ1-42)As of 2011, the price of PV modules per MW has fallen by 60% since the summer of 2008, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance estimates, putting solar power for the first time on a competitive footing with the retail price of electricity in a number of sunny countries; an alternative and consistent price decline figure of 75% from 2007 to 2012 has also been published,[43] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-wells2012-43) though it is unclear whether these figures are specific to the United States or generally global. The levelised cost of electricity (LCOE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCOE)) from PV is competitive with conventional electricity sources in an expanding list of geographic regions,[44] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-Branker-44) particularly when the time of generation is included, as electricity is worth more during the day than at night.[45] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-45) There has been fierce competition in the supply chain, and further improvements in the levelised cost of energy for solar lie ahead, posing a growing threat to the dominance of fossil fuel generation sources in the next few years.[46] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-invest2011-46) As time progresses, renewable energy technologies generally get cheaper,[47] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-47)[48] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-48) while fossil fuels generally get more expensive:
The less solar power costs, the more favorably it compares to conventional power, and the more attractive it becomes to utilities and energy users around the globe. Utility-scale solar power can now be delivered in California at prices well below $100/MWh ($0.10/kWh) less than most other peak generators, even those running on low-cost natural gas. Lower solar module costs also stimulate demand from consumer markets where the cost of solar compares very favorably to retail electric rates.[49] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photovoltaics#cite_note-49)



I think the various posters have covered the obvious concerns in a first look at this policy. Here is the Greens' actual paper on it, showing their research and references. They have done their homework (they always do), it has to stack up, and the policy covers battery PV and grid-tie PV, both are eligible. As they are going to push for good buy-back prices, I would go for grid-tie. No batteries to worry about.

https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/green_party_solar_homes_policy_paper_160214.pdf

[Cuzzie]

I think grid tie, or that type of system, (http://www.cellpower.co.nz/shopping/pgm-more_information.php?id=335&=SID) has a smallish battery pack to run the monitoring gear. At each instant in time that solar power is generated, it can be used in the house or business (preferable) , or it is placed into the grid at what should be better than a wholesale price credit. A meter monitors this. That's because it is going to be used in premises nearby, there's not a lot of heat energy lost from it in cabling inefficiencies. Meridian did this for quite a while. (http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/grid-tied-pv-systems/why-consider-pv)Someone using this system at home could set up timers to run the washing machine during sunshine hours, ditto other gear if possible. If the power was all taken by the grid at (close to) normal retail, it wouldn't matter quite so much. Businesses do use a lot of power during sunshine hours, even if homes don't as much.

Lots of solar panels feeding the grid in many different locations would be helpful in dry months, still weather, and could remove the need for thermal stations if the respite for our hydro lakes was enough to keep plenty of them in reserve. Many PV panels have a guarantee of 20 years, I suspect they'd keep working for a lot longer, but I don't know for sure. 35-40 years is expected with say 20% lower output by then, but there are hardly any systems worldwide that have been running for longer than 30 years, to check.

Some figures from Wikipedia:



I think the various posters have covered the obvious concerns in a first look at this policy. Here is the Greens' actual paper on it, showing their research and references. They have done their homework (they always do), it has to stack up, and the policy covers battery PV and grid-tie PV, both are eligible. As they are going to push for good buy-back prices, I would go for grid-tie. No batteries to worry about.

https://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/green_party_solar_homes_policy_paper_160214.pdf
EZ, the Batteries are expensive, so where in their paper did they tell you this. Of course the Greens can say the Batteries are covered but the limit is $15000. That is a small system when you include the inverter, insulation costs and an independent inspection. I'd go a bigger system, rent it and let Vector look after that. You will need to blow the budget to get a solar setup capable of saving you real money and that means your Batteries wont be included in the $15k or less election bribe. Go over the 15k and your $100 a year savings will be going towards repaying your Batteries off, why bother.

Like I said wait five or so years, solar panels will be so much more efficient and will cost a whole lot less. The Vector scheme is cheaper than the Greens and will save you more in the long run by a country mile. If your renting what happens when there is a failure? It gets replaced for nada, not so when your paying off a system that doesn't even include batteries. Also by renting you are future proofing for what lies ahead.
In five years solar panels will be competing and loosing out to new technologies anyway, but they still will be cheaper and more efficient than now.
What new technologies I hear you say? Solar Paint technology and Solar Power Windows technology to name a few. Google these two to get up to speed, they are really exciting. Here's a video on Solar Power Windows - amazing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BohznWrTrO8 This is what the Greens should be looking at, the future. Not a Solar system without batteries that is in the past. You just have got to have the Batteries man and that just does not compute with the Green scheme.
BTW, keep an eye on New Energy Technologies Ltd sp, it can only head one way IMHO.

[elZorro]

EZ, the Batteries are expensive, so where in their paper did they tell you this. Of course the Greens can say the Batteries are covered but the limit is $15000. That is a small system when you include the inverter, insulation costs and an independent inspection. I'd go a bigger system, rent it and let Vector look after that. You will need to blow the budget to get a solar setup capable of saving you real money and that means your Batteries wont be included in the $15k or less election bribe. Go over the 15k and your $100 a year savings will be going towards repaying your Batteries off, why bother.

Like I said wait five or so years, solar panels will be so much more efficient and will cost a whole lot less. The Vector scheme is cheaper than the Greens and will save you more in the long run by a country mile. If your renting what happens when there is a failure? It gets replaced for nada, not so when your paying off a system that doesn't even include batteries. Also by renting you are future proofing for what lies ahead.
In five years solar panels will be competing and loosing out to new technologies anyway, but they still will be cheaper and more efficient than now.
What new technologies I hear you say? Solar Paint technology and Solar Power Windows technology to name a few. Google these two to get up to speed, they are really exciting. Here's a video on Solar Power Windows - amazing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BohznWrTrO8 This is what the Greens should be looking at, the future. Not a Solar system without batteries that is in the past. You just have got to have the Batteries man and that just does not compute with the Green scheme.
BTW, keep an eye on New Energy Technologies Ltd sp, it can only head one way IMHO.

Cuzzie, I had a look at the video. That would be expensive technology, how long does it last? I find it hard to believe there would be any useful power generated at night or by fluorescent lights, on all four sides of the building.

Grid Tie uses the established mains system as the battery or load, and the one I linked to was a NZ made 3kw, at just over $3000 retail. You should try making a solar panel for less than $1 a watt, it's not going to be easy over here, and they won't get much cheaper. Sure, 3kw means a best sales figure of 20c x 3 or 60c for 3kwHrs per hour max, and that might be for 4 hours average a day, $876 worth of power generated a year if you were well paid for any surplus. In todays dollars, $30,000 of power over a 35 year lifetime at least. The govt system would be able to buy gear in bulk of course, which might help out the local suppliers of inverters and fittings. 1,000 people to do 10,000 systems manufacturing and installs, means each one could take 200 hours of work in NZ. That also seems excessive or a safe top end, once the kits are put in place.

But the other benefits are reduced thermal power plant use, more employed, more industry, more distributed power, some backup for houses if the grid fails, etc. Would battery life be about 10 years or less? This system is not attractive considering the numbers, unless you are off-grid. You'd need a big ugly, vented battery shed for one.

[slimwin]

Will it be compulsory for power companies to buy your power?

If everybody is producing at the same time (while the sun is up) then the usage is down and the hydro companies will still be producing a constant. Why would or should they shed load to accomodate paying you? At least the spot price for that power will be very low.

From the greenies point of view it stops another of our rivers being dammed. Who cares if the public sponsor this.

I'd love to be on a micro hydro/wind/ solar system and I looked into all three a few years back. The numbers for me,in NZ didn't work. Isolated farms,go for it and perhaps localized wind ie swift turbines. But they all have huge drawbacks.

And if Rio Tinto was to pull out in the next 20 years then there will be huge excesses of supply...

[Harvey Specter]

elZorro

- Any scheme that creates jobs is good but you have to question if it is the best source of the governments money (the govt can only borrow so much without increasing interest rates) and whether the targets will be meet. Overall, it is not a bad scheme for a Green party but definitely no game changer and those that will benefit are relatively few (only 30,000 households which will only benefit those with houses (so no help for the poor or the young).

- Batteries are not required but if they aren't, they you have to sell any excess power into the spot market. The issue is peak demand is not when the sun shines (this could change with more air con units) so we still have to fully invest in the electricity network and generation to meet that peak demand. That means the benefit of solar does not flow into transmission costs (compared to batteries and Vectors scheme which does) and we will still need gas peaker plants. Further more, new plants, when needed are more likely to be gas peakers than hydro and Geothermal which are better for base load since they have very low operation costs and can be run 24/7.

- Solar is best suited where generation is matched to day time demand so business and schools. This policy would be a lot better if it replaced households with schools (which is similar to what a Nelson Primary school has done with the help of a Green candidate from down there). Much better policy - investing in schools, perfect use of solar, lowers school costs for all demographics, not just homeowners.

[Harvey Specter]

Will it be compulsory for power companies to buy your power?Currently no. Some offer much better deals that others.

Under Greens proposal, we will also have NZPower, which will buy back at a rate between wholesale and retail (ie. a subsidised price even though they say there is no subsidy). Also remember that consumer rates smooth out peaks and troughs in spot prices - technically with smart meters, they should only be paid the spot rate at the time they produce it.

[slimwin]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11205754

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, I had a look at the video. That would be expensive technology, how long does it last? I find it hard to believe there would be any useful power generated at night or by fluorescent lights, on all four sides of the building.

Grid Tie uses the established mains system as the battery or load, and the one I linked to was a NZ made 3kw, at just over $3000 retail. You should try making a solar panel for less than $1 a watt, it's not going to be easy over here, and they won't get much cheaper. Sure, 3kw means a best sales figure of 20c x 3 or 60c for 3kwHrs per hour max, and that might be for 4 hours average a day, $876 worth of power generated a year if you were well paid for any surplus. In todays dollars, $30,000 of power over a 35 year lifetime at least. The govt system would be able to buy gear in bulk of course, which might help out the local suppliers of inverters and fittings. 1,000 people to do 10,000 systems manufacturing and installs, means each one could take 200 hours of work in NZ. That also seems excessive or a safe top end, once the kits are put in place.

But the other benefits are reduced thermal power plant use, more employed, more industry, more distributed power, some backup for houses if the grid fails, etc. Would battery life be about 10 years or less? This system is not attractive considering the numbers, unless you are off-grid. You'd need a big ugly, vented battery shed for one.That would be expensive technology - all clever new to the market technology will be. That being said, it is a basic setup which can now be applied to existing windows. All the best things in this world are simple and Solar Power Windows falls into that category. The difference with Solar Power Windows is it's super efficient. You might find it hard to believe that it can generate power at night on all four corners of the building but that is exactly what it does. As long as there is a light source such as the moon, car headlights or street lighting. It also recycles it's own power when the interior lights are used any time of the day, now that is smart, free recycled energy. The power savings are massive and that expensive technology pays for itself in no time, plus Battery replacement costs aren't as painful when they actually work for you. They are making improvements all the time too. Really, keep an eye on this corp. as they have all the patents tied up.

EZ, to do Solar Power properly you are going to need at least an 8kw setup in my mind and an absolute min. of 6kw . Off Grid would be 10kw plus. What your doing with a 3kw system without Batteries is kind of like an electric car on a short trip travelling at 10km/h and stopping when heavy cloud blocked the sun. A 3kw system with Batteries would carry on at 10 km/h and get you home again. A good set up with 8kw plus and naturally the Batteries would see you getting a speeding ticket in the middle of the night, but that system would cost a fortune - unless you rented it. Of note, you would not leave the batteries out of an electric car so why would you consider leaving them out of a home setup? You need the Batteries and they are expensive. The life span is only ten short years so that means replacing your Batteries three times over the life of your panels and that is not good economics. A full set of Batteries would cost min. 5k for cheep ones up to 7k depending on your set up for a larger kw system, times that by three for a start. If your renting from Vector, you get peace of mind no worries about equipment failure. It really is a no brainier.

[Cuzzie]

That's Len Brown tries to sneak in the Auckland Unitary Plan I can't edit my bad spelling on the heading - whoops.
This is bad news for Auckland home owners. Read this link for info: BAD BAD LENNY BROWN (http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/21536779/local-body-politicians-asleep-at-the-wheel/)

Councillor Wayne Walker said at another meeting the council had, 'voted to remain silent on the subject'. Dirty rotten a-holes. The sooner we get rid of Len Brown & his cronies the more we save Auckland as we know it. I know Wayne Walker and what he stands for and this man should have the top job. He is a Greenie, but not just any Greenie, he is a common sense Greenie & that's what I'm talking about.

[elZorro]

Maybe it's just me, my eyes were glazing over about the Auckland Unitary Plan. I cannot comment Cuzzie.

Regarding tall buildings generating power from moonlight and fluoro fittings.

No, that cannot be any major use. Sunlight is a blackbody radiation over a wide range, with max power at right angles of about 1kW per square metre at the equator, best time of year. Most other light sources our eyes work with, are logarithmically weaker. When you step outside into sun, it's 1000 times brighter than inside normally. Our eyes make this less obvious, but a lux meter tells the story. So technically, the panels will be putting out some power in the moonlight, but it will be a very low amount.

Which means the article is aimed at investors who don't know the maths yet, and are not going to ask. I'd be more interested in one fact: what is the payback period at the moment? That will sort this idea out.

[Cuzzie]

Maybe it's just me, my eyes were glazing over about the Auckland Unitary Plan. I cannot comment Cuzzie.

Regarding tall buildings generating power from moonlight and fluoro fittings.

No, that cannot be any major use. Sunlight is a blackbody radiation over a wide range, with max power at right angles of about 1kW per square metre at the equator, best time of year. Most other light sources our eyes work with, are logarithmically weaker. When you step outside into sun, it's 1000 times brighter than inside normally. Our eyes make this less obvious, but a lux meter tells the story. So technically, the panels will be putting out some power in the moonlight, but it will be a very low amount.

Which means the article is aimed at investors who don't know the maths yet, and are not going to ask. I'd be more interested in one fact: what is the payback period at the moment? That will sort this idea out.
Don't know the payback yet, but this is new technology & the initial cost wont be cheap. The manufacturing cost would be far less expensive than panels once they are up and running for more than a year or so one must think.
It’s looking to get the price down to USD$0.35 cents per watt.
There's potential for extremely low installation costs compared to other solar technologies N.E.T Solar Windows are also included in Obama's Sun-shot funding which has the backing of the US Govt.

China, which it describes as the “biggest supplier to solar-panel manufacturers worldwide,” has shut down almost a third of its polysilicon production after prices fell by 60 percent, a move that is expected to result in a quick return to higher prices. Perfect timing for Solar Windows when they come to market. They should be available in the US any day now. The delayed release date is due to federal scientists who have been working with New Energy Technologies to help develop a more efficient prototype, by increasing the number of working solar cells that contact the surface area.

EZ, under normal office lighting conditions, without the benefit of outside natural light from windows, New Energy’s ultra-small solar cells produced:
Almost 2-fold greater output power density than monocrystalline silicon, an established commercial solar cell material;
More than 8-fold greater output power density than copper-indium-selenide, known for its high optical absorption coefficients and versatile optical and electrical characteristics; and
More than 10-fold greater output power density than flexible thin-film amorphous-silicon, a popular ‘second-generation’ solar thin-film material. EZ, that test was aimed at investors that do know their Maths and they hooked the US Govt. The US Govt. is now funding N.E.T and have supplied them with federal scientists to help develop the technology further. This is the future and its Green, so where the bloodyhell are the Greens on this one?

[elZorro]

Don't know the payback yet, but this is new technology & the initial cost wont be cheap. The manufacturing cost would be far less expensive than panels once they are up and running for more than a year or so one must think.
It’s looking to get the price down to USD$0.35 cents per watt.
There's potential for extremely low installation costs compared to other solar technologies N.E.T Solar Windows are also included in Obama's Sun-shot funding which has the backing of the US Govt.

China, which it describes as the “biggest supplier to solar-panel manufacturers worldwide,” has shut down almost a third of its polysilicon production after prices fell by 60 percent, a move that is expected to result in a quick return to higher prices. Perfect timing for Solar Windows when they come to market. They should be available in the US any day now. The delayed release date is due to federal scientists who have been working with New Energy Technologies to help develop a more efficient prototype, by increasing the number of working solar cells that contact the surface area.

EZ, under normal office lighting conditions, without the benefit of outside natural light from windows, New Energy’s ultra-small solar cells produced:
Almost 2-fold greater output power density than monocrystalline silicon, an established commercial solar cell material;
More than 8-fold greater output power density than copper-indium-selenide, known for its high optical absorption coefficients and versatile optical and electrical characteristics; and
More than 10-fold greater output power density than flexible thin-film amorphous-silicon, a popular ‘second-generation’ solar thin-film material. EZ, that test was aimed at investors that do know their Maths and they hooked the US Govt. The US Govt. is now funding N.E.T and have supplied them with federal scientists to help develop the technology further. This is the future and its Green, so where the bloodyhell are the Greens on this one?

I have a couple of points to make: the improvements in output over standard cells with very low ambient light could be useful, but I'd like to see the watts produced. The price per watt is very good, but you have to be careful they're not using some strange and rare element. The performance in full sun will be the main test.

Secondly, it's obvious that posting into forums can do what all of one's schooling years cannot: produce cohesive arguments, good grammar, and produce perfect spelling. In your case Cuzzie, that has taken just a few weeks! Well, you must have had some fun baiting the lefties :)

I wish I'd been offered economics at school. This teacher writes a good article.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11205722

[Cuzzie]

I have a couple of points to make: the improvements in output over standard cells with very low ambient light could be useful, but I'd like to see the watts produced. The price per watt is very good, but you have to be careful they're not using some strange and rare element. The performance in full sun will be the main test.

Secondly, it's obvious that posting into forums can do what all of one's schooling years cannot: produce cohesive arguments, good grammar, and produce perfect spelling. In your case Cuzzie, that has taken just a few weeks! Well, you must have had some fun baiting the lefties :)

I wish I'd been offered economics at school. This teacher writes a good article.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11205722
Nice link EZ, that's if your looking though a loony left point of view. Look, there is no doubt about it, the Christchurch rebuild has boosted the figures, but you can't blame National for that. They have got the books moving in the right direction through our most costly disaster, that's what I call a job well done so far. Our Dairy Industry is on a roll, why would you try and make these two positives a big negative? You've got what your given and in this case National has turned that into Gold. Well done Key, the figures speak for themselves. Nothing lasts for ever, Nationals making hay while the sun is shining, what's wrong with that? ..... Nothing!

I wonder if a opinion from an economic school teacher would be even more critical if our dairy industry was not doing so well and the re-build in Christchurch was draining NZ tax payers money, our money, even more than what it already has? You bet your bottom dollar he would so what is the point?
You need to understand EZ that this is overseas praise coming from financial and economic experts in the know telling the world that NZ has a rock star economy not the National Govt. or their supporters, but hey what would these Global experts know against one school teacher from Epsom!!!

Oil & Gas is coming to boost our economy even more very soon (watch this space) and add that to the number of new immigrants and Kiwis returning to God Zone, then you have more positive news on the horizon. Peter Lyons has failed to put that into his calculations which in my mind is very reckless on his part. That is a major difference between Ireland and NZ right there. Did Ireland have an emerging resource that would pump possibly billions of dollars into the economy year in year out for decades to come? Nope but I do believe they found a hidden crop of potatoes near Cork somewhere. Was Ireland holding onto their population or even having a net gain? They were for a period and then they continued what they do best, export their population around the Globe.

We are doing good and I know that non-right wing thinkers & tinkers need to come up with a negative reason as to why our economy is full steam ahead leading up to an election. That's all Peter Lyons rant against our economy doing well is, negative hand-braking of positive news, otherwise known as sour grapes.

Finally, if Peter Lyons was a rock star in Economics, he would be Pumice - Something spewed out and is a soft rOCK!!! :)

[elZorro]

Oh dear ...

The government expects to post an obegal deficit of $2.3 billion in the current financial year ending June 30 before returning a surplus of $86 million the following year

... but ...

The Crown's operating balance before gains and losses (obegal) was a deficit of $1.79 billion in the six months ended December 31, $380 million wider than forecast in its Dec. 17

Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11207173

So govt is predicting a surplus of $86m but in one quarter they were $380m out? ... Personally ... I think a surplus is a long way off!

But everyone trusts that nice Mr Key so nobody will be listening to me. :)

Where have you been Belge? I have had to carry the leftie can for (it seems like) weeks while you argue about religious matters elsewhere on the forum. During this time, Cuzzie has learnt how to spell. It's been interesting.

I have placed some money on Labour/Greens winning the election. Do you think they have a lot more chance, now that Shane Jones and others have upped the ante?


From your article: The core residual cash deficit was $653 million higher than forecast at $7.27 billion largely due to the smaller tax take. The cash balance is forecast to return to surplus in 2017, after which the government plans to start reducing debt.


Good one. Bill English has put out a report showing the nasty dips after the GFC, but on the future timescale into 2020 or so (which is all completely hypothetical) it shows the metrics returning to normal ,or even better than Labour had them at, in 2008.

A lower than expected tax take is behind the shortfall. This makes the very slender, tiny, predicted budget surplus a lot more difficult. They'll slash something just to show they can meet the surplus deadline, but it'll be a fake surplus.

Cuzzie, I had to post the earlier article because I like baiting the right-wingers myself. I did agree with it though.

[westerly]

Nice link EZ, that's if your looking though a loony left point of view. Look, there is no doubt about it, the Christchurch rebuild has boosted the figures, but you can't blame National for that. They have got the books moving in the right direction through our most costly disaster, that's what I call a job well done so far. Our Dairy Industry is on a roll, why would you try and make these two positives a big negative? You've got what your given and in this case National has turned that into Gold. Well done Key, the figures speak for themselves. Nothing lasts for ever, Nationals making hay while the sun is shining, what's wrong with that? ..... Nothing!


Oil & Gas is coming to boost our economy even more very soon (watch this space) and add that to the number of new immigrants and Kiwis returning to God Zone, then you have more positive news on the horizon.

[FONT=arial]We are doing good and I know that non-right wing thinkers & tinkers need to come up with a negative reason as to why our economy is full steam ahead leading up to an election. That's all Peter Lyons rant against our economy doing well is, negative hand-braking of positive news, otherwise known as sour grapes.

Finally, if Peter Lyons was a rock star in Economics, he would be Pumice - Something spewed out and is a soft rOCK!!! :)

If your economy is dependent on more people coming into the country somethings wrong. Only real world problem is too many people.
As for oil and gas, they are only looking, haven't actually found anything yet.
The dairy industry is going ok but has high debt levels, is causing severe environmental damage and is reliant on high prices continuing,
Australia has found with the mining industry that demand is not guaranteed.
The worry is National may get back in followed by Labour at the next election who will again take the flak for cleaning up the the Countries finances

westerly

[Cuzzie]

If your economy is dependent on more people coming into the country somethings wrong. Only real world problem is too many people.
As for oil and gas, they are only looking, haven't actually found anything yet.
The dairy industry is going ok but has high debt levels, is causing severe environmental damage and is reliant on high prices continuing,
Australia has found with the mining industry that demand is not guaranteed.
The worry is National may get back in followed by Labour at the next election who will again take the flak for cleaning up the the Countries finances

westerlySomething is wrong alright westerly, not enough people to boost our economy. BTW, National & you are brothers in arms on that one and I'm the one going against the grain here. This will get you up to speed. http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants (http://http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants)

You need to do some research before making bold claims that new oil & gas corps have not found anything yet and are just looking. TAG Oils Cardiff oil field target is currently 12km long by 3km wide and has not one but three zones. They will be playing Cardiff over many years to come. Cardiff is a new play. In Taranaki, TAG has reported increased revenue for the three months ended December 31, up 19 per cent to $12,939,442 when compared to the same period last year. For the nine-month period it was up 35 per cent to $43,522,224. That's small compared to what will be coming. When Cardiff comes on-line their revenue should explode.
Then there's the East Coast. TAG Oil is proceeding with its Ngapaeruru-1 well east of Dannevirke after tests have confirmed the presence of petroleum-bearing rock which will respond well to fracking, but because the source rock is naturally fractured, fracking might not be necessary. westerly that is just Tag Oil.
East West are all smiles but I'll let you do the research ion that. They just made an easy 5 million doing some drilling for TAG and stand to earn 30% profits from now on.
NZEC have had ups and downs in the last quarter, but are looking good for the next two quarters both in Taranaki and the East Coast. NZEC's new CEO of NZ operations, David Robinson is a sign of great things on the horizon.
MES are sitting on more oil & gas on the East Coast than TAG or NZEC but are letting them carry the burden. Smart move and I have plenty of their shares.
westerely, you don't know much about oil & gas in NZ huh?
The dairy industry is on fire right now, but can understand the need for you to say it's just OK. I feel your pain there.

Your last statement is outrageous, we need National to win the next eletion more than ever now. Not just to carry on fixing up Labours over spending when they ran the joint, but to keep out the Labour & Green left version of the Nazi party from more social engineering projects on us. My feeling now is that the Green Labour combo will either sneak in and win, but only just, or it will be a landslide victory for National.

[Cuzzie]

Oh dear ...

The government expects to post an obegal deficit of $2.3 billion in the current financial year ending June 30 before returning a surplus of $86 million the following year

... but ...

The Crown's operating balance before gains and losses (obegal) was a deficit of $1.79 billion in the six months ended December 31, $380 million wider than forecast in its Dec. 17

Source: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11207173

So govt is predicting a surplus of $86m but in one quarter they were $380m out? ... Personally ... I think a surplus is a long way off!

But everyone trusts that nice Mr Key so nobody will be listening to me. :)belg, just think where we would be with the big spending Clark Govt. still at the helm right now. The comparison with Ireland would be well deserved if that was the case.

[Cuzzie]

Labour only knew how to increased power prices.


New Zealand producers' input and output prices fell in the fourth quarter, driven by lower electricity prices.

Producer output prices, which measures the prices received by New Zealand producers, fell 0.4 percent in the final three months of 2013, according to Statistics New Zealand. Input prices, representing the prices of goods and services used by New Zealand producers, fell 0.7 percent in the quarter.

The output price index for electricity and gas supply fell 8.7 percent in the quarter, as prices for generated electricity fell. The input price fell 9.8 percent, the fastest pace of decline since the September 2012 quarter, due to lower electricity prices and electricity spot-market conditions, the government statistician said.

"Lower electricity prices contributed to both the lower input and output PPIs in the latest quarter," prices manager Chris Pike said.

The output prices for dairy product manufacturing fell 0.2 percent following gains of 14 percent in each of the two previous quarters, as manufacturers received lower export prices for butter and cheese.

The dairy cattle farming output price index was unchanged in the December quarter after reaching a record in the September quarter, as the forecast farm-gate milk price for the 2013/14 season was unchanged from the previous quarter.

Meat and meat product manufacturing input prices rose 1.9 percent due to higher prices for prime sheep and lamb.

The price index for export logs rose 4.3 percent in the quarter due to higher overseas demand, up 23 percent for the year, the highest annual increase in three years. The price index for domestic logs rose 2.2 percent in the quarter, reflecting higher demand associated with more new house consents.

Who wants Solar panels to power your light bulb? The Greens say it will save you money. Reality is- It will cost you a fortune to say I'm a Greenie these days.

[elZorro]

Something is wrong alright westerly, not enough people to boost our economy. BTW, National & you are brothers in arms on that one and I'm the one going against the grain here. This will get you up to speed. http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants

You need to do some research before making bold claims that new oil & gas corps have not found anything yet and are just looking. TAG Oils Cardiff oil field target is currently 12km long by 3km wide and has not one but three zones. They will be playing Cardiff over many years to come. Cardiff is a new play. In Taranaki, TAG has reported increased revenue for the three months ended December 31, up 19 per cent to $12,939,442 when compared to the same period last year. For the nine-month period it was up 35 per cent to $43,522,224. That's small compared to what will be coming. When Cardiff comes on-line their revenue should explode.
Then there's the East Coast. TAG Oil is proceeding with its Ngapaeruru-1 well east of Dannevirke after tests have confirmed the presence of petroleum-bearing rock which will respond well to fracking, but because the source rock is naturally fractured, fracking might not be necessary. westerly that is just Tag Oil.
East West are all smiles but I'll let you do the research ion that. They just made an easy 5 million doing some drilling for TAG and stand to earn 30% profits from now on.
NZEC have had ups and downs in the last quarter, but are looking good for the next two quarters both in Taranaki and the East Coast. NZEC's new CEO of NZ operations, David Robinson is a sign of great things on the horizon.
MES are sitting on more oil & gas on the East Coast than TAG or NZEC but are letting them carry the burden. Smart move and I have plenty of their shares.
westerely, you don't know much about oil & gas in NZ huh?
The dairy industry is on fire right now, but can understand the need for you to say it's just OK. I feel your pain there.

Your last statement is outrageous, we need National to win the next eletion more than ever now. Not just to carry on fixing up Labours over spending when they ran the joint, but to keep out the Labour & Green left version of the Nazi party from more social engineering projects on us. My feeling now is that the Green Labour combo will either sneak in and win, but only just, or it will be a landslide victory for National.

Cuzzie, whoa! Labour's overspending, Labour/Green Nazi party, social engineering..

Actually National has been doing some social engineering itself, and most of that has gone down OK. Name any Labour/Green MP or aspirant who is a communist or a fascist? Labour paid off a lot of old debt in their last terms. It's National who are overspending, they have been doing that every year they have been in office since 2008. Now the tax income seems to be lower than they were hoping for, with their budget surplus date looming.

That would be because the ag sector, amongst others, knows all about boom/bust, and in the boom they also try not to pay any extra tax if they can help it. You can't get out of company or private tax by paying off old debt, but you can increase your effective costs in a given year by buying new depreciable assets or increasing normal spend. Have a look at new car and commercial/farm vehicle sales and you'll get the drift. That is squandered cashflow.

You don't often see the headline "Provincial NZ crying out for workers" because large landowners have very few staff to the hectare. They have the cash some years, but buying assets that often come from larger centres, ultimately overseas, takes precedence. It's a lot simpler.

This is all part of the disappointment that I have with NZ's economy, and I'm not the only one. Why can't National see the big picture? We might be churning out tertiary graduates, but where will they all go? Will they start up new businesses and employ people, will they help build smart exporters of manufactured high-value goods? How will govt policy push this along?

National's policy settings have forced many school leavers to try tertiary training, because there are not enough jobs for unskilled new workers. Put them in the right sort of job and they could immediately produce a good wage and a profit for a business, but business owners are tending not to take the risks. Instead more than is healthy are selling out, closing down, giving up.

That will be John Key's legacy, one which I hope will start in 2014. We need to start rebuilding the place, as Westerly said.

Chalkie has some insight on the Grocery sector. Again minimising tax is the go. Countdown have been increasing their gross margin to over 23%, while loading the NZ stores with Australian debt, to reduce any tax they need to pay the NZ govt.

http://m.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9736437/Tread-carefully-we-re-not-out-of-the-woods-yet

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, whoa! Labour's overspending, Labour/Green Nazi party, social engineering..

Actually National has been doing some social engineering itself, and most of that has gone down OK. Name any Labour/Green MP or aspirant who is a communist or a fascist? Labour paid off a lot of old debt in their last terms. It's National who are overspending, they have been doing that every year they have been in office since 2008. Now the tax income seems to be lower than they were hoping for, with their budget surplus date looming.

That would be because the ag sector, amongst others, knows all about boom/bust, and in the boom they also try not to pay any extra tax if they can help it. You can't get out of company or private tax by paying off old debt, but you can increase your effective costs in a given year by buying new depreciable assets or increasing normal spend. Have a look at new car and commercial/farm vehicle sales and you'll get the drift. That is squandered cashflow.

This is all part of the disappointment that I have with NZ's economy, and I'm not the only one. Why can't National see the big picture? We might be churning out tertiary graduates, but where will they all go? Will they start up new businesses and employ people, will they help build smart exporters of manufactured high-value goods? How will govt policy push this along?

National's policy settings have forced many school leavers to try tertiary training, because there are not enough jobs for unskilled new workers. Put them in the right sort of job and they could immediately produce a good wage and a profit for a business, but business owners are tending not to take the risks. Instead more than is healthy are selling out, closing down, giving up.

That will be John Key's legacy, one which I hope will start in 2014. We need to start rebuilding the place, as Westerly said.

Chalkie has some insight on the Grocery sector. Again minimising tax is the go. Countdown have been increasing their gross margin to over 23%, while loading the NZ stores with Australian debt, to reduce any tax they need to pay the NZ govt.

http://m.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9736437/Tread-carefully-we-re-not-out-of-the-woods-yet

That's all hogwash EZ and most of NZ knows it. Labours overspending can not and will not be written off by a stoke of a pen like you are trying to do. It's a big problem for Labour and the voting public have not got short memories like you. National are going great leading into our next election, time to get those left-wing propaganda programs rolling. Cunliffe is so lazy he has even stopped talking B.S & he better get cracking soon.


This from the Herald this morning. Cunliffe-led Labour is still at the starting blocks. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11207423)

You have got to be joking concerning Social engineering and the Labour party EZ. The Global Queen of social engineering is our very own Helen Clark. Now she in a position to really enforce her passion with the U.N. l'd like a full on debate with you over that one. Your be found wanting within minutes EZ so go ahead, make my day. I'll tell you what, I'm going out shortly and wont be back until mid-afternoon, so take your time and give me your best shot. Bring it on baby.

EZ, I bet your happy electricity prices have dropped, care to comment?

Finally, why is it that all the serious issues and negative news at the moment is all about our opposition partys? Normally the heat goes on the current Govt. heading into an election. The answer is simple, National are going great guns right now, there is plenty of solid financial news for NZ and that's thanks to professional guidance from our Govt. National are peaking just right and the polls confirm this. Can the Green Labour party catch up? With what - what have they got? I'm seeing Nada right now.

[elZorro]

That's all hogwash EZ and most of NZ knows it. Labours overspending can not and will not be written off by a stoke of a pen like you are trying to do. It's a big problem for Labour and the voting public have not got short memories like you. National are going great leading into our next election, time to get those left-wing propaganda programs rolling. Cunliffe is so lazy he has even stopped talking B.S & he better get cracking soon.


This from the Herald this morning. Cunliffe-led Labour is still at the starting blocks. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11207423)

You have got to be joking concerning Social engineering and the Labour party EZ. The Global Queen of social engineering is our very own Helen Clark. Now she in a position to really enforce her passion with the U.N. l'd like a full on debate with you over that one. Your be found wanting within minutes EZ so go ahead, make my day. I'll tell you what, I'm going out shortly and wont be back until mid-afternoon, so take your time and give me your best shot. Bring it on baby.

EZ, I bet your happy electricity prices have dropped, care to comment?

Finally, why is it that all the serious issues and negative news at the moment is all about our opposition partys? Normally the heat goes on the current Govt. heading into an election. The answer is simple, National are going great guns right now, there is plenty of solid financial news for NZ and that's thanks to professional guidance from our Govt. National are peaking just right and the polls confirm this. Can the Green Labour party catch up? With what - what have they got? I'm seeing Nada right now.


I'm going to be busy too, today. But John Armstrong's piece assumes that Labour will obligingly feed journalists with data from now until the election. The average voter possibly has a shorter attention span than that. I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty from David Cunliffe before the election date, but closer to the event.

In the meantime MP Shane Jones has fired a very accurate first salvo. It's not all about Labour and the smaller parties. Why did National do nothing about this cosy supermarket situation before now? They also had the heads up.

We have already covered 'nanny state' policies on the thread, and I'm pleased to see no smoking in public places, I don't smack my children so at least they won't have to ponder about that as they get older, and numerous other things Labour did over the years are now part of how NZ operates. Part of our culture. National has by and large left them in place.

I think they made a mistake with the lower drinking age though. Put it back to 20 unless we can educate every youth, who thinks it's OK to drink until they can't remember what's happened.

[Major von Tempsky]

Electricity is getting cheaper? Gosh it must be time for huge Government and local body subsidies for solar power and windpower to produce lots of electricity at the time of day it's least needed..... :-)

[elZorro]

Electricity is getting cheaper? Gosh it must be time for huge Government and local body subsidies for solar power and windpower to produce lots of electricity at the time of day it's least needed..... :-)

MVT, I would have thought you'd know more about how the power grid works. It costs energy to send electricity long distances, like all the way from S.I. hydro schemes to Auckland, but they'll do it if they have to. So a fair bit of it is lost as heat before it even gets there (3%-7% (http://www.powerco.co.nz/uploaded_files/Our%20Buisness/Buisness%20Overview/NZ%20Electricity%20Market/Aboutthesector.pdf)). That's a waste. Wealthier NZers in urban areas can instead generate a bit of their own power needs, selling the rest to the grid for use in local daytime businesses. By that I mean at a very fair price, say 75% of the retail price, because it allows hydro lakes to be kept closer to full, for the bad winters, and it won't be all the energy a retailer buys. Hydro is fast acting, as many smaller stations on small dams and rivers are ready anytime. It's a click of a button, even automatic, done with telemetry.

Solar PV won't supply all of our power, whoever said it would. But the Greens policy will get us up to speed, and maybe it'll be enough to stop the building of any more thermal power plants in NZ. This is assuming that we don't get into more energy-intensive industry here.

Solar water heating is also well under-utilised, should be part of this policy. Unless I'm missing something, it seems too obvious.

[westerly]

[QUOTE=Cuzzie;463203]Something is wrong alright westerly, not enough people to boost our economy. BTW, National & you are brothers in arms on that one and I'm the one going against the grain here. This will get you up to speed. http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants (http://http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants)

As I said, if you rely on immigration to boost an economy something is wrong It can only be a short term boost. Allowing people to buy their way into the country seems inherently wrong to me. Families with children yes, thier aging parents no. NZ is a soft touch.
As for oil , your enthusiasim runs away,most wells drilled are unproductive. If there is oil there it might be more beneficial in the long term to NZ to leave it in the ground and get the benefit of far higher oil prices as the easy oil runs out.
Nationals borrowed too much money to have any real confidence in their policies. The so called boom is driven by the ChCh rebuild and dairy, neither
likely to be long term.
westerly

[fungus pudding]

[QUOTE=Cuzzie;463203]Something is wrong alright westerly, not enough people to boost our economy. BTW, National & you are brothers in arms on that one and I'm the one going against the grain here. This will get you up to speed. http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants (http://http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants)

As I said, if you rely on immigration to boost an economy something is wrong It can only be a short term boost. Allowing people to buy their way into the country seems inherently wrong to me. Families with children yes, thier aging parents no. NZ is a soft touch.
As for oil , your enthusiasim runs away,most wells drilled are unproductive. If there is oil there it might be more beneficial in the long term to NZ to leave it in the ground and get the benefit of far higher oil prices as the easy oil runs out.
Nationals borrowed too much money to have any real confidence in their policies.
westerly

Well you had better get used to it. There is no way Russell Norman will make it as P.M. and Labour are running out of time to find a leader. National will probably be a four term government.

[Cuzzie]

I'm going to be busy too, today. But John Armstrong's piece assumes that Labour will obligingly feed journalists with data from now until the election. The average voter possibly has a shorter attention span than that. I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty from David Cunliffe before the election date, but closer to the event.

In the meantime MP Shane Jones has fired a very accurate first salvo. It's not all about Labour and the smaller parties. Why did National do nothing about this cosy supermarket situation before now? They also had the heads up.

We have already covered 'nanny state' policies on the thread, and I'm pleased to see no smoking in public places, I don't smack my children so at least they won't have to ponder about that as they get older, and numerous other things Labour did over the years are now part of how NZ operates. Part of our culture. National has by and large left them in place.

I think they made a mistake with the lower drinking age though. Put it back to 20 unless we can educate every youth, who thinks it's OK to drink until they can't remember what's happened.
EZ, you really didn't say anything here. It was kind of unfair of me as I already had you in checkmate mate, thus your bumbling reply. A weak reply by you and I wont really put too much into this post as this clearly has been done and dusted in half a day and only 3 posts. Unless you want to make more of it, up to you.
Let me just use a copy & paste from Ian Wishart's book - "Absolute Power", for now.
"Helen Clark has just been announced as the third most powerful appointee to the United Nations - running the UN Development Programme. This former New Zealand Prime Minister is known for trialling a range of UN social engineering policies in New Zealand, and is well known in liberal circles worldwide for her power and her achievements. With a budget in excess of $5 billion, and responsibility for introducing new UN social programmes and climate change policy, Helen Clark is about to do to the world what she did to New Zealand during a nine year reign as Prime Minister. To find out who Helen Clark really is, and what she brings to the international stage, Ian Wishart's #1 bestseller Absolute Power is the only place to start. This book is devastating. If you want to get inside the head of the new battering ram of the United Nations, this book tells all..."


Care to deny the claim above EZ? Perhapes knock I.W down a peg or two. That wont change the fact that Clark was a control freak to the extent that she needed to change the way we think - or at least try too.

[Cuzzie]

[QUOTE=Cuzzie;463203]Something is wrong alright westerly, not enough people to boost our economy. BTW, National & you are brothers in arms on that one and I'm the one going against the grain here. This will get you up to speed. (http://http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants)http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/235709/aggression-needed-to-recruit-more-migrants

As I said, if you rely on immigration to boost an economy something is wrong It can only be a short term boost. Allowing people to buy their way into the country seems inherently wrong to me. Families with children yes, thier aging parents no. NZ is a soft touch.
As for oil , your enthusiasim runs away,most wells drilled are unproductive. If there is oil there it might be more beneficial in the long term to NZ to leave it in the ground and get the benefit of far higher oil prices as the easy oil runs out.
Nationals borrowed too much money to have any real confidence in their policies. The so called boom is driven by the ChCh rebuild and dairy, neither
likely to be long term.
westerly
I'll except that immigration could just be a short term boost, but that is something that can only be confirmed after the fact not before. NZ could easily house 22 million, I think another 800,000 in the next ten or fifteen years will do a lot to pay for the baby boomers retirement quite nicely thank you very much.
Wow, I gave you one oil companies quarterly profit figures which can be confirmed by going on the TAG Oil website and you say most wells drilled are unproductive. TAG's last quarter profit was $12,939,442 forget about the unproductive wells which TAG has too, look at that profit. Not bad for just one Junior Oil Corp. Then you say, " If there is oil there it might be more beneficial in the long term to NZ to leave it in the ground and get the benefit of far higher oil prices as the easy oil runs out." Bollocks, if the Greenies get their way any oil left in the ground will be worth nothing. Go get it now baby. Most of the Gas alone will be exported directly to China earning NZ billions in revenue. I think what you are trying to say is leave it in the ground until Labour is in power and they can gain the benefit from it. Tough titties westerly, it was National that encouraged and stimulated the oil industry and it will be National's baby even if the Green Labour party win the election.

[fungus pudding]

I'm sure we'll be hearing plenty from David Cunliffe before the election date, but closer to the event.



I think Cunliffe has taken the old adage to heart 'better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt'.

[Cuzzie]

EZ, I'm interested to know your thoughts on Dot.com buying stuff and not paying his bills. Albany Mowers & Machinery most certainly did not deserve to get ripped off by convicted criminal Dot.com, but they just have. How say you on that subject?

[elZorro]

[QUOTE=westerly;463279]

Well you had better get used to it. There is no way Russell Norman will make it as P.M. and Labour are running out of time to find a leader. National will probably be a four term government.

I hope not. Can we afford the interest on the borrowings until then? The country could be a basket case in another 6 years, no manufacturing to speak of, heaps of unemployed, the country crippled with high energy costs and the attending low tax take reducing all social spending and capital works.

[craic]

Do you not read the papers, LZ? Are you not aware that the rest of the world disagrees with you? This country is doing better than most and short of some major disaster, will continue to do better than most under the current leadership. The other side, with Winston Peters, Russell Norman, Dot Com led by David Cunliffe do not present a viable alternative.

[elZorro]

EZ, you really didn't say anything here. It was kind of unfair of me as I already had you in checkmate mate, thus your bumbling reply. A weak reply by you and I wont really put too much into this post as this clearly has been done and dusted in half a day and only 3 posts. Unless you want to make more of it, up to you.
Let me just use a copy & paste from Ian Wishart's book - "Absolute Power", for now.
"Helen Clark has just been announced as the third most powerful appointee to the United Nations - running the UN Development Programme. This former New Zealand Prime Minister is known for trialling a range of UN social engineering policies in New Zealand, and is well known in liberal circles worldwide for her power and her achievements. With a budget in excess of $5 billion, and responsibility for introducing new UN social programmes and climate change policy, Helen Clark is about to do to the world what she did to New Zealand during a nine year reign as Prime Minister. To find out who Helen Clark really is, and what she brings to the international stage, Ian Wishart's #1 bestseller Absolute Power is the only place to start. This book is devastating. If you want to get inside the head of the new battering ram of the United Nations, this book tells all..."


Care to deny the claim above EZ? Perhapes knock I.W down a peg or two. That wont change the fact that Clark was a control freak to the extent that she needed to change the way we think - or at least try too.



Was she a control freak, or did she have some good ideas for a better direction for NZ? Her govt moved us away from the globalism experiment, not completely, but it was a welcome change. We were still exposed to global forces, but smart enough to keep ourselves employed in the right sort of areas. That was, until National swept in and gave large landowners and big business the right to set our government policies, mostly in their favour.

We might find another big lot of CNG, but it's hard to send that around the world, so we might have to resort to fuelling our cars with it again. It's a poor fuel for that. We could burn it in thermal stations at about 35% efficiency, but we don't have the need for more power. We could dry milk with it, and send a raw commodity around the world as we've been doing. Or as an even poorer use, we could turn it into fertiliser so we can create milk in the first place at about 0.1% efficiency via cows. Funny how we never hear about these abysmal figures.

Regarding Kim Dotcom, most businesses have their share of slow-paying customers. It's called B.S.ing and it's not cool.

[elZorro]

Do you not read the papers, LZ? Are you not aware that the rest of the world disagrees with you? This country is doing better than most and short of some major disaster, will continue to do better than most under the current leadership. The other side, with Winston Peters, Russell Norman, Dot Com led by David Cunliffe do not present a viable alternative.

Craic, I agree that National is a bit luckier than usual this election year, because ag exports are going well, and the ChCh rebuild is starting properly. But I agree with Rod Oram who was beating the drum again in the SST, we need smarter exports longer term.

National should be worried about the long tail and middle NZ. If Labour can appeal to them through the likes of Shane Jones and many other opposition MPs who are stepping up, maybe more of them will vote this year.

Labour are by far the biggest force in a left-leaning coalition, they will have most of the policy control. It's unlikely Kim Dotcom will be in the picture in any case, unless he does list his company, and people are crazy enough to buy shares in it, giving him the funds he needs to do some electioneering.

[iceman]

National should be worried about the long tail and middle NZ. If Labour can appeal to them through the likes of Shane Jones and many other opposition MPs who are stepping up, maybe more of them will vote this year.


Why should National be worried about middle NZ. They are by and large National supporters today because Labour forgot them and doesn't understand them. I agree Shane Jones is a formidable politician (not sure about his Countdown attack though) and I've always thought he was in the wrong party. But I am curious as to what "other opposition MPs who are stepping up" you are referring to ? Any names ? From where I sit, Labour appears awfully silent so I assume you are talking about Russell Norman and Winston Peters with his made up stories !

[winner69]

I think Cunliffe has taken the old adage to heart 'better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt'.

Like it ..... good advice but he still opens his mouth too much

Methinks Nats will clean up this election .... by default ...... and that's not really good news

[elZorro]

Why should National be worried about middle NZ. They are by and large National supporters today because Labour forgot them and doesn't understand them. I agree Shane Jones is a formidable politician (not sure about his Countdown attack though) and I've always thought he was in the wrong party. But I am curious as to what "other opposition MPs who are stepping up" you are referring to ? Any names ? From where I sit, Labour appears awfully silent so I assume you are talking about Russell Norman and Winston Peters with his made up stories !

I think I saw David Parker on the news the other day. Maybe they are keeping Shane Jones in the spotlight in case too many more Labour MPs would confuse people.

Al Nisbet had a funny cartoon today which I can't access, showing him being a high-flier while David Cunliffe was still on the ground. Always some truth in good humour.

But if you look at the wording in what Shane Jones said in parliament, the timing of it in election year, and that it's had a big effect -with even National unable to walk away from it this time- I think this was a calculated release date. How many others do they have ready?

[westerly]

[QUOTE=westerly;463279]
I'll except that immigration could just be a short term boost, but that is something that can only be confirmed after the fact not before. NZ could easily house 22 million, I think another 800,000 in the next ten or fifteen years will do a lot to pay for the baby boomers retirement quite nicely thank you very much.
Wow, I gave you one oil companies quarterly profit figures which can be confirmed by going on the TAG Oil website and you say most wells drilled are unproductive. TAG's last quarter profit was $12,939,442 forget about the unproductive wells which TAG has too, look at that profit. Not bad for just one Junior Oil Corp. Then you say, " If there is oil there it might be more beneficial in the long term to NZ to leave it in the ground and get the benefit of far higher oil prices as the easy oil runs out." Bollocks, if the Greenies get their way any oil left in the ground will be worth nothing. Go get it now baby. Most of the Gas alone will be exported directly to China earning NZ billions in revenue. I think what you are trying to say is leave it in the ground until Labour is in power and they can gain the benefit from it. Tough titties westerly, it was National that encouraged and stimulated the oil industry and it will be National's baby even if the Green Labour party win the election.

Cuzzie, Tag oils $12,939,442 profit was actually revenue not profit. I suggest you read the footnotes to the news release which explain in detail the risks involved in oil exploration. Good luck with Tag however. Tag also suggest the gas will be sold in NZ not exported. Australia will probably supply China
As for another 800,000 in the next 10-15 years, we have enough difficulty housing the present population.

westerly

[Sgt Pepper]

Interesting reading through the posts today regarding left/right divide and the assumptions that national delivers and left of centre governments dont. First of all let me decalre my background, I was raised in state house which my hardworking parents bought. I am a high salary earner, financially literate and own shares. I am instiinctively a social democrat so usually vote Labour. My father was a small businessman who deeply distrusted National. . Dont forget in the 1990s the Presdient of the Labour Party was the late Michael Hirscfeld, highly intelligent man( and very wealthy) who owned Mico Wakefield. He had no probelms running a significant business and being a life long social democrat

[Cuzzie]

[QUOTE=Cuzzie;463313]

Cuzzie, Tag oils $12,939,442 profit was actually revenue not profit. I suggest you read the footnotes to the news release which explain in detail the risks involved in oil exploration. Good luck with Tag however. Tag also suggest the gas will be sold in NZ not exported. Australia will probably supply China
As for another 800,000 in the next 10-15 years, we have enough difficulty housing the present population.

westerlywesterly, your right revenue not profit. Not bad netting $12,939,442 in one quarter, not bad at all. There is risk in every share you buy, do you not read the footnotes of the companies you invest in? No difference, so fail to see why you would even post that. TAGs testing results are in and they are a green light. Test results take the risk out of investing somewhat if they are positive westerly. I invested before those all those results were known & it was a risk, but now I'm feeling great about the risk that I took. I'm happy.
The increase of Gas will be coming from the East Coast play and there will be far too much of it to be sold in NZ. There's a high probability that both MES and NZEC separately have more oil & gas than TAG on the East Coast and the HBRIC & Eastland Port stand to increase their revenue too once up and running. This huge increase in Gas will be exported to China.

westerly, always the negative from lefties, just think of housing a further 800,000 over the decade and what that would do to boost our economy. How many Kiwis live in Aussie alone? As our economy continually out shines Australia you will have more and more Kiwis coming home and less moving over.

[Cuzzie]

Regarding Kim Dotcom, most businesses have their share of slow-paying customers. It's called B.S.ing and it's not cool.
EZ, so if Dotcom does pay his bills eventually that is not cool, I agree. What if he does not pay his bills and one or two businesses fold because they could not pay their bills due to Dotcom not paying them?
What's the adjective you would use to describe anybody, not just Dotcom who wont pay their bills due to any circumstance and a that business shuts down as a result?

[elZorro]

EZ, so if Dotcom does pay his bills eventually that is not cool, I agree. What if he does not pay his bills and one or two businesses fold because they could not pay their bills due to Dotcom not paying them?
What's the adjective you would use to describe anybody, not just Dotcom who wont pay their bills due to any circumstance and a that business shuts down as a result?

From what I've seen Cuzzie, not too many will be giving Dotcom a great deal of credit. Not enough to sink their businesses. Their BS-o-meters will be running full bore by now. They are doing the right thing. I did that once to a bad debtor, I posted their details including their addresses and phone numbers on the web, and also a bit about what they had been getting up to. Where professional debt collectors failed, I got my bill paid in full in return for taking the details off the web. This is because everything I posted was true.

Kim Dotcom won't be able to get these details removed, it's gone too far.

[Cuzzie]

From what I've seen Cuzzie, not too many will be giving Dotcom a great deal of credit. Not enough to sink their businesses. Their BS-o-meters will be running full bore by now. They are doing the right thing. I did that once to a bad debtor, I posted their details including their addresses and phone numbers on the web, and also a bit about what they had been getting up to. Where professional debt collectors failed, I got my bill paid in full in return for taking the details off the web. This is because everything I posted was true.

Kim Dotcom won't be able to get these details removed, it's gone too far. Nice reply & good for you. I have just done something similar and I too got the desired result.

[nextbigthing]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9755443/Labour-limping-Greens-in-freefall-poll

[elZorro]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9755443/Labour-limping-Greens-in-freefall-poll

I can't understand why this poll ended up so good for National. On Interest.co.nz they show that many NZers are worried about the economy, the gap between rich and poor, etc. So many obviously think the trickle-down effect works, that all of us will reap the extra primary sector export income while it lasts.

http://www.interest.co.nz/news/68643/new-zealanders-say-economic-issues-easily-most-important-problem-affecting-country-and-wo

The cost of energy is a major drag on the economy (it's fundamentally what the economy is about), and Labour and the Greens have some good ideas to sustainably help with that.

[fungus pudding]

I can't understand why this poll ended up so good for National. On Interest.co.nz they show that many NZers are worried about the economy, the gap between rich and poor, etc. So many obviously think the trickle-down effect works, that all of us will reap the extra primary sector export income while it lasts.

http://www.interest.co.nz/news/68643/new-zealanders-say-economic-issues-easily-most-important-problem-affecting-country-and-wo

The cost of energy is a major drag on the economy (it's fundamentally what the economy is about), and Labour and the Greens have some good ideas to sustainably help with that.

Forget all that rubbish. Greens will bounce up and down in the polls, but Labour's problem is the current leader. He is not - and never will be popular.

[craic]

The Labour and Greens "good ideas" to deal with the cost of energy is what is commonly known as subsidy and no matter how you disguise a subsidy it is still a cost to the taxpayer - we still have to pay for the energy. It's the same as insurance companies complaining of "losses" through crime or whatever. They do not have losses - their customers pay and if they, the insurance companies, miscalculate, they make less profit - not a "loss" as they claim.

[Harvey Specter]

I can't understand why this poll ended up so good for National. Because your not listening to us. ;)

[Cuzzie]

This is interesting ..... The latest One News Colmar Brunton poll shows a large change since their last poll in October.

National is up 6% to 51% and the Greens have dropped 5% to 8%. This is the (equal) highest National has polled since the election and the lowest the Greens have polled.

Labour have stayed constant at 34%. Now voters do not tend to defect from the Greens to National. Almost certainly what has happened is National has picked up 5% to 6% off Labour, while Labour has picked up 5% from the Greens. This makes sense, as their giving welfare to families earning up to $150,000 will appeal to hard left voters, but be a total turn off for centrist voters.


Link (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/whats-behind-nationals-surge-and-greens-record-low-ck-152320)

[westerly]

This is interesting ..... The latest One News Colmar Brunton poll shows a large change since their last poll in October.

National is up 6% to 51% and the Greens have dropped 5% to 8%. This is the (equal) highest National has polled since the election and the lowest the Greens have polled.

Labour have stayed constant at 34%. Now voters do not tend to defect from the Greens to National. Almost certainly what has happened is National has picked up 5% to 6% off Labour, while Labour has picked up 5% from the Greens. This makes sense, as their giving welfare to families earning up to $150,000 will appeal to hard left voters, but be a total turn off for centrist voters.


Link (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/whats-behind-nationals-surge-and-greens-record-low-ck-152320)

Inclined to agree with your analysis Cuzzie, $150,000 seems way over the top to me.
Westerly

[Major von Tempsky]

Nah, you've missed the major reason.

Suddenly no-one wants to know Dotcom, he has a cross between political bubonic plague and leprosy. His party support is nil and the search warrants have been validated and he will be extradited. Anyone who visited him is being mercilessly exposed and pilloried.
And Russel Norman was discovered in bed with him!

[Minerbarejet]

Luges upon ice probably.



( cross between bubonic plague and leprosy)
:)

[Cuzzie]

Nah, you've missed the major reason.

Suddenly no-one wants to know Dotcom, he has a cross between political bubonic plague and leprosy. His party support is nil and the search warrants have been validated and he will be extradited. Anyone who visited him is being mercilessly exposed and pilloried.
And Russel Norman was discovered in bed with him!And Russel Norman was discovered in bed with Dot.com! Question is do they become one and be known as Fat Boy Slim.:)

[elZorro]

The whole Dotcom thing is done, well before the election. The blogosphere will have forgotten about him by then. It's interesting that the polls are fairly volatile.

David Cunliffe was just on TV. He's met a healthcare worker who is on below $14 an hour, she had not had a pay rise since Labour was in office (2008). Yes, there are employers like that out there. 100,000 NZers are on the minimum wage. I wonder how many are within 10% of the minimum wage. Nearly 75% of NZers want the minimum pay to be $15 an hour or better.
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/nearly-half-kiwis-bac
k-15-minimum-wage-poll-5848703 (http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/nearly-half-kiwis-back-15-minimum-wage-poll-5848703)

On one hand you have people who are doing a hard day's work but because of their skill-base and unemployment queues are paid the absolute minimum, while megalomaniac business owners can make big sums in what appears to be illegal operations paying little tax, and even after they're pinged for it they'll still prey on other people to live their lifestyle.

[Major von Tempsky]

Did you note the amusing story doing the rounds in Britain....

A banker, a Daily Mail reader and a refugee are somehow by accident at morning tea in a café.
On the table in front of them are twelve biscuits.

The banker takes eleven of them and says to the Daily Mail reader "Careful, the refugee wants to take your biscuit!".

Heh heh heh!

[Major von Tempsky]

For those who wonder why Cunliffe is not making any progress....

To raise your share of the vote you need to attract people who vote for other parties or those who don't vote. Cunliffe is not even trying to do this.

Take the minimum wage issue. Quite apart from powerful arguments about crashing the labour market for youth entrants and unemployed trying to get back in and making some industries uneconomic, raising the minimum wage will attract the vote of those (a) too young to vote (b) already vote Labour or Green (c) are so disorganized/lackadaisical that they don't bother to enroll or vote anyway.

The more time and energy Cunliffe spends on this issue the less he will garner any extra votes. See what I mean? But I suppose I shouldn't really be pointing this out to EZ etc but quietly chortling as I read the paper.

[elZorro]

For those who wonder why Cunliffe is not making any progress....

To raise your share of the vote you need to attract people who vote for other parties or those who don't vote. Cunliffe is not even trying to do this.

Take the minimum wage issue. Quite apart from powerful arguments about crashing the labour market for youth entrants and unemployed trying to get back in and making some industries uneconomic, raising the minimum wage will attract the vote of those (a) too young to vote (b) already vote Labour or Green (c) are so disorganized/lackadaisical that they don't bother to enroll or vote anyway.

The more time and energy Cunliffe spends on this issue the less he will garner any extra votes. See what I mean? But I suppose I shouldn't really be pointing this out to EZ etc but quietly chortling as I read the paper.

Don't worry MVT, after filtering some of what I see, I'll certainly send Labour some advice. I'd quite like to see some graphs of economic results during Labour's and then National's terms, in their campaign material. Labour always try hard to get drivers to take people to polling stations, maybe I'll do that this time.

I can tell that you are torn, MVT. You know what's fair, but that's not always how it works out, is it.

[Cuzzie]

EZ remember this conversation you and I had over people not paying their bills and companies going bust because they in turn could not pay their bills?

From what I've seen Cuzzie, not too many will be giving Dotcom a great deal of credit. Not enough to sink their businesses. Their BS-o-meters will be running full bore by now. They are doing the right thing. I did that once to a bad debtor, I posted their details including their addresses and phone numbers on the web, and also a bit about what they had been getting up to. Where professional debt collectors failed, I got my bill paid in full in return for taking the details off the web. This is because everything I posted was true.

Kim Dotcom won't be able to get these details removed, it's gone too far.
Well mate I'm afraid to tell you it was a leading question on my part.
I was about to drop a bomb shell about a certain high flying member of the Labour party that did just that recently. Hint - this person has a do-up Then that poll came along and I thought don't kick a man why he is down, wait until such a time where Labour might be polling better to bring him back a peg or two. I also needed to do some more research on whether this information is true or not. I still have not confirmed that so most certainly wont be saying a thing until I'm happy that this is 100% correct. I do have some doubts, however this person is adamant and if true will be a big game changer and might just see massive changers before the upcoming election. This is no joke EZ and will apologize profusely to you for even bringing this up before confirmation on my part, however if it is true you will either have to eat your words above or vote National. That's how damming this is.

Major von Tempsky, I would like your opinion on how to handle this news. P.M me and I'll tell you what I've been told if you promise to keep quite about it until we have confirmation. I know Whale Oil Beef Hooked could dine out for six months or so on this news and he probably will.

[Minerbarejet]

This bombshell you are about to drop - ensure it is not a shrapnel bomb or you may have a few pieces in places you dont want them. Intrigued nevertheless.

[elZorro]

Cuzzie, I only posted some bad debtor details on the web in a very tucked away place that would normally only get accessed by a fairly specific google-type search. Like from other people who were owed money by the same outfit. And I only did that, after trying fruitlessly to contact them over several months. I got no replies, even though they were obviously still trading.

So my advice now, is that until you know for sure that there is no dispute of the bill, say, and nothing has happened after normal avenues have been tried, not to say anything in public unless you don't mind being hauled into court. Especially if it's not your bill that hasn't been paid.

I once had a guy threaten to pull the iron off my recently repaired roof if I didn't pay the last 10% of the ever-increasing bill which I'd withheld. Well that was because he only put one coat of paint on the roof, and not the three coats he talked about in his quote.

[Cuzzie]

This bombshell you are about to drop - ensure it is not a shrapnel bomb or you may have a few pieces in places you dont want them. Intrigued nevertheless.I hear you Minerbarejet and that is some concern for me. That's why I have not posted it yet.

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, I only posted some bad debtor details on the web in a very tucked away place that would normally only get accessed by a fairly specific google-type search. Like from other people who were owed money by the same outfit. And I only did that, after trying fruitlessly to contact them over several months. I got no replies, even though they were obviously still trading.

So my advice now, is that until you know for sure that there is no dispute of the bill, say, and nothing has happened after normal avenues have been tried, not to say anything in public unless you don't mind being hauled into court. Especially if it's not your bill that hasn't been paid.

I once had a guy threaten to pull the iron off my recently repaired roof if I didn't pay the last 10% of the ever-increasing bill which I'd withheld. Well that was because he only put one coat of paint on the roof, and not the three coats he talked about in his quote.
I hear you too, advice taken on board.

[Cuzzie]

Funny that. The link is http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11210236

Might be able to confirm one way or another my Game Changer story this evening. Just waiting for a phone call.

[fungus pudding]

Funny that. The link is http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11210236

Might be able to confirm one way or another my Game Changer story this evening. Just waiting for a phone call.

I think McCarten will be enough of a game changer without anything else.

[iceman]

Yes Matt McCarten is a formidable political operator. He will need all his skills to bridge the obvious gap between Cunliffe and the parliamentary Labour party. This appointment further entrenches Cunliffe's lurch to the left.

[fungus pudding]

Yes Matt McCarten is a formidable political operator. He will need all his skills to bridge the obvious gap between Cunliffe and the parliamentary Labour party. This appointment further entrenches Cunliffe's lurch to the left.

And further entrenches him in the same losing mould as Goff and Shearer.:t_down:

[slimwin]

Yep, thats certain to isolate a large part of the centrist vote from looking to Labour. A bad appointment I would have thought.

More bad news for the left..

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9766167/Manufacturing-vibrant-and-kicking-report
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11209844

[Cuzzie]

Well, got conformation finally. It's watered down somewhat and not what I call a game changer now, just extremely damming.

EZ a business was closed down partly because of this Labour high flyer not paying his bills on time and one weeks wage was lost by all and the business folded . The word, "partly" & not solely is the watered down change. Others had not paid in time too. The Labour high flyers bill was paid after a long delay to the liquidator to try and save face and that long delay cost peoples jobs. That's peoples jobs, not just one persons job & the business.
That's sometime I'm proud to say I have never done and I will wait until such a time where I can do the most damage to this arrogant a-hole. No threat of legal action against me as this is now water tight, but a real threat of losing multiple votes just before an election. This story will more than likely make it to the headlines if I wait too long as we are talking about many pissed-off people here. Not a problem, after all it's there story and should be told be them & not me anyway.
EZ & other Labour supporters, it fair to say that you wont be best pleased with what unfolded. Here is another hint, "he is not short".

I will leave it for later on.

[Cuzzie]

Yep, thats certain to isolate a large part of the centrist vote from looking to Labour. A bad appointment I would have thought.

More bad news for the left..

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9766167/Manufacturing-vibrant-and-kicking-report
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11209844
Every day the news gets better for National and worse for the Green Labour party. Let the good times roll.:)

[Xerof]

This made me belly laugh : (courtesy of a respondent on whale oil)

'Cunliffe: habitational name from a place in Lancashire, near Rishton, recorded in 1246 as Kunteclive, from Old English ****e ‘****’ + clif ‘slope’, i.e. ‘slope with a slit or crack in it’.

Could we have a new catchphrase? He's made a right cunliffe of himself

oh, for the ******'s just rearrange the letters C N T U

[westerly]

This made me belly laugh : (courtesy of a respondent on whale oil)

'Cunliffe: habitational name from a place in Lancashire, near Rishton, recorded in 1246 as Kunteclive, from Old English ****e ‘****’ + clif ‘slope’, i.e. ‘slope with a slit or crack in it’.

Could we have a new catchphrase? He's made a right cunliffe of himself

oh, for the ******'s just rearrange the letters C N T U

Grow up little man

westerly

[elZorro]

Yep, thats certain to isolate a large part of the centrist vote from looking to Labour. A bad appointment I would have thought.

More bad news for the left..

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9766167/Manufacturing-vibrant-and-kicking-report
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11209844

Slimwin, neither of those two articles imply jobs for most of provincial NZ are in the offing.


The current economic recovery will be concentrated in service sector jobs in large urban centres."


So probably not high paying jobs, and you need to be paying dearly for accommodation there, plus transport costs.

The manufacturing charts are talked up by Castalia, but they failed to mention that in two years the manufacturing sector shrivelled back as a portion of total GDP. It went backwards, it got worse, and more people ended up on the jobless queue. Some of whom are fairly dependent on that type of job for an income. The charts also don't show what the story was in 2008. I'm picking it was a lot better again.

It's 2014. If they are very lucky, with a tailwind of high dairy exports and the turnover from the CHCH rebuild, the National Govt can claim that in six years, they have now almost achieved the same economic performance that Labour achieved by 2008. Except they have put the crown capital accounts well into the red to do it, and we'll be paying off that historic debt for years to come. For most of the five and a bit years they have been in office, NZ's economic performance has been well below the 2008 level. GDP per capita has been lower, in other words the workforce has been less efficient. They have achieved nothing, we are directionless and weakened as a country. New jobs have not kept pace with a working age population increase.

They'll now try to sell 30% of Genesis Energy, to obtain $490mill or so. The Huntly Power Station is just one of its assets. To rebuild that main station now, would probably cost $3,000 million. The E3P gas cogen is on top of that. So who is going to get a good deal out of the Genesis sale? Not the govt or the taxpayers.

Herald editorial: some interesting comments, but they still stay the private sector will make better decisions? Based on what experiences?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11210470

Huntly might be an aging station, but it has a good weatherproof cover over it, much of the control gear has been replaced relatively recently, and they are still refurbishing parts that have been in place for nearly 40 years. The intention surely is to keep this station largely available for service in the future.

[craic]

Cuzzie, I thought only left wingers came up with stuff like that. Some figure - who might be prominent - owes money to people/employees? - and he might be politically embarrassed? When someone gets upset enough to make a fuss?

[slimwin]

Another pointless comparison EZ. Comparing progress in boom times to progress in a world depression. Fortunately the average voter (the Center)isn't as myotpic as that.

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, I thought only left wingers came up with stuff like that. Some figure - who might be prominent - owes money to people/employees? - and he might be politically embarrassed? When someone gets upset enough to make a fuss?
craic, that would be right, left wingers do it all the time & we are all used to it now. When I was first told about this Labour high flyer, I thought 'yeah that could be right', but only maybe. After a couple of days I thought I'd check it out & that maybe became, 'more than likely'. It wasn't until I got conformation from the source, which in this case was the pissed-off wife of a worker that not only lost his job partly due as a result of this Labour high flyer not paying their bills on time, but his last weeks wage not payed to boot.

I knew EZ would not engage with me over this one and has ignored my last two posts even though I did try and entice him with some poor spelling. One word was completely wrong & EZ went swimming right past it. That tells me one of two things, either his 'hurtometer is right off the scale', or he is in the know and after putting one & one together with my little hints, he has confirmed his greatest fear.

EZ, in the spirit of George Gregan ... Three more years. With all the good news only coming from right of center lately, I'm now thinking only one party can possibly win the next election and that would be without any further blows to the Green Labour party, including what I have.

[craic]

So my decision to send my wife and kids down into the cellar with a months food and water proved to be an unnecessary act of panic. I have since remembered that I don't have any kids here and I don't have a cellar. I wonder where she went with all that food and water?

[elZorro]

craic, that would be right, left wingers do it all the time & we are all used to it now. When I was first told about this Labour high flyer, I thought 'yeah that could be right', but only maybe. After a couple of days I thought I'd check it out & that maybe became, 'more than likely'. It wasn't until I got conformation from the source, which in this case was the pissed-off wife of a worker that not only lost his job partly due as a result of this Labour high flyer not paying their bills on time, but his last weeks wage not payed to boot.

I knew EZ would not engage with me over this one and has ignored my last two posts even though I did try and entice him with some poor spelling. One word was completely wrong & EZ went swimming right past it. That tells me one of two things, either his 'hurtometer is right off the scale', or he is in the know and after putting one & one together with my little hints, he has confirmed his greatest fear.

EZ, in the spirit of George Gregan ... Three more years. With all the good news only coming from right of center lately, I'm now thinking only one party can possibly win the next election and that would be without any further blows to the Green Labour party, including what I have.

Did you mean the word conformation, which means, when applied to cattle, the grading of their physical appearance? It was a malapropism, but not as good as I've seen on this site. JBMurc is better at it :)

Now as this account of yours seems to involve a senior Labour politician, I have "payed" some attention to that, but as the debt has been paid or settled, this would be moot by now. There was probably some dispute involved, and a business owner who doesn't keep enough spare capital to have a few weeks of pay available, is being negligent. There have been many businesses rising like a phoenix after one lot of creditors has been shed in a liquidation. Time will tell.

[Cuzzie]

Did you mean the word conformation, which means, when applied to cattle, the grading of their physical appearance? It was a malapropism, but not as good as I've seen on this site. JBMurc is better at it :)

Now as this account of yours seems to involve a senior Labour politician, I have "payed" some attention to that, but as the debt has been paid or settled, this would be moot by now. There was probably some dispute involved, and a business owner who doesn't keep enough spare capital to have a few weeks of pay available, is being negligent. There have been many businesses rising like a phoenix after one lot of creditors has been shed in a liquidation. Time will tell.Typical left wing answer, blame the business owner for not having enough capital when in fact it was the Labour high flyer who was caught short. He had an expensive house to pay for and was doing it up. Money appears to be all dried up, but kept on spending anyway. Probably thought he was doing them a favor by keeping them employed when in fact his actions sent employed tradesmen to the dole queue and closed down a small business. What was that you said about Labour working for small businessman EZ? Oh the irony. Try all you like to turn the tables and blame the other party, however just like you can not talk your way out of Labour leaving NZ it a terrible financial state back in 08, no amount of talking will change the facts here EZ. BTW may I remind you that you don't even know what happened here, yet you are all ready putting up scenarios. Wait a minute that's what you do all the time. Just let facts be facts. The bill was "paid" (not payed - you still have missed a couple EZ) in full so clearly no problem with the stock in question. The only hindrance was from the customers non-payment, it's as simple as that.

Funny how we have not heard from Russel lately, real funny. No amount of porkies from the Greens co-leader will ever see him entirely murder the truth I believe, because he never gets close enough to it.:cool:

[elZorro]

Cuzzie, let's not forget the political headwinds that National are facing. These are more important.

Less than 5% of homes being sold are to low deposit borrowers. This is half of the govt stipulation, the banks are only too happy to comply.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11211035

In Hamilton, first home buyers would need $72,000 cash as a deposit. Unlikely anyone can meet that. This hare-brained National policy will keep out first-time entrants in the property market, leaving it wide open for property investors, who have relatively low interest rates and pressure on rentals from high immigration at the moment. National are meanwhile selling off state houses and state power assets, the intention being to allow the top 2% to gather good private investment profits well into the future.

Tony Ryall is leaving, the subtitles imply he has built up his contacts and wants to get involved in the private sector. The partial sales of SOEs on his watch has apparently strengthened them and made them more efficient. No mention on how it will also cripple the govt income well into the future, and these assets are likely to be stripped at some point, so investors can make a windfall profit. They've done it with the railways before.

New soft rules for offshore drilling: many holes to be drilled with very little oversight and no public submissions. Just one of many changes National's backers want in the RMA.

[iceman]

Less than 5% of homes being sold are to low deposit borrowers. This is half of the govt stipulation, the banks are only too happy to comply.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11211035

In Hamilton, first home buyers would need $72,000 cash as a deposit. Unlikely anyone can meet that. This hare-brained National policy will keep out first-time entrants in the property market, leaving it wide open for property investors, who have relatively low interest rates and pressure on rentals from high immigration at the moment. National are meanwhile selling off state houses and state power assets, the intention being to allow the top 2% to gather good private investment profits well into the future.

Tony Ryall is leaving, the subtitles imply he has built up his contacts and wants to get involved in the private sector. The partial sales of SOEs on his watch has apparently strengthened them and made them more efficient. No mention on how it will also cripple the govt income well into the future, and these assets are likely to be stripped at some point, so investors can make a windfall profit. They've done it with the railways before.

New soft rules for offshore drilling: many holes to be drilled with very little oversight and no public submissions. Just one of many changes National's backers want in the RMA.

EZ, you are obviously feeling the pressure of Labour going down the gurgler. You have resorted to stating plain untruths.
You well know that the low equity rules were designed and implemented by the independent Reserve Bank and has nothing to do with National. In fact the PM suggested the RB could be more lenient which fell on Wheeler's deaf ears. Good on him I say. The RB should be independent of political interference of the sort Labour/Green say they will start doing if they become Government. Thank the stars that they will be in opposition for a few years yet !

Tony Ryall has done a great job as Health Minister. Great to see that he has a future after politics in the private sector, unlike most Labour MPs. May the future be kind to him.

[fungus pudding]

The RB should be independent of political interference of the sort Labour/Green say they will start doing if they become Government. Thank the stars that they will be in opposition for a few years yet !



An interesting point. The numbers are reasonably close, given the choice of coalition partners available to the socialists. However I reckon National will get back in this year but then Labour will have the good sense to dump Cunliffe and Parker making 2017 a whole new ballgame. Even eZ will agree with that.

[craic]

So the question remains - unanswered by ELZ from my earlier post. Why can't the left find a credible leader? They had a soft easy-going guy who would have appealed to all the mothers out there but his reticence or shyness which ELZ always defended eventually led to his ousting. Then they come up with a demented ferret who is not liked by too many of his party elite and who has resorted to the union rhetoric of yesteryear and terrified all the schoolteachers, lawyers and other academics at the heart of Labour. It's probably too late now, but can't they find an ordinary bloke, laid back, reasonable in his response to any situation, intelligent with leadership qualities, acceptable to all - someone like John Key?

[fungus pudding]

So the question remains - unanswered by ELZ from my earlier post. Why can't the left find a credible leader? They had a soft easy-going guy who would have appealed to all the mothers out there but his reticence or shyness which ELZ always defended eventually led to his ousting. Then they come up with a demented ferret who is not liked by too many of his party elite and who has resorted to the union rhetoric of yesteryear and terrified all the schoolteachers, lawyers and other academics at the heart of Labour. It's probably too late now, but can't they find an ordinary bloke, laid back, reasonable in his response to any situation, intelligent with leadership qualities, acceptable to all - someone like John Key?

No, they can't.

[iceman]

Why can't the left find a credible leader? It's probably too late now, but can't they find an ordinary bloke, laid back, reasonable in his response to any situation, intelligent with leadership qualities, acceptable to all - someone like John Key?

Because they're such a broad church of many and very different congregations. For example, what has the miner on the West Coast in common with the academic, the bureaucrat in Wellington or the Rainbow faction ? How is it possible to find a Leader to suit all of those factions within Labour. It simply isn't. The only one of recent Leadership challengers that comes close to an "ordinary bloke" is Shane Jones but the feminists, the rainbows and the academics would never accept him.
Labour has no future trying to cater for all these groups within one party.

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, let's not forget the political headwinds that National are facing. These are more important.
New soft rules for offshore drilling: many holes to be drilled with very little oversight and no public submissions. Just one of many changes National's backers want in the RMA.I'll think your find that this change was needed thanks to the Green Talibans actions. Don't you realise that there is only so many untruths and illegal actions ones Govt. can take.

This will benefit the Greens too, because they are a big user of hydrocarbons in many forms and if this natural substance can be & will be harvested in our country. We don't need to import the stuff. Think of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions savings right there as no more super tankers used to import oil from overseas. But the Greens wont look at that or even acknowledge the fact.

We should put a hypocrisy tax on the Greens, so every time they fill up their vehicles with petrol, diesel, LPG or charge it with electricity - they pay 10% hypocrisy tax. Every time they catch a bus, train or plane - they pay 10% hypocrisy tax. Every time they buy a bike - they pay 10% hypocrisy tax (Solar power wont lube their chain) Every time they buy new cloths or footwear - they pay 10% hypocrisy tax (machinery used & transportation of goods) Every time they build a new house - they pay 10% hypocrisy tax. Every time they open their mouths - they pay 10% hypocrisy tax & so on. EZ, we could put this hypocrisy tax towards gifting the lazy and the poor making housing cheaper and everybody including you would be happy. I think I'm on to a winner here, what do you think?

EZ, your problem is you need the Greenies numbers and you must stand by their policies. Good, I like that, but you & I both know that you just cant't believe a word Russel Norman says, even when he swears he's lying.

[Harvey Specter]

I'll think your find that this change was needed thanks to the Green Talibans actions. Don't you realise that there is only so many untruths and illegal actions ones Govt. can take.I am not sure if you jest but I assume this is correct. Lets face it, their objection will be the same on every single application. There are no 'neighbours' who will be directly effected. There is no part of the sea that is more precious that the other.

So the questions is, what is the risk and what has been done to mitigate that risk and what is the plan should that risk eventuate. I am not sure the government is doing enough on these points but public hearings wont solve this.

EDIT: I dont think this is the case here, but it will be interesting to see how many policies are put forward before the election, that can be given away afterwards as part of coalition or confidence agreements. None from Winston because all his policies are non negotiable but National has been happy in the past to give concessions to its friends (eg. Charter schools, whunua ora, and even with the Greens, home insulation, etc). This has been one of Keys successes - much better that in the past when concessions were mearly giving Winstone what ever role he wanted.

[Cuzzie]

I am not sure if you jest but I assume this is correct. Lets face it, their objection will be the same on every single application. There are no 'neighbours' who will be directly effected. There is no part of the sea that is more precious that the other.

So the questions is, what is the risk and what has been done to mitigate that risk and what is the plan should that risk eventuate. I am not sure the government is doing enough on these points but public hearings wont solve this.

EDIT: I dont think this is the case here, but it will be interesting to see how many policies are put forward before the election, that can be given away afterwards as part of coalition or confidence agreements. None from Winston because all his policies are non negotiable but National has been happy in the past to give concessions to its friends (eg. Charter schools, whunua ora, and even with the Greens, home insulation, etc). This has been one of Keys successes - much better that in the past when concessions were mearly giving Winstone what ever role he wanted.
Here is a link to Oil Spills and Disasters since 1967 - http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html
Not much when you compare how the oil has has helped man immensely since 1967. Think of life without hydrocarbons and the Greens got their own way. It would last days and the Greenies would be rounded up. It's not going to happen. We will be using hydrocarbons for our energy needs beyond our kids lifetime. Look at the link again at you will see that there has been nothing major or minor to report for four years, the longest period since 1967. The last one was Gulf of Mexico's Deepwater Horizon disaster. In the last four years the oil industry on-shore & off-shore has increased production in most parts of the world. So more oil & gas and no accidents. Put one & one together and you know a plain is in place and it is working.
Anadarko lost plenty from the Deepwater Horizon disaster and I'll bet my bottom dollar they are doing the very utmost to make sure that never happens again. They would be the safest oil corp to be carrying out deep water testing of our coast line right now & they are experts at it.

[elZorro]

EZ, you are obviously feeling the pressure of Labour going down the gurgler. You have resorted to stating plain untruths.
You well know that the low equity rules were designed and implemented by the independent Reserve Bank and has nothing to do with National. In fact the PM suggested the RB could be more lenient which fell on Wheeler's deaf ears. Good on him I say. The RB should be independent of political interference of the sort Labour/Green say they will start doing if they become Government. Thank the stars that they will be in opposition for a few years yet !

Tony Ryall has done a great job as Health Minister. Great to see that he has a future after politics in the private sector, unlike most Labour MPs. May the future be kind to him.

Iceman, yes maybe I forgot about the Reserve Bank setting the LVR rules, but National could have stepped in there, I'm sure Labour would have toned the policy down somehow. Tony Ryall was SOE minister too. Annette King thinks he created a climate of fear in the Health portfolio, so who is right here? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11210735

Craic: David Cunliffe speaks well to camera, and like Helen Clark before him, he has his own strongly held view on some things, and yet is sensible enough to seek compromises in policy. Given something interesting to work with, like Shane Jones had in the last two weeks, he'd do just as good a job. I think we lose touch of the fact that most MPs would be very impressive amongst the normal population with their skills, but they are in a rarified environment in parliament.

[Harvey Specter]

Here is a link to Oil Spills and Disasters since 1967 - http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001451.html
Not much when you compare how the oil has has helped man immensely since 1967. Think of life without hydrocarbons and the Greens got their own way. True - maybe we should demand that any Green policy for no oil drilling also be paired with a no import rule. The implausibility shows the flaw in their policy.

[elZorro]

True - maybe we should demand that any Green policy for no oil drilling also be paired with a no import rule. The implausibility shows the flaw in their policy.

I don't think you guys get it. What say they did find some gas condensate field, it would be good for the economy short term until it ran out, but it would also increase our emissions, and put off the date, sometime in the near future, when we have to start living sustainably. Look at Beijing, having to even think about creating a bubble over a park, so they can remember what clean air feels like. Madness.
(http://www.gizmag.com/orproject-bubbles-beijing/30995/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=5a24df4d06-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_65b67362bd-5a24df4d06-91378781)
If the price of energy stays high, maybe govts around the world will work harder on the solutions, along with the private sector. Sooner or later they'll not get enough capital to blow heaps of it on fruitless deep sea drilling, and then we might get somewhere. For the billions they spend on drilling, a lot of pilot biofuel plants could be built, for example.

[westerly]

No comments on the CV errors by someone with close links to the National party? Wonder why.

westerly

[Harvey Specter]

I don't think you guys get it.Or is it you that doesn't get it. Drilling for Oil in NZ will do nothing to the amount of oil we use in NZ. If we dont find it here, we will import it like we currently do. Until recently we were importing coal into NZ even though we had operating coal mines, so we would definitely have imported if we had none.

Our demand for Oil and our supply of Oil are two different issues. You are trying to reduce the first by changing the second, despite that fact we are lost in the rounding in relation to international supply.

[Harvey Specter]

No comments on the CV errors by someone with close links to the National party? Wonder why.If you are talking about the 'Lawyer', that is probably because he fell on his sword as soon as he was caught, as opposed to DC who still holds his position and maintains he did nothing wrong.

[Sgt Pepper]

Sorry iceman, I am a share enthusiast/investor who also works at the sharp end of the health service. Tony ryall has not done a great job in the health service. There has been little noise as he had been in the fortunate position of not having difficult collective contracts up for renegotiation i.e Nursing MECA and Resident Doctors. If you think he has done a great job most Orthopaedic surgeons will tell you a lot of their time is explaining to public patients in clinics why they wont be getting surgery.

[craic]

That situation with orthopaedic surgeons existed long before Tony Ryall or his predecessor. I saw my wife go through the hip replacement circus years ago and decided to pay the $20,000 from our life savings. Even then they stuffed it up and left her with a dropped foot and later with tendon transplant operations. We will never be able to afford all the medical/surgical proceedures that the population needs and the growing elderly population will only exacerbate the situation.
Sorry iceman, I am a share enthusiast/investor who also works at the sharp end of the health service. Tony ryall has not done a great job in the health service. There has been little noise as he had been in the fortunate position of not having difficult collective contracts up for renegotiation i.e Nursing MECA and Resident Doctors. If you think he has done a great job most Orthopaedic surgeons will tell you a lot of their time is explaining to public patients in clinics why they wont be getting surgery.

[westerly]

If you are talking about the 'Lawyer', that is probably because he fell on his sword as soon as he was caught, as opposed to DC who still holds his position and maintains he did nothing wrong.

More likely pushed. and was claiming a proffesional qualification. Bit of a difference.
Westerly

[elZorro]

Sorry iceman, I am a share enthusiast/investor who also works at the sharp end of the health service. Tony ryall has not done a great job in the health service. There has been little noise as he had been in the fortunate position of not having difficult collective contracts up for renegotiation i.e Nursing MECA and Resident Doctors. If you think he has done a great job most Orthopaedic surgeons will tell you a lot of their time is explaining to public patients in clinics why they wont be getting surgery.

I think I like Sgt Pepper at this point. Perhaps from a perspective of being right inside the health area, yours is a view that has a bit of weight, SP.

An older guy who is self-employed doing manual work nearby and would possibly be someone Craic would get along with (except this guy tends to vote Labour like myself) has waited for about a year for knee replacements. But he has kept working, will be getting it done soon via the public hospital system, so from his point of view it's working out OK. But it's the big picture that is more telling.

[iceman]

Sorry iceman, I am a share enthusiast/investor who also works at the sharp end of the health service. Tony ryall has not done a great job in the health service. There has been little noise as he had been in the fortunate position of not having difficult collective contracts up for renegotiation i.e Nursing MECA and Resident Doctors. If you think he has done a great job most Orthopaedic surgeons will tell you a lot of their time is explaining to public patients in clinics why they wont be getting surgery.

Hi Sgt Pepper,

I am sure you have a point but as craig points out, its difficult to blame Tony Ryall for it all. He has been a Health Minister now for nearly 6 years and during that time we have had no major upsets in the portfolio nor any major scandals or media beat up. There has been a big focus on preventative work.
During his tenure we have seen amongst other things:
# Several initiatives to reduce smoking, resulting in the lowest smoking rates on record.

# A large increase in immunisations of children with the 2 year old immunisation rate rising from 67% to
93% in 5 years on average with an even bigger increase for the Maori population. Targets for 95% of 8
months olds by this year.

# Extra $ 500 million on average into the operational health budget (capital investment not counted) to
reach $ 14.7 billion this year

# $ 350 million spent on insulating 235,000 mainly low income family homes, with co-operation from the
Greens

# Prioratising lowering the shamefully high rates of rheumatic fever

# Elective surgery procedures up 34% from 118,000 to 158,000

# Funded medical school places from 365 to 505

# Ministry of Health staff reduced from 1600 to 1200 while medical workforce has grown by 1700

I maintain that Ryall has done a fairly good job, with very astute political management, in an inherently difficult portfolio and especially so for a National Minister. Of course there are many things still to fix and it will never "be all done"

[Sgt Pepper]

Fair enough Iceman, you make some valid points. However would you concede that he has been aided by a comparatively benign industrial environment in the Health Service. Don't get me wrong I would HATE to be Minister of Health but believe me the health sector is an enormously stressful to work in, but I concede there are many stressful occupations, and DO like your share insights

[elZorro]

I'm impressed too, Iceman dug up some facts to bolster the case for National. The first big win, reducing smoking, wasn't that Maori party policy (and before that, Labour policy)? National would never have run with that by themselves. So did they encourage a Nanny State by doing that?

Speaking of ingesting things, now the Chinese locos for KiwiRail are being held aside for asbestos checking. The contract for manufacture said no asbestos. I have learnt the hard way that you need to check Chinese manufacturing, to see that it meets the spec. The first locos came in four years ago (2010, National policy), they've only just now spotted it. It's a big job to disassemble everything to remove the offending material, and the drivers probably won't be happy until it's gone completely. The Chinese will probably send people over to do that, but they won't cover the costs of temporary replacement locos being used.

I wonder how those lauded savings on the overseas purchase contract are going now. Perhaps not so rosy.

http://tvnz.co.nz/business-news/asbestos-in-kiwirail-locomotives-death-sentence-5854807

[Sgt Pepper]

I agrree 100% EZ, i drive past the deserted Hillside Workshops everyday in Dunedin, denied contracts as according to Steven Joyce the Chinese Manufacturer was more experienced. I look forward to his comments on this fiasco ASAP, too much to hope he will fall on his sword unfortunately ,comes across as very smug, arrogant man.

[iceman]

Fair enough Iceman, you make some valid points. However would you concede that he has been aided by a comparatively benign industrial environment in the Health Service. Don't get me wrong I would HATE to be Minister of Health but believe me the health sector is an enormously stressful to work in, but I concede there are many stressful occupations, and DO like your share insights

Totally agree Sgt Pepper. I have a couple of close friends at the front end of the health industry and know how stressful it is. Nothing I´ve said is meant to undermine the profession, far from it.
But like you say, many other professions are highly stressful too. My wife, a primary school teacher with new entrants, is highly stressed at times, especially in the first term of the year with many of the little ones extremely hard to deal with (not to mention the madness of giving them breaqkfast/lunch etc like some suggest!!!). I think it is a job underestimated by most.

EZ I agree also regarding smoking policy where there seem to be a cross party consensus and Tariana Turia has been a big advocate for reduction in smoking and should be acknowledged for it. It is great to see the parties agree on such policies.
I wish we had more policy agreement across parties, superannuation and the independence of the Reserve Bank comes to mind.

But this is exactly why John Key has been so successful and popular. He has not gone into wholesale changes of policies implemented by Labour, even though National may have opposed them originally. Working for Families and interest free student loans come to mind. He has been a pragmatist and focused on getting the economy sorted, not that I personally agree with it all.
Labour on the other hand opposes everything National does and claims they will repeal just about everything. Thats why the public has turned off and Cunliffe continues barking up the wrong tree !

[elZorro]

Iceman, National opposed everything Labour did while they were in office, those are the opposition rules. But once National did get their turn, many of the Labour policies had to stay because they were smart policies, and/or they helped to reduce the gap between rich and poor.

I have been beating the drum about R&D tax credits, ripped away by National. Crowd funding, if not abused, could be a good system for getting technology startups going. It has been used overseas for projects like 3D printers. But these are now passé, there are good commercial ones for sale in shops, not too expensive. Anyway, National has helped this idea along. It's not as simple for a business owner as R&D tax credits, but it could help energise employees and give them a stake.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9777851/Crowd-funding-gets-go-ahead

[elZorro]

The ACT party looks like they're taking "crazy" to new heights. They want to entirely scrap the RMA and replace it with something sketchy. National has not gone far enough. I suppose these ACT people also assume that once you're driving a car on a road, everyone else should simply get out of your way.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/act-would-repeal-rma-whyte-ck-152663

Bernard Hickey wrote a good article on inequality, and the changing of thinking at the IMF. If we look back at our own figures, surely Helen Clark's govt was years ahead of this thinking, and had reduced inequality (certainly stopped its massive rise from globalisation practices here) well before the GFC.

National has noted this, and kept some of the measures in place. But there have been peaks in the GINI index, and the trend under National is not dropping back further, especially when their mistakes in the calculations are pointed out.

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/68745/bernard-hickey-points-imf-research-showing-reducing-income-inequality-can-actually-imp

So NZ remains more unequal than it has been, in terms of post-tax income. This lines up with lower GDP per capita.

[Cuzzie]

The ACT party looks like they're taking "crazy" to new heights. They want to entirely scrap the RMA and replace it with something sketchy. National has not gone far enough. I suppose these ACT people also assume that once you're driving a car on a road, everyone else should simply get out of your way.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/act-would-repeal-rma-whyte-ck-152663

I like what Whyte is saying here, finial some common sense from this man. "ACT wants to repeal the Resource Management Act" Great, what's wrong with that EZ? I understand your need to control the lives & private property of New Zealanders EZ being from the left. Personally I would like the freedom (that's freedom as in choice, not that I would) to chop down a Pohutukawa tree if it was blocking my beautiful view of the coast line and I would not like to get prosecuted for removing brunches off native trees if they are rotten or diseased. They way the act stands now both of those two examples have happened under the act many times and one person who was responsible for the chopped down Pohutukawa tree without permission was not prosecuted. However the couple who tried to save native trees by removing rotten and diseased brunches are getting prosecuted. Too much confusion and not enough fair play, the act needs to go.

BTW, it was "Sue Kedgley the Green MP" who went ahead and cut the Pohutakawa blocking her view without a permit or any neighborhood consent.

The couple getting prosecuted for removing brunches off native trees are a pair of elderly environmentalists, that's real Greenies with common sense, not the pretenders you see parading themselves on T.V that cut down Pohutukawa trees without getting prosecuted.
Link here/ http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/lovers-bush-in-court-cutting-down-native-trees-5840835

[Cuzzie]

David Cunliffe has admitted he blundered in attacking John Key for being “out of touch” because he’s rich and lives in a “leafy suburb.” The comment was derided (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/middle-range-existence-bd-152078) by political commenttor David Farrar, who noted the Leader of the Opposition gets a salary of $268,500 a year and a superannuation subsidy of almost $30,000 so a remuneration package of around $300,000 a year. His wife, a partner at a top Auckland law firm, would earns somewhere north of $244,460.
In case you missed my inserted link above, click this/

A "middle range" existence? How the Cunliffe's $550K annual income breaks down (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/middle-range-existence-bd-152078)
That should be EZ enough to see!!!


He also withdrew a promise by previous Labour leader David Shearer that Greens will get a share of Cabinet seats proportionate to their vote. So a split away from the Greens, he has finally seen the light, but if he needs the numbers to form a Govt. he reverses that statement by saying, “that depends on how the voters decide.”. He's not saying anything but the, "fact he wants it both ways". I guess the good thing here is the Greenies are left out to dry where they belong, but will that change the way they (The Greens) feel about Cunliffe after doing the dirty on them? Hmmm!! Either way, I like what's happening here. All good for Key and another three years. Maybe we should start talking who will be the next Labour Leader in opposition after this years election.:)

Link here/ http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/cunliffe-admits-he-blundered-attacking-key-out-touch-ck-152667

[fungus pudding]

I like what Whyte is saying here, finial some common sense from this man. "ACT wants to repeal the Resource Management Act" Great, what's wrong with that EZ? I understand your need to control the lives & private property of New Zealanders EZ being from the left. Personally I would like the freedom (that's freedom as in choice, not that I would) to chop down a Pohutukawa tree if it was blocking my beautiful view of the coast line and I would not like to get prosecuted for removing brunches off native trees if they are rotten or diseased. They way the act stands now both of those two examples have happened under the act many times and one person who was responsible for the chopped down Pohutukawa tree without permission was not prosecuted. However the couple who tried to save native trees by removing rotten and diseased brunches are getting prosecuted. Too much confusion and not enough fair play, the act needs to go.

BTW, it was "Sue Kedgley the Green MP" who went ahead and cut the Pohutakawa blocking her view without a permit or any neighborhood consent.

The couple getting prosecuted for removing brunches off native trees are a pair of elderly environmentalists, that's real Greenies with common sense, not the pretenders you see parading themselves on T.V that cut down Pohutukawa trees without getting prosecuted.
Link here/ http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/lovers-bush-in-court-cutting-down-native-trees-5840835


There's a lot wrong with the RMA. Few would dispute that, but chucking it out would be disastrous and, far from what Jamie Whyte says about owners' rights, scrapping it would remove the protection of their rights. I doubt that he has read the act.

[Cuzzie]

Cuzzie, Are you saying that because you are rich you must be "out of touch" with what it's like to be poor?

Staying "in touch" with the 20% plus of our society that is significantly disadvantaged is about taking an interest and using empathy.

Cunliffe is talking about their needs and the need to improve their lot. Score one point to Cunliffe.

Key says almost nothing. Key scores zero. ... One to Cunliffe I think.
Well that is a main point of difference between the right and the left. National policies encourage and help the poor help themselves that's a good thing, generally all left wing policies are designed for the hard working middle class to help the poor who wont help themselves. I'm never in the mood to hand over my hard earned cash to those who want it and I wont start now. The way I see it, Cunliffe will never get a point off me for increasing my taxes to help the lazy ones who want it.

[Cuzzie]

There's a lot wrong with the RMA. Few would dispute that, but chucking it out would be disastrous and, far from what Jamie Whyte says about owners' rights, scrapping it would remove the protection of their rights. I doubt that he has read the act.Fair enough, the point is that it needs reviewing, a reversal of the Resource Management Act might be going one step too far.

[artemis]

Fair enough, the point is that it needs reviewing, a reversal of the Resource Management Act might be going one step too far.

Maybe, but the policy is consistent with classical liberalism, which is where ACT is (re)positioning itself. If ACT become a partner in government, they may make a review of the RMA a bottom line, and perhaps contribute to review guidelines / terms of reference which identify / reduce unnecessary government involvement. "Unnecessary" needing a bit of a definition though!

In any case, a policy of scrapping the RMA will get attention, and that can't be a bad thing. It does seem to have been hijacked by a wide range of interest groups over the years.

[craic]

So the latest piece of political and economic wizardry from D Cunliffe is the raising of the remains of the Rena from the rocks and its disposal at great cost to the owners, who, according to DC will be made to pay in full? I think the vast majority of voters in the country couldn't give a stuff about another wreck around our coastline - one of hundreds. Some locals are making a song and dance about it but that is human nature - find something to make a song and dance about. It should provide some interest for divers and fishermen and if you haven't got a GPS system to tell you that its there, you should not be at sea in charge of a boat.

[Sgt Pepper]

Craic me thinks you are of centre right persuasion and obviously dont liike David Cunliffe? Hopefully you are not orwellian enough to subscibe to the mantra Labour = bad National = always good. No one, either a political party, or an individual has a monopoly on widsom. Economic cycles are simply that , politicians take the credit in good times and when economies contract these are forces which must be endured. Give Labour credit when its due: they recognised China in 1972- National vehemently opposed, Labour negiotiated FTA with China, Labour facilitated establishment of Fonterra. As for not being Business friendly (whatever that means) the Presdient of lLabour Party in 1990s was Michael Hirscfeld a multi millionaire who owned a company you may have heard of :Mico- Wakefield You can have social democrat governments and very successful economies, Norway, Sweden, Finland ,Denmark, Netherlands, not exactly economic basket caes are they???

[winner69]

NBR getting stuck into our Davev re where his donations came from.

All this to much for me and the gossip about short or was it tall ones not paying bills on time turns me off

At this rate will have to make my vote invalid ....at least counted as such

[craic]

You are fairly close. My favourite uncle was Frank Purcell. He spent his life looking after the welfare of the Irish workers. He spent time in a British gaol for his actions as a "rebel" whatever that means and a leader of rebels in 1916 and 1922. He served years as General Secretary of the Irish Transport and General Workers Union and served as the Labour Representative in the Irish Senate until his death. I have trouble with Labour in this country because it not a phisosophy based on the needs of the oppressed but rather a party based on opposition to the right based on a manufactured inequality. It is probably hard for native New Zealanders to understand what it is like to try to function in the place where I came from. Three quarters of the worlds poor would gladly change places with NZs poor tomorrow.
Craic me thinks you are of centre right persuasion and obviously dont liike David Cunliffe? Hopefully you are not orwellian enough to subscibe to the mantra Labour = bad National = always good. No one, either a political party, or an individual has a monopoly on widsom. Economic cycles are simply that , politicians take the credit in good times and when economies contract these are forces which must be endured. Give Labour credit when its due: they recognised China in 1972- National vehemently opposed, Labour negiotiated FTA with China, Labour facilitated establishment of Fonterra. As for not being Business friendly (whatever that means) the Presdient of lLabour Party in 1990s was Michael Hirscfeld a multi millionaire who owned a company you may have heard of :Mico- Wakefield You can have social democrat governments and very successful economies, Norway, Sweden, Finland ,Denmark, Netherlands, not exactly economic basket caes are they???

[westerly]

You are fairly close. My favourite uncle was Frank Purcell. He spent his life looking after the welfare of the Irish workers. He spent time in a British gaol for his actions as a "rebel" whatever that means and a leader of rebels in 1916 and 1922. He served years as General Secretary of the Irish Transport and General Workers Union and served as the Labour Representative in the Irish Senate until his death. I have trouble with Labour in this country because it not a phisosophy based on the needs of the oppressed but rather a party based on opposition to the right based on a manufactured inequality. It is probably hard for native New Zealanders to understand what it is like to try to function in the place where I came from. Three quarters of the worlds poor would gladly change places with NZs poor tomorrow.

Perhaps Craic you should read a bit of NZ history. It was never easy being working class in NZ in the early days hence the formation of the Labour Party. Much is made of the difficulties of the Maoris and thier struggles but the poor in NZ were not well off either. The Labour Party may have once been "left" but as conditions improved thier policies moved more centre. That was OK when nearly full employment was achieved but with advent of neo liberal policies world wide the need for a left of centre party is becoming more necessary.
Three quarters of the worlds poor would probably shift to Ireland if they had the chance too.

Westerly

[craic]

Westerly, you need to read of the early days on the West Coast and the status of the Irish there. They were well below the status of the Maori. As late as 1960 I telephoned the home of a young woman I had made friends with. Her mother answered and immediately asked "are you Irish". when I said yes her response was "Do you realise that we are Communicant Presbyterians?" That was one of two similar experiences. Fortunately, I had had the experience of being a Catholic in the Royal Ulster Rifles in Ballymena for six months, long before that. It had nothing to do with socio-economic status or anything other than my ability to recognise and ignore pig-ignorance and deal with it.

[westerly]

Westerly, you need to read of the early days on the West Coast and the status of the Irish there. They were well below the status of the Maori. As late as 1960 I telephoned the home of a young woman I had made friends with. Her mother answered and immediately asked "are you Irish". when I said yes her response was "Do you realise that we are Communicant Presbyterians?" That was one of two similar experiences. Fortunately, I had had the experience of being a Catholic in the Royal Ulster Rifles in Ballymena for six months, long before that. It had nothing to do with socio-economic status or anything other than my ability to recognise and ignore pig-ignorance and deal with it.

As my great Grandparents were on the Coast in the 1860's I know a little of the history. I am not sure what religous bigotry [which worked both
ways] has to do with economic conditions. All workers were probably in the same economic and social position.
Westerly

[Major von Tempsky]

Seems like, according to journos, Cunliffe had a bad day yesterday, 3 feet in his mouth.

Who's the next cab off the rank? Shane Jones still watch porn?

[fungus pudding]

Seems like, according to journos, Cunliffe had a bad day yesterday, 3 feet in his mouth.

Who's the next cab off the rank? Shane Jones still watch porn?


Probably. Next one will be Grant Robertson I reckon. I'd say he'll be hovering around, licking his chops at the moment....

[winner69]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/share-your-news-and-views/9788458/Stop-being-selfish-NZ

That you Winner?

Pretty good effort I thought

[Sgt Pepper]

To be fair National are hardly squeaky clean. Big danger for the next Narional Government will the newly mortgaged middle income earners and Dairy Farmers confronting 10% mortgages. They will be extremely grumpy by 2017

[Harvey Specter]

To be fair National are hardly squeaky clean. Big danger for the next National Government will the newly mortgaged middle income earners and Dairy Farmers confronting 10% mortgages. They will be extremely grumpy by 2017With our exchange rate as high as it is, I would think it is very unlikely interest rates will get that high. Other than house prices, which they are trying to solve by other means, and Chch due to the earthquake rebuild, what inflation are we facing?

[fungus pudding]

With our exchange rate as high as it is, I would think it is very unlikely interest rates will get that high. Other than house prices, which they are trying to solve by other means, and Chch due to the earthquake rebuild, what inflation are we facing?

How right you are. I think there will be more talk than action from the reserve bank over the next year or two. Perhaps a couple of rises of 0.25% or so. They will be keeping a close eye on the exchange rate - which will inevitably rise with interest increase. Best weapon they have is to terrorise borrowers with threats of a rise. Although it is sort of like 'wait till your father gets home', which only works till you learn it's bluff.

[westerly]

Probably. Next one will be Grant Robertson I reckon. I'd say he'll be hovering around, licking his chops at the moment....

No comments on Collins and Oravida? Funny that

Westerly