PDA

View Full Version : If National wins ...



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61

fungus pudding
05-03-2014, 04:24 PM
No comments on Collins and Oravida? Funny that

Westerly

Perfectly happy to comment. Judith Collins is like a Rottweiler. Horrible woman. That's my comment on her. Don't know much about the company, Oravida, but her husband is a director. They have posted a photo of her with something written in Chinese about their products. That should have a huge negative affect on their sales. That's my comment on Oravida.

elZorro
05-03-2014, 05:38 PM
FP, she was on the TV just now, her view was it's perfectly OK to use part of a ministerial trip overseas to call in on a firm connected to her husband. John Key, of course, concurred. Using the same sheepish look as he does when trying to ping David Cunliffe for something that looked suspect, but was in fact perfectly legal.

I really liked the wording in the article, back a page or two, about how we have changed as a nation. We are certainly more selfish. A lot of the metrics for the last two decades show that globalisation can produce poorer results in a country like ours. The metrics improve when we move in the opposite direction (Helen Clark did this). For example, a comment on that article.


As was suggested by the documentary Mind the Gap, why not bypass the parents themselves and (as the Green party is suggesting) make schools hubs for healthcare and nutrition. Have social workers and health workers based there so that (regardless of the reasons behind the hunger/illness) the kids get what they need. The kids are provided for, ensuring they are in a good place to get on with their education. The money for this doesn't make it to the parents at all.

Sweden does this and has one of the lowest percentage of kids who remain in poverty. It's something like 25% of those born into poverty remain there, as opposed to 40-something% for other countries who don't provide this service. I would rather this happen than the current system, and I'm sure that the great parents on benefits or parents who are working poor would appreciate it. It's only a small minority who would abuse it - but even if they do, the kids at least are being fed and are healthy.

Anyway, my two cents. I would be happy if my tax dollars went to a scheme like this. This sort of thing is what Lance O'Sullivan set up in Northland, and we judged him NZer of the year for it, so it definitely can work.


We should not let other countries show us up in this regard. We are the world leaders in social justice and equality. Or we used to be.

fungus pudding
05-03-2014, 05:57 PM
FP, she was on the TV just now, her view was it's perfectly OK to use part of a ministerial trip overseas to call in on a firm connected to her husband.


I imagine that is everyone's view. It would be ridiculous if she didn't call in on the odd firm with NZ contacts while there. That is what MPs do. Obviously she has knowledge of that firm and could easily get an introduction. That is how MPs work. There simply is nothing wrong with that.

Harvey Specter
05-03-2014, 06:34 PM
I imagine that is everyone's view. It would be ridiculous if she didn't call in on the odd firm with NZ contacts while there. That is what MPs do. Obviously she has knowledge of that firm and could easily get an introduction. That is how MPs work. There simply is nothing wrong with that.I dont thing she asked for the invite, they invited her, though I guess the company was in a better position than most to know when she was to be in China to extend an invite.

The issues is more that those dodgy Chinese, or was it her husband, claimed she endorsed their product. Politians visit lots of companies, try lots of product and are in lots of photos, but that is not an endorsement.

elZorro
05-03-2014, 06:50 PM
I've seen that happen here in Hamilton at trade shows. Anyone 'important' is snapped with the business owners, and hopefully in front of part of their brand signage. This is an automatic endorsement. If you ask what that was all about, of course it's not an endorsement, it wasn't unfair advertising, the important people were only handing over the results of some research or were just visiting, nothing to see here. These photos then appear in all the advertising blurbs on the web and in print for years afterwards. That's how it is done, and they know it.

fungus pudding
05-03-2014, 07:28 PM
I've seen that happen here in Hamilton at trade shows. Anyone 'important' is snapped with the business owners, and hopefully in front of part of their brand signage. This is an automatic endorsement. If you ask what that was all about, of course it's not an endorsement, it wasn't unfair advertising, the important people were only handing over the results of some research or were just visiting, nothing to see here. These photos then appear in all the advertising blurbs on the web and in print for years afterwards. That's how it is done, and they know it.

More important though eZ, is who will be next to lead Labour? I'm sure you'll have the inside running.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Cunliffe-in-crosshairs-over-trust-issue/tabid/1607/articleID/334715/Default.aspx

elZorro
05-03-2014, 10:47 PM
More important though eZ, is who will be next to lead Labour? I'm sure you'll have the inside running.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Cunliffe-in-crosshairs-over-trust-issue/tabid/1607/articleID/334715/Default.aspx

Maybe Patrick Gower wants the job. Just the title of the article is mercenary. But this is already an old issue, it was sorted properly months ago.

FP, I can only assume that if they're going to these lengths to pin something on DC, National must be worried.

elZorro
06-03-2014, 06:56 AM
This opinion from EA's Carl Hansen might be showing a bit of a right lean, as any business writes off its non-land assets using a depreciation method. Hydro power stations are no exception. So where we are standing now, those older stations are virtually paid off. Why do we pay 25c a kwhr for power that was generated for a cost of maybe 2c? Does it really cost that much to deliver the energy over wires?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11193142

fungus pudding
06-03-2014, 07:01 AM
Maybe Patrick Gower wants the job. Just the title of the article is mercenary. But this is already an old issue, it was sorted properly months ago.

FP, I can only assume that if they're going to these lengths to pin something on DC, National must be worried.

Strange comment eZ. It's Labour, or more specifically the ABC faction of Labour, who are 'going to these lengths to pin something on DC'. It is them who must be worried. Are there not a few who will not stand under Cunliffe so have their jobs on the line? I have no idea why National would worry about that at all. Au contraire, I imagine they are sitting back, pleasantly delighted and amused. Likewise - the Greens and Winston 1st - both will benefit from Cunliffe destroying Labour.

Harvey Specter
06-03-2014, 08:26 AM
This opinion from EA's Carl Hansen might be showing a bit of a right lean, as any business writes off its non-land assets using a depreciation method. Hydro power stations are no exception. So where we are standing now, those older stations are virtually paid off. Houses have an estimated life of 50-100 years. So those houses in Devonport must be worthless by now. NO wonder they are full of old squatters.


Why do we pay 25c a kwhr for power that was generated for a cost of maybe 2c? Does it really cost that much to deliver the energy over wires?Yes - I think it does. This is the argument for unbundling which, and I might be mistaken, means that your bill would look like this:

10c Power generation
5c Transmission (ie. Transpower)
5c Distribution (ie. local lines Vector/Orion)
5c Retail

This is why the solar argument is so hard. Solar is not cheaper than 10c, but is cheaper than 25c at its peak supply. However, if you are grid tied and using power at peak demand, they you should be paying your fair share of transmission and distribution as Solar does not mitigate those costs.

Cuzzie
06-03-2014, 08:37 AM
Maybe Patrick Gower wants the job. Just the title of the article is mercenary. But this is already an old issue, it was sorted properly months ago.

FP, I can only assume that if they're going to these lengths to pin something on DC, National must be worried.Not worried EZ, the fact that DC is pinning himself so much his new nickname could be "pincushion". One problem with Cunliffe is he spends half his time trying to be witty. You might say he's a half-wit.:cool:

Anyway here is a copy & paste from the Herald this morning/
Unsurprisingly, Matthew Hooton has gone on a major offensive against Cunliffe, suggesting that the scandal could bring the leader down: 'Were National to press the nuclear button, with a full-scale privileges committee inquiry into this latest issue, this would surely be the last nail in Mr Cunliffe's political coffin. Mr Jones would then be required to step up. But that is almost certainly not going to happen. No one gains more than Mr Key from the disingenuous Mr Cunliffe remaining in his role until the election, now expected in September'

That just about says it all, keeping Cunliffe in power is great for National, besides I still have the devious non-payment of a certain Labour MP that is making plenty of mistakes right now to disclose. BTW the link is: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11214428 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11214428It's)It's a round up of current political events & makes interesting reading to say the least.


EZ, surly you must admit Cunliffe has failed as a leader and will be a big part of why Labour can not win the next election

fungus pudding
06-03-2014, 08:55 AM
This opinion from EA's Carl Hansen might be showing a bit of a right lean, as any business writes off its non-land assets using a depreciation method. Hydro power stations are no exception. So where we are standing now, those older stations are virtually paid off.


Gee. I've got buildings like that. Must remember to drop the rent.

Cuzzie
06-03-2014, 09:21 AM
Houses have an estimated life of 50-100 years. So those houses in Devonport must be worthless by now. NO wonder they are full of old squatters.

Yes - I think it does. This is the argument for unbundling which, and I might be mistaken, means that your bill would look like this:

10c Power generation
5c Transmission (ie. Transpower)
5c Distribution (ie. local lines Vector/Orion)
5c Retail

This is why the solar argument is so hard. Solar is not cheaper than 10c, but is cheaper than 25c at its peak supply. However, if you are grid tied and using power at peak demand, they you should be paying your fair share of transmission and distribution as Solar does not mitigate those costs.
Harvey Specter you are right of course. Solar energy is one subject I do know a bit about. Just to keep it simple stupid as the saying goes, Solar energy generated from a set of solar photovoltaic modules works well in the daylight hours and OK "maybe" to a degree when the sun goes down if you have Batteries. Typically you power consumption increases at night for many reasons. Solar panels are working for you at the wrong time & for that very reason are too expensive at this point in time.

Solar water heaters however work for you at the right time and can store that energy throughout the day & night. So while hot water is only about 25% of your power bill, it is 100% saving and reduces your total power bill down to 75% of what you are paying now.

Solar panels to generate electricity will reduce your power output during the day time but the expenditure for a 3kw plus system with Batteries would turn savings into a net loss - week in week out.

There is a place for Solar power however and it's a no brainier. Commercial buildings and Schools should be targeted more by Solar power companies, Power Corps and Govt. subsidies. Schools could act as substations during power cuts and save the Dept. of Education plenty over time. They would still need Batteries in Tech blocks, ITCs and where power is needed at night for such things as running Air Con units & Severs in Sever rooms, but the savings made more than pays for new Batteries every ten years or so. If most buildings are facing North or North West and your Power Company will buy back power off you, this would actual mean Solar Power would work for you org.

fungus pudding
06-03-2014, 09:44 AM
So while hot water is only about 25% of your power bill,


I know that is an often quoted figure but it's pure nonsense. It may well apply in the upper North, but in a typical home in Otago or Southland, with eclectic heating, hot water heating would be a very low percentage of the power bill.

iceman
06-03-2014, 10:54 AM
I know that is an often quoted figure but it's pure nonsense. It may well apply in the upper North, but in a typical home in Otago or Southland, with eclectic heating, hot water heating would be a very low percentage of the power bill.

I monitored & recorded our home electricity usage on a daily basis between 1 August & 23 September last year, with 4 people living at home at the time. During that time, 15.6% of our total electricity usage went on hot water.

fungus pudding
06-03-2014, 11:03 AM
I monitored & recorded our home electricity usage on a daily basis between 1 August & 23 September last year, with 4 people living at home at the time. During that time, 15.6% of our total electricity usage went on hot water.

That is a much higher % than it would be in Southland.

Cuzzie
06-03-2014, 11:21 AM
I've got more hot water than I can handle and my system pays for itself. That means 100% my end. You have to remember there are two types of Solar Hot Water systems. The one with a water tank on your roof and one that taps into your excising hot water system. A tank on your roof is not the way to go particularly if you live in colder climates. I'm north of Aucks and have the Solar Hot Water connected to my original Hot Water Cylinder. It works for me.

Harvey Specter
06-03-2014, 01:27 PM
Yes - I think it does. This is the argument for unbundling which, and I might be mistaken, means that your bill would look like this:

10c Power generation
5c Transmission (ie. Transpower)
5c Distribution (ie. local lines Vector/Orion)
5c RetailFrom http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/9a5eff87/electricity-authority-says-prices-blame-game-unacceptable.html


"Remember that network charges about half the bill. We are only about one-third of the retail electricity bill. If those network tariffs are not adjusted in the same way, then it's very difficult for one-third of the bill to drive a behaviour change."
The Electricity Networks Association, which represents the country's 29 distribution companies, refuted Contact's claims, saying independent analysis by PwC showed combined generator-retailer portion of a typical domestic bill was 52 percent and that Contact was misrepresenting the situation to draw attention away from its profits.


So it looks like it is

8c Generation
12c Transmission and distribution
5c Retail
25c TOTAL

westerly
06-03-2014, 04:18 PM
More important though eZ, is who will be next to lead Labour? I'm sure you'll have the inside running.

http://www.3news.co.nz/Cunliffe-in-crosshairs-over-trust-issue/tabid/1607/articleID/334715/Default.aspx

FP, Gower made no mention of Minister Nathan Guy who was late with trusts concerning farmland ,beach place and a flat. Also Shane Ardern and Simon Bridges all National Party who were also late disclosing. Bias evident? Labours Carol Beaumont and Ross Robertson were also at fault along with Denis O'Rourke. Haven't got a good opinion of Gower at the best of times. I think Business is really worried Cunliffe could win, hence the continual efforts by the media to find him at fault
Westerly

craic
06-03-2014, 04:44 PM
FP, Gower made no mention of Minister Nathan Guy who was late with trusts concerning farmland ,beach place and a flat. Also Shane Ardern and Simon Bridges all National Party who were also late disclosing. Bias evident? Labours Carol Beaumont and Ross Robertson were also at fault along with Denis O'Rourke. Haven't got a good opinion of Gower at the best of times. I think Business is really worried Cunliffe could win, hence the continual efforts by the media to find him at fault
Westerly
Busness is not quite that stupid.

fungus pudding
06-03-2014, 05:12 PM
Busness is not quite that stupid.


And even if ' business' was worried, then employees should be shaking in their boots.

Sgt Pepper
06-03-2014, 05:59 PM
I vaguely recall an issue investigated in 2008 when allegedly, according to Investigative journalists, John Key failed to disclose a minor detail concerning his purchase 100000 shares in Tranz Rail . Pot calling Kettle black me thinks

elZorro
06-03-2014, 06:20 PM
I have looked up the dictionary and I'm no wiser on what constitutes eclectic heating. How does it reduce the proportional water heating power bills of those south of Cook Straight, or is it a myth? They don't get as much sun either, going on their paler complexions generally, so maybe it just means their space heating bills are much higher:)

We just had a new smart meter installed beside the previous one on our meterbox at home. I talked this over with the installers. Sure enough, this new meter uses PLC (power line carrier) to transmit the data down the copper lines to base. It also monitors our power factor. Previously in domestic dwellings, power companies had to assume the voltage and current were in phase when billing us using old electromechanical meters. Motors on fridges, freezers, pools, washing machines, heat pumps and LED bulbs etc will modify the phase angle, and we would have received some power for "free". Not any more. Have a look at about two minutes in, here.
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAFH4XzyfA)
Westerly and Sgt Pepper, thanks for reminding us of some balance in forgetfulness by politicians. I knew National wouldn't be squeaky clean themselves.

FP, business people mostly worry about tax, i.e. how much of the year's profit they can keep. CGT is uppermost in their minds , as it will be with you. They don't want Labour to get in.

winner69
06-03-2014, 06:58 PM
Pity we don't have an opposition member like this guy in Australia.....OK he is a Green but thinks / talks mor like a Liberal.

Love bits like this about Abott -

Ludlam continued to blast the incumbent. “Just as the reign of the dinosaurs was cut short to their great surprise, it may be that the Abbott government will appear as nothing more than a thin, greasy layer in the core sample of future political scientists drilling back into the early years of the 21st century,” he said.

Worth a watch .....maybe inspire some nz polie but I doubt it

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/greens-senator-scott-ludlams-blunt-speech-to-an-almost-empty-room-goes-vi/ral-20140306-348zx.html

Minerbarejet
06-03-2014, 07:12 PM
[QUOTE=elZorro;466016]I have looked up the dictionary and I'm no wiser on what constitutes eclectic heating. How does it reduce the proportional water heating power bills of those south of Cook Straight, or is it a myth? They don't get as much sun either, going on their paler complexions generally, so maybe it just means their space heating bills are much higher:)[QUOTE]
Currently the consensus of opinion is that Eclectic Heating is the result if using Eclectrickle current which is obtained by combining supply from hydro, gas, solar, and wind, geothermal and coal.
Couldnt be more eclectic ​than that.:)

winner69
06-03-2014, 07:22 PM
EZ eclectic eh ...but I live close to Cook Strait .....almost a straight line view from my lounge window

fungus pudding
06-03-2014, 11:14 PM
FP, business people mostly worry about tax, i.e. how much of the year's profit they can keep. CGT is uppermost in their minds , as it will be with you. They don't want Labour to get in.

CGT won't even apply to me so not sure why it would be uppermost in my mind. . As I have often said, CGT, if not properly designed (e.g. Australia), does a lot of harm. Most business people I know simply want to survive. NZ is full of small businesses and most make very little. Why you think CGT is uppermost in their minds is a ridiculous generalisation. CGT will initially increase real estate prices, but it's the share-market that will take the hit in value. And I doubt that that business people mostly worry about tax as you claim. It's just another bill to them and they worry equally about each and every bill. Business is hard.

elZorro
07-03-2014, 06:53 AM
CGT won't even apply to me so not sure why it would be uppermost in my mind. . As I have often said, CGT, if not properly designed (e.g. Australia), does a lot of harm. Most business people I know simply want to survive. NZ is full of small businesses and most make very little. Why you think CGT is uppermost in their minds is a ridiculous generalisation. CGT will initially increase real estate prices, but it's the share-market that will take the hit in value. And I doubt that that business people mostly worry about tax as you claim. It's just another bill to them and they worry equally about each and every bill. Business is hard.

Taxes are the kind of bill that catch businesses out, as GST over even two months can get high, and sure, it's not your money, but it felt like it, when it was in your bank account. And of course the annual books can pose a surprise or two, the rest of the bank balance might have to go to the IRD as income tax. Yes I agree, business is hard. But most businesses do have opportunities to morph into something else, to be the best at something, to add something that has a profitable edge. I'll argue that National doesn't encourage that kind of thinking, and they certainly don't always support those who are doing the poorest.

fungus pudding
07-03-2014, 08:22 AM
Taxes are the kind of bill that catch businesses out, as GST over even two months can get high, and sure, it's not your money, but it felt like it, when it was in your bank account. And of course the annual books can pose a surprise or two, the rest of the bank balance might have to go to the IRD as income tax. Yes I agree, business is hard. But most businesses do have opportunities to morph into something else, to be the best at something, to add something that has a profitable edge. I'll argue that National doesn't encourage that kind of thinking, and they certainly don't always support those who are doing the poorest.

There are thousands of very small businesses that have little chance to do anything but survive. Cafes, hairdressers, small retailers, just wander along any suburban shopping strip and you'll see plenty; There are more of these than you imagine who earn less than the minimum wage. then there are plumbers electricians - in fact all tradesmen just for a start who can hardly swing into something else. To say most businesses have the chance to morph into something else is ludicrous. Natioinal have done a lot more at eliminating red-tape and sorting out restrictive employment laws (which assist employees as much as employers - although many employees do not recognise that). Say what you like but Labour ****s on about fairness and tries to appeal to workers and unions with policies that sound good but will screw them to death.

elZorro
07-03-2014, 05:58 PM
There are thousands of very small businesses that have little chance to do anything but survive. Cafes, hairdressers, small retailers, just wander along any suburban shopping strip and you'll see plenty; There are more of these than you imagine who earn less than the minimum wage. then there are plumbers electricians - in fact all tradesmen just for a start who can hardly swing into something else. To say most businesses have the chance to morph into something else is ludicrous. Natioinal have done a lot more at eliminating red-tape and sorting out restrictive employment laws (which assist employees as much as employers - although many employees do not recognise that). Say what you like but Labour ****s on about fairness and tries to appeal to workers and unions with policies that sound good but will screw them to death.

FP, only a small proportion of businesses have a website running, let alone a shopping basket on it. These guys need to pick up their act. Even without a website, you can cheaply advertise services and sell stuff on the biggest traffic sales website in NZ, TradeMe. This can be going on in the background while you do something else during the day.

Regarding workers, while I am in agreement that the rules around employment might appear daunting, they are there to protect both sides of the deal. If someone gives up a lot of their time to earn a paypacket, that's fair enough. But do you have any first-hand experience of being an employer, or is this just your considered opinion?

fungus pudding
07-03-2014, 06:18 PM
FP, only a small proportion of businesses have a website running, let alone a shopping basket on it. These guys need to pick up their act. Even without a website, you can cheaply advertise services and sell stuff on the biggest traffic sales website in NZ, TradeMe. This can be going on in the background while you do something else during the day.

Regarding workers, while I am in agreement that the rules around employment might appear daunting, they are there to protect both sides of the deal. If someone gives up a lot of their time to earn a paypacket, that's fair enough. But do you have any first-hand experience of being an employer, or is this just your considered opinion?

You have no idea of small business, the thousands of one-man-band or husband and wife type businesses. It's ridiculous to suggest they all have a web-site. What the hell would the corner dairy or the local fish and chip shop, do with a web-site; or the Thai restaurant I had my $7 lunch at today!
Yes, I have been an employer - something I have carefully avoided for a couple of decades, and would never never never reconsider. Have a look at some of the ridiculous employment court rulings over the last two weeks and you'll see why. I scratch my head and wonder why more employers (those who can) don't just shut up shop. Some do of course. But it's the ones who never start that do the damage.

elZorro
07-03-2014, 06:42 PM
You have no idea of small business, the thousands of one-man-band or husband and wife type businesses. It's ridiculous to suggest they all have a web-site. What the hell would the corner dairy or the local fish and chip shop, do with a web-site; or the Thai restaurant I had my $7 lunch at today!
Yes, I have been an employer - something I have carefully avoided for a couple of decades, and would never never never reconsider. Have a look at some of the ridiculous employment court rulings over the last two weeks and you'll see why. I scratch my head and wonder why more employers (those who can) don't just shut up shop. Some do of course. But it's the ones who never start that do the damage.

Maybe the first two have no major use for a website, but a Thai restaurant could have posts from happy customers, their menu could be up live as it changed, prices and some background explanations, photos, and a booking service. And they should certainly make sure that they were listed on the web in the numerous business and food directories. I would also suggest that some of their customers can afford to pay quite a bit more, so they should put up their prices, to rest well above the cost of the food items. You probably heard the no-sale button on the till as you left, FP. I can't see how else they made it work.

The guy near us with a dairy sometimes moans about how hard it is, but I don't see him importing or buying/making goods to resell on Trademe, something he could easily monitor from a computer or even a cellphone. Or making more of his late hours by adding shop façade lighting, to augment the one clapped-out fluoro tube the building owner has provided.

Still puzzled by your last sentence, it's out of context FP. What did you mean here?


But it's the ones who never start that do the damage.

fungus pudding
07-03-2014, 07:06 PM
Maybe the first two have no major use for a website, but a Thai restaurant could have posts from happy customers, their menu could be up live as it changed, prices and some background explanations, photos, and a booking service. And they should certainly make sure that they were listed on the web in the numerous business and food directories. I would also suggest that some of their customers can afford to pay quite a bit more, so they should put up their prices, to rest well above the cost of the food items. You probably heard the no-sale button on the till as you left, FP. I can't see how else they made it work.

The guy near us with a dairy sometimes moans about how hard it is, but I don't see him importing or buying/making goods to resell on Trademe, something he could easily monitor from a computer or even a cellphone. Or making more of his late hours by adding shop façade lighting, to augment the one clapped-out fluoro tube the building owner has provided.

Still puzzled by your last sentence, it's out of context FP. What did you mean here?


Last sentence means the damage that is done by dissuading entrepreneurs from employing people. There are many like me who steer clear of being employers. "The businesses that could exist - but never will.'

The Thai café I mentioned would not be able to charge more than the others - it's an overcrowded industry. It would not benefit from a website - it's a small café, like so many others. You're way off beam. Go to any small town and tell the local café owner to set-up a web page. Wear armour.

elZorro
07-03-2014, 08:15 PM
Last sentence means the damage that is done by dissuading entrepreneurs from employing people. There are many like me who steer clear of being employers. "The businesses that could exist - but never will.'

The Thai café I mentioned would not be able to charge more than the others - it's an overcrowded industry. It would not benefit from a website - it's a small café, like so many others. You're way off beam. Go to any small town and tell the local café owner to set-up a web page. Wear armour.

FP, I've seen from close at hand, the losses that can happen in the hospitality and food industry. It has been overcrowded in urban centres for decades. Maybe all this got worse when we abandoned one-third markups in general stores, when we decided big stores with ongoing sales were the only ones worth visiting. This has put strain on all the smaller and service industry businesses, many of which are owner operators, not FTE employers as such. In many cases, these are self-made jobs, an indication of the issues for many in finding good paid employment in NZ.

An article from Brian Fallow I'd go along with, our inequality (GINI index) suffered a big increase in the mid 1980s (Rogernomics, globalisation), and it has not recovered from that. Way back then, employees were put on the back foot. With them, smaller businesses that don't have an edge. Labour started to make inroads last time, another term would have made a difference that was more noticeable I think.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11214548

fungus pudding
08-03-2014, 03:25 AM
FP, I've seen from close at hand, the losses that can happen in the hospitality and food industry. It has been overcrowded in urban centres for decades. Maybe all this got worse when we abandoned one-third markups in general stores, when we decided big stores with ongoing sales were the only ones worth visiting. This has put strain on all the smaller and service industry businesses, many of which are owner operators, not FTE employers as such. In many cases, these are self-made jobs, an indication of the issues for many in finding good paid employment in NZ.

An article from Brian Fallow I'd go along with, our inequality (GINI index) suffered a big increase in the mid 1980s (Rogernomics, globalisation), and it has not recovered from that. Way back then, employees were put on the back foot. With them, smaller businesses that don't have an edge. Labour started to make inroads last time, another term would have made a difference that was more noticeable I think.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11214548

Get your blinkers off and ponder labour's opposition to youth rates and the ninety day trial period. that's the sort of nonsense that they spout and claim it helps workers. You will too of course.

elZorro
08-03-2014, 07:31 AM
Get your blinkers off and ponder labour's opposition to youth rates and the ninety day trial period. that's the sort of nonsense that they spout and claim it helps workers. You will too of course.

When Labour removed youth rates for a while, employers immediately responded by swapping younger workers for more mature workers, it was very noticeable. So the firms that did this, took an opportunity that then presented itself, for the same pay rates they obtained staff who were perhaps more mature and focussed. I guess part-time jobs that used to go to students were taken by adults who also needed an income, or extra income.

Now we have youth rates again, balance is being restored, so I'll concede that this policy from Labour wasn't good. Better to increase the minimum pay (by more than a paltry amount), and then make youth pay a proportion of that. I've employed two students as contractors over summer, and been a bit perturbed over their attitudes to work. There was nothing these students couldn't do, they let the rest of us know that it was only a temporary job while they moved on to better things, and then we bailed them out on all the tricky parts of their work while they were here. Maybe they're starting to learn something about humility.

fungus pudding
08-03-2014, 09:19 AM
When Labour removed youth rates for a while, employers immediately responded by swapping younger workers for more mature workers, it was very noticeable. So the firms that did this, took an opportunity that then presented itself, for the same pay rates they obtained staff who were perhaps more mature and focussed. I guess part-time jobs that used to go to students were taken by adults who also needed an income, or extra income.

Now we have youth rates again, balance is being restored, so I'll concede that this policy from Labour wasn't good. Better to increase the minimum pay (by more than a paltry amount), and then make youth pay a proportion of that. I've employed two students as contractors over summer, and been a bit perturbed over their attitudes to work. There was nothing these students couldn't do, they let the rest of us know that it was only a temporary job while they moved on to better things, and then we bailed them out on all the tricky parts of their work while they were here. Maybe they're starting to learn something about humility.

And the trial period? Bitterly opposed by Labour, the self proclaimed 'workers' friend'?

Sgt Pepper
08-03-2014, 10:01 AM
Could be testing times in the future when the supply of labour starts to drop off, especially from 2020 if you believe demographers who research this stuff, many business SME who relied on stable wage rates since mid 1980s Basic laws of supply and demand, any significant labour shortage may see a significant ratcheting up of wage rates, supermarkets, cafes etc may find this rather challenging I guess, I know in the health service the average age of Registered Nurses for instance is 49.5 years

elZorro
08-03-2014, 10:30 AM
And the trial period? Bitterly opposed by Labour, the self proclaimed 'workers' friend'?

I admit I haven't looked into it or applied it, because I always thought it sounded unfair from the employee's point of view. Turns out that it has to be part of a written agreement, so the employee has to choose to agree or not, in writing. Of course an employer can simply pick from those who are happy to sign an employee contract with a 90 day clause.

Does everyone fully come up to speed in a new job within 90 days? How disruptive would it be to that person's life if they are let go after just 90 days? Is there a stand-down period of 13 weeks from the dole after that? (Normally not, they have to be employed for over 26 weeks for stand-down to apply).

http://www.dol.govt.nz/workplace/knowledgebase/item/1517

Perhaps the way I handle short-term positions is to use students, they have to go back to study afterwards, so the contract ends naturally. But I've at least seen some of the prospects out there, they have seen what we do, and hopefully I've improved their CVs and they have a better idea about job opportunities.

fungus pudding
08-03-2014, 10:30 AM
Could be testing times in the future when the supply of labour starts to drop off, especially from 2020 if you believe demographers who research this stuff, many business SME who relied on stable wage rates since mid 1980s Basic laws of supply and demand, any significant labour shortage may see a significant ratcheting up of wage rates, supermarkets, cafes etc may find this rather challenging I guess, I know in the health service the average age of Registered Nurses for instance is 49.5 years

Rest assured, supply and demand (aka the market) will sort this out better than any government policies (aka interference).

fungus pudding
08-03-2014, 02:38 PM
Uncontrolled free markets have a history of destruction. Some interference is actually desirble.

That is simply wrong. A free market will come right - always. Not necessarily overnight but it will always win out over any political interference.

Sgt Pepper
08-03-2014, 04:10 PM
FP Imagine this scenario. Its 2020, Phil O'Reilly is still CEO of Business NZ,National has incredibly attained a 4th term( quite possible) although JK is now High Commissioner in London not PM. He goes to Judith Collins (now PM). He reports his members are getting stressed concerning the escalation of wage rates, incredibly some pine for the days of national bargaining.Judith very mindful that most are ardent National supporters and anxious to assist wishes to be supportive. Should she
1 "Sorry Phil thats the free market wages are escalating and there is nothing we can or should do".
2 "we will get Treasury to advise on legislative and economic tools to contain wages and invite any suggestions from Business NZ to attain this end"

whats the best response FP?

westerly
08-03-2014, 04:10 PM
That is simply wrong. A free market will come right - always. Not necessarily overnight but it will always win out over any political interference.

But at what cost? Always to those lower down the economic scale

Westerly

fungus pudding
08-03-2014, 04:44 PM
FP Imagine this scenario. Its 2020, Phil O'Reilly is still CEO of Business NZ,National has incredibly attained a 4th term( quite possible) although JK is now High Commissioner in London not PM. He goes to Judith Collins (now PM). He reports his members are getting stressed concerning the escalation of wage rates, incredibly some pine for the days of national bargaining.Judith very mindful that most are ardent National supporters and anxious to assist wishes to be supportive. Should she
1 "Sorry Phil thats the free market wages are escalating and there is nothing we can or should do".
2 "we will get Treasury to advise on legislative and economic tools to contain wages and invite any suggestions from Business NZ to attain this end"

whats the best response FP?


The first of course.

Sgt Pepper
08-03-2014, 06:22 PM
Fair enough FP. You know the old saying " everyone wants to go to heaven but no one wants to die" I suspect in the scenario many would expect intervention, strong belief in free market principles(only as long as it doesnt impact on profitability)The free market is excellent at delivering baked beans, bananas and cars, terrible at delivering cardiac surgery or cancer treatment

slimwin
08-03-2014, 09:03 PM
No banana in store this week...

elZorro
09-03-2014, 08:26 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_anticommons

In the SST today, Deborah Coddington states she has moved on from being an ACT party member and MP (Page A15). "I used to believe in it. Then I grew up". Her journalism work has shown repeatedly that the market (e.g. finance companies, Pike river) has been brutal to many people. In other words, it needs light interference and regulation. "I wouldn't call those espousing pure capitalism or pure Marxism completely bonkers...they're fanatical theorists.. They're not dangerous either, because only a taxi-full of followers take them seriously."

But ACT is a party National will be looking after, this election.

Noted that John Key refuses to give up the donors for over $100,000 of National Party funds from one evening of private fundraising. Who the hell are these people, or businesses, and what does the country owe them now? National has raised millions of dollars in funds over the years for electioneering, most of it paid in through trusts.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/21878900/secret-fundraising-meals-not-tricky-key/

Cuzzie
09-03-2014, 08:42 AM
Memo to: David Cunliffe, Leader of the Opposition

From: Matt McCarten, Chief of Staff

From now on you do nothing, say nothing, think nothing. Not until you run it past me. Better yet, just do, say and think what I tell you. That saves time and minimises risk.

What part of your political brain thought it a good idea to run donations through a secret trust?

No. Forget I even asked. I don't want to know.


Read the whole sorry affair here/
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11216531 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11216531):ohmy:

iceman
09-03-2014, 09:11 AM
Noted that John Key refuses to give up the donors for over $100,000 of National Party funds from one evening of private fundraising. Who the hell are these people, or businesses, and what does the country owe them now? National has raised millions of dollars in funds over the years for electioneering, most of it paid in through trusts.
[/URL]

You are grasping at straws aren't you EZ. Yes National did use a Trust to raise funds, until a LabourGovernment that David Cunliffe changed the law to make it illegal. That is why Cunliffe's recent use of a hidden Trust is so hypocritical and against the spirit of a law he was involved in introducing himself.

With regard to a restaurateur taking it up on himself to invite a few well of friends to a dinner at his restaurant and John Key attends as well where the friends pay lots of money ffor the dinner knowing it is going to National. The restaurateur then hands the proceeds to the National Party which promptly discloses it. Where exactly is the problem with that ?

Labour did the exact same thing when they sold seats at a dinner for a $ 1,000 a pop to listen to the irrelevant Sir Ian Mckellan. But they didn't disclose any funds from that night and I assume that was within the rules.

I also read a beatup article in the Sunday Herald today about Cunliffe inspecting a property for a long term close friend, who much later donated money to Cunliffe's Leadership race. Again I thought, where is the story in this ?

I think the media is running a little ahead of themselves with all this rubbish. Why not get back to reporting on policies and issues that really matter ? But I suppose you wouldn't like that either as it would be all about National and Labour/Greens wouldn't get a mention :p

fungus pudding
09-03-2014, 09:20 AM
You are grasping at straws aren't you EZ. Yes National did use a Trust to raise funds, until a LabourGovernment that David Cunliffe changed the law to make it illegal. That is why Cunliffe's recent use of a hidden Trust is so hypocritical and against the spirit of a law he was involved in introducing himself.

With regard to a restaurateur taking it up on himself to invite a few well of friends to a dinner at his restaurant and John Key attends as well where the friends pay lots of money ffor the dinner knowing it is going to National. The restaurateur then hands the proceeds to the National Party which promptly discloses it. Where exactly is the problem with that ?

Labour did the exact same thing when they sold seats at a dinner for a $ 1,000 a pop to listen to the irrelevant Sir Ian Mckellan. But they didn't disclose any funds from that night and I assume that was within the rules.

I also read a beatup article in the Sunday Herald today about Cunliffe inspecting a property for a long term close friend, who much later donated money to Cunliffe's Leadership race. Again I thought, where is the story in this ?

I think the media is running a little ahead of themselves with all this rubbish. Why not get back to reporting on policies and issues that really matter ? But I suppose you wouldn't like that either as it would be all about National and Labour/Greens wouldn't get a mention :p

I think all political parties have fund raising events. I can recall an auction sale some years ago I was invited to run by some party - not National. They all do this sort of thing, and the attendees are quite visible. I doubt that here is any problem with this at all. I'd be surprised if the other parties make much noise about this, but if Labour do they might just go down in a screaming heap for sheer hypocrisy.

elZorro
09-03-2014, 09:39 AM
Yes, I agree Iceman, why not hear about policies instead, let's debate those carefully. It would require a lot more skilled journalistic work than we are seeing now. Not only would they have to research it, then they would have to make it interesting for the readers or listeners. I think that's behind what we are being encouraged to think about. There are few enough journalists who will look at the big picture, many are lower paid juniors. We're bombarded with lite TV and radio interviews, cartoons, commentators, blog sites like this one, all trying to pick holes in personalities. These issues are a sideshow.

Labour's policies would be of immense benefit to most people living in NZ. More so than National's policies, which at their core are intended to extend globalisation, the failed experiment.

Cuzzie
09-03-2014, 10:13 AM
Yes, I agree Iceman, why not hear about policies instead, let's debate those carefully. It would require a lot more skilled journalistic work than we are seeing now. Not only would they have to research it, then they would have to make it interesting for the readers or listeners. I think that's behind what we are being encouraged to think about. There are few enough journalists who will look at the big picture, many are lower paid juniors. We're bombarded with lite TV and radio interviews, cartoons, commentators, blog sites like this one, all trying to pick holes in personalities. These issues are a sideshow.

Labour's policies would be of immense benefit to most people living in NZ. More so than National's policies, which at their core are intended to extend globalisation, the failed experiment.Come on EZ, if it was the National leader that was incompetent, you would be all over it as would all journalists. Are you asking the journalists to stop reporting on Cunliffe's apologies and mistakes.
Tell me this EZ, why would you trust one word about any policies that comes out of the mouth of Cunliffe? It's not the journalists fault for reporting on Cunliffe's wrong doing is it. The problem is your leader EZ, you know it, I know it and I'll tell you what, the voting public knows it too. So as a Labour supporter, how about you do something to sort it out instead of complaining about journalists for doing their job.

Sgt Pepper
09-03-2014, 10:22 AM
Notice that when Labour holds power and they have the audacity to raise the minimum wage there was always howls of outrage from Business NZ, i.e the end of life as we know it, the sun will will not rise in the morning etc. YET when National hold their noses and raises the Minimum Wage whats the response from Business nz thats fine, good move from the government etc etc. What blatant hypocrisy. I note that Mr ORelly was apparently the Presdent of the Young Nats in 1985

elZorro
09-03-2014, 03:46 PM
Notice that when Labour holds power and they have the audacity to raise the minimum wage there was always howls of outrage from Business NZ, i.e the end of life as we know it, the sun will will not rise in the morning etc. YET when National hold their noses and raises the Minimum Wage whats the response from Business nz thats fine, good move from the government etc etc. What blatant hypocrisy. I note that Mr ORelly was apparently the Presdent of the Young Nats in 1985

That would be correct I'm sure, because all of their policies are now firmly behind National's. I spotted this when Phil O'Reilly didn't think R&D tax credits were a good idea a few years back, yet most businesses would surely disagree. The Electricity Authority also looks to be firmly stacked with National supporters, and over the last few years local bodies, boards of governance, charitable trusts etc, have moved to the right. So who are we hearing from in 2014, when the press are asking for comments from the so-called unbiased heads of these lobbyists? People who will normally back National policies no matter what.

Harvey Specter
09-03-2014, 04:20 PM
I also read a beatup article in the Sunday Herald today about Cunliffe inspecting a property for a long term close friend, who much later donated money to Cunliffe's Leadership race. Again I thought, where is the story in this ?:pThats the thing. The story isn't that he helped an old friend. its that he lied to the papers and tried to hide the facts.

I can only assume he did this to hide that fact he has rich prick friends that the public would more closely align with Key.

westerly
09-03-2014, 05:56 PM
Thats the thing. The story isn't that he helped an old friend. its that he lied to the papers and tried to hide the facts.

I can only assume he did this to hide that fact he has rich prick friends that the public would more closely align with Key.

It was just a paper beatup. Lied to journalists, thats a bit rich most stretch the facts all the time to suit whatever they are reporting,
Key looked decidely uncomfortable trying to bluff his way out of the &5000 donations undisclosed and entered as a $100000 plus donation from a restaurent Who would pay 5 grand to have dinner with Key anyway?
Of more interest in the Herald was Mike Williams clearing Winston of knowing about Owen Glens NZ first donation.

Westerly

elZorro
10-03-2014, 06:48 AM
Another Green policy that should get them noticed: an idea to cap MP salaries where they are (or even decrease them) if the medium wage doesn't increase. There would still be increases due to inflation, fairly safe there. But MP salary increases directly tied to the economy's performance.


http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/greens-mp-pay-policy-money-taxpayers-union-ck-152993

fungus pudding
10-03-2014, 07:32 AM
Another Green policy that should get them noticed: an idea to cap MP salaries where they are (or even decrease them) if the medium wage doesn't increase. There would still be increases due to inflation, fairly safe there. But MP salary increases directly tied to the economy's performance.


http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/greens-mp-pay-policy-money-taxpayers-union-ck-152993

That's silly stuff but no doubt will find much support among the hoi-polloi. MP's generally work hard and long hours. (yes, there are exceptions) It definitely requires skills that not many have, and has the heavy price to pay of a public profile in matters often controversial. To align this with median income earners is just plain wrong. that is why the higher salaries commission exists. And if Norman is right, that eventually MP's salaries would fall, then we would end up with a parliament full of ex-school teachers, and drop out life assurance salesmen. In spite of street chatter we do not have too many MPs because of MMP. (we have fewer per capita than ever before) and they are not over-paid. If the greens felt strongly about this they could pool, say 25% of their salaries, and start a charity fund, or plant a forest or something. But they won't. According to Norman Greens aren't there for money, so there's the answer.

iceman
10-03-2014, 07:44 AM
That's silly stuff but no doubt will find much support among the hoi-polloi. MP's generally work hard and long hours. (yes, there are exceptions) It definitely requires skills that not many have, and has the heavy price to pay of a public profile in matters often controversial. To align this with median income earners is just plain wrong. that is why the higher salaries commission exists. And if Norman is right, that eventually MP's salaries would fall, then we would end up with a parliament full of ex-school teachers, and drop out life assurance salesmen. In spite of street chatter we do not have too many MPs because of MMP. (we have fewer per capita than ever before) and they are not over-paid. If the greens felt strongly about this they could pool, say 25% of their salaries, and start a charity fund, or plant a forest or something. But they won't. According to Norman Greens aren't there for money, so there's the answer.

Totally agree with this FP. This is another nutty idea from the Greens.

Westerly I did notice the article from Mike Williams and his claim about the origin and method of Owen Glenn's donation to Winston First. I have a lot of respect for Mike Williams but I find this claim stretching credibility a little. Why did he not defend Peters before the Privileges Committee if he had such important information ? Coming out with this now, in an election year when Labour needs Winston First in Parliament on friendly terms, takes the wind out of its sails in my view.

Harvey Specter
10-03-2014, 07:59 AM
It was just a paper beatup. Lied to journalists, thats a bit rich most stretch the facts all the time to suit whatever they are reporting,
Key looked decidedly uncomfortable trying to bluff his way out of the $5000 donations undisclosed and entered as a $100000 plus donation from a restaurant Who would pay 5 grand to have dinner with Key anyway?Definately a beat up but why lie in the first place, especially since (though may have predated) National are trying to label Cunliffe as 'tricky' and cant be trusted.

Key did look a bit uncomfortable but that's what happens when you are asked the same question over and over again on a topic which is new to you so you dont have the answers. Key was in the right - Individual donations to a party under $15k dont have to be disclosed. So they dont have to be disclosed. The fact that they were aggregated via Antiones makes is a bit unclear, so National erred on the side of caution and did disclose the aggregated amount. I understand that Labour did a similar dinner with Ian McK but didn't disclose, so they erred on the side of not disclosing, rather than disclosing (either that or they couldn't find 15 to pay the $1k price of the dinner!). If Gower asked Key the same question agian now, after he had been briefed, my guess is Key was slaughter him, just like he slaughtered Cambell live last year. He wont be so game and will take the point while he can.

Cunliffe on the hand is still lying. Telling Dann he decided to front foot it to the media, to which Dann continually replied, but only after 3 days of questioning. However, I do feel sorry for Cunliffe as I honestly think he believes his own bullsh!t. Note: Cunliffes one is slightly different as the donations were to the individual, so the limit is $500, not $15k as is the case for parties. Different sets of rules.

Note 2: If I was 'middle NZ' like the Cunliffe family, I would probably pay $5k for a dinner with Key. Unfortunately I am only in the top 5%. Antones is nice but it is already expensive enough without him ramping prices more.

Sgt Pepper
10-03-2014, 08:52 AM
Just some observations about being in business and being very public about your political support as in the case of Antoines Restaurant. I would assume that this carries some risks as well as benefits. I guess he knows his business clientele and makes certain assumptions of a political nature. There are always a proportion of people whose political/philosophical alignments may not necessarily be what one would expect with their occupation, education, income level or family background. One of the most staunchest National Party voters I ever met was a Union delegate at Fisher and Paykel. One of the most articulate, intelligent Labour Party life long supporters was a multi millionaire business owner. Remember Helen Clarks background, daughter of a Dairy Farmer whose was President of the local National Party branch. Affiliations can also evolve and move on, the most blue ribbon seat of Renuera in 1987 almost went to Labour. If I was the owner of Antoines I would stick to Cuisine and keep my political affiliations between me and my voting paper on election day.There are countless worthy causes to donate money to if he is so inclined.

elZorro
10-03-2014, 05:44 PM
Just some observations about being in business and being very public about your political support as in the case of Antoines Restaurant. I would assume that this carries some risks as well as benefits. I guess he knows his business clientele and makes certain assumptions of a political nature. There are always a proportion of people whose political/philosophical alignments may not necessarily be what one would expect with their occupation, education, income level or family background. One of the most staunchest National Party voters I ever met was a Union delegate at Fisher and Paykel. One of the most articulate, intelligent Labour Party life long supporters was a multi millionaire business owner. Remember Helen Clarks background, daughter of a Dairy Farmer whose was President of the local National Party branch. Affiliations can also evolve and move on, the most blue ribbon seat of Renuera in 1987 almost went to Labour. If I was the owner of Antoines I would stick to Cuisine and keep my political affiliations between me and my voting paper on election day.There are countless worthy causes to donate money to if he is so inclined.

Sir Angus Tait, a man whose accomplishments I greatly admire, would probably have been a Labour voter. I'm not sure though. He wouldn't have liked the Rogernomics period.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10457026

elZorro
10-03-2014, 05:50 PM
That's silly stuff but no doubt will find much support among the hoi-polloi. MP's generally work hard and long hours. (yes, there are exceptions) It definitely requires skills that not many have, and has the heavy price to pay of a public profile in matters often controversial. To align this with median income earners is just plain wrong. that is why the higher salaries commission exists. And if Norman is right, that eventually MP's salaries would fall, then we would end up with a parliament full of ex-school teachers, and drop out life assurance salesmen. In spite of street chatter we do not have too many MPs because of MMP. (we have fewer per capita than ever before) and they are not over-paid. If the greens felt strongly about this they could pool, say 25% of their salaries, and start a charity fund, or plant a forest or something. But they won't. According to Norman Greens aren't there for money, so there's the answer.

FP, Russel Norman isn't crazy.. it's only the changes in their pay rate that are linked to this proposal. They'll start at the higher income of over 100K or whatever it is. But I agree. This is not a great salary by any means, for people who are skilled enough to be good MPs. They could be doing a lot of other things also.

slimwin
10-03-2014, 06:08 PM
Its just envy politics. Very low mentality stuff. It'll appeal to the hard core left though.

iceman
10-03-2014, 10:59 PM
A good article by Patrick Smellie on the Labour/Green NZ Power policy !
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9795013/Change-may-give-consumers-less-power

slimwin
10-03-2014, 11:28 PM
More bad news for the country EZ? http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9810371/Record-rise-for-manufacturing

elZorro
11-03-2014, 06:25 AM
A good article by Patrick Smellie on the Labour/Green NZ Power policy !
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/9795013/Change-may-give-consumers-less-power

No, I couldn't go along with the comments in the front of that article. Later on, Patrick gives some balance by saying our market is much smaller and spread out than in the US. Yes, it is, and we have a surplus of power available at the moment. Why are all the power companies decrying the idea? Because it will reduce profits. A comment from 5 days ago:


No surprises here, given his recent history with Contact Energy. NZ's size makes it inherently vulnerable to the whim of industry cartels, and the EA in its current form basically exists to put lipstick on a pig.

In California, where the biggest meddling in any electricity market happened, the guilty party wasn't a Govt agency, but Enron gaming the market for its own gain.

elZorro
11-03-2014, 06:41 AM
More bad news for the country EZ? http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9810371/Record-rise-for-manufacturing

Exports and imports dropped away sharply in 2009, but exports have recovered since then to exceed 2008 levels. But considering the high current dairy prices being paid, and inflation, it's not that great. Dairy and meat production is lumped in with manufacturing, I'd have thought it was closer to primary production. There are probably less people employed in the dairy/meat sector than before, with robotics in plants being used more frequently, and farms going to larger scales. So all the new manufacturing jobs, where are they?

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/industry_sectors/imports_and_exports/OverseasMerchandiseTrade_HOTPJan14.aspx

fungus pudding
11-03-2014, 07:22 AM
Exports and imports dropped away sharply in 2009, but exports have recovered since then to exceed 2008 levels. But considering the high current dairy prices being paid, and inflation, it's not that great. Dairy and meat production is lumped in with manufacturing, I'd have thought it was closer to primary production. There are probably less people employed in the dairy/meat sector than before, with robotics in plants being used more frequently, and farms going to larger scales. So all the new manufacturing jobs, where are they?

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/industry_sectors/imports_and_exports/OverseasMerchandiseTrade_HOTPJan14.aspx


eZ. I think most posters to this site are quite capable of reading magazines, papers, blogs etc. Of course you are perfectly entitles to spend half your life re-posting others' opinions here if you wish - I'm merely pointing out that you have posted thousands of urls to anything at all that supports your one-eyed point of view, and your life might become more enjoyable and healthier if you popped outside to play occasionally instead of staring at your computer screen all day.

P.S. I'd bet my bottom dollar that nobody who doesn't agree with your view of the world ever bothers to explore the never-ending stream of links you so generously provide.

Cuzzie
11-03-2014, 08:36 AM
Exports and imports dropped away sharply in 2009, but exports have recovered since then to exceed 2008 levels. But considering the high current dairy prices being paid, and inflation, it's not that great. Dairy and meat production is lumped in with manufacturing, I'd have thought it was closer to primary production. There are probably less people employed in the dairy/meat sector than before, with robotics in plants being used more frequently, and farms going to larger scales. So all the new manufacturing jobs, where are they?

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/industry_sectors/imports_and_exports/OverseasMerchandiseTrade_HOTPJan14.aspx
Well according to accounting software & payroll provider MYOB, it's obvious where new employment including manufacturing jobs have gone, if you just open the other eye EZ.

This from the Herald this morning reporting MYOB's stats & these guys would know - would they not?

The country's small and medium-sized manufacturers have experienced a remarkable turnaround in the past year and most businesses in the sector are expecting revenue growth in the coming 12 months, says accounting software maker MYOB.

MYOB regularly surveys local small and medium-sized firms and says its latest research shows SMEs "have enjoyed the highest levels of annual growth seen in more than four years".

While the effect of the Christchurch rebuilding and the housing markets was getting a lot of attention, MYOB chief executive Tim Reed said there "was plenty of positivity in other areas".

"Just over a year ago, many commentators were expressing alarm at what they saw as a crisis in the New Zealand manufacturing industry. Yet in the last 12 months our local manufacturers have seen more revenue growth than any other sector, and in 2014 they expect to do even better."

Reed said the survey included firms that had up to 200 employees but that MYOB had not compared the results with any information about the performance of big business.

About 8 per cent of the 1025 respondents in the survey were from the "manufacturing or wholesale" sector.

Just over half the manufacturers surveyed by MYOB reported revenue growth in the 12 months to February. About 14 per cent of those surveyed saw their revenue drop over this period. About 70 per cent of the manufacturers surveyed expected their revenue to grow in the next 12 months.

Looks good for all New Zealanders and great to know National is working well for SMEs EZ, that contradicts what you were saying earlier. Of course, you might know better EZ.

artemis
11-03-2014, 11:35 AM
........................................ So all the new manufacturing jobs, where are they? .......................[/URL]

China probably, or in the global robotics markets, or in high skill fields such as industrial design and engineering. Revenue increases in the manufacturing sector are more likely due to offshoring labour, and other efficiencies. The days of huge NZ factory floors employing unskilled labour are largely gone, and we will never see them again.

That is definitely a problem for those in NZ with low or no skills.

fungus pudding
11-03-2014, 02:43 PM
China probably, or in the global robotics markets, or in high skill fields such as industrial design and engineering. Revenue increases in the manufacturing sector are more likely due to offshoring labour, and other efficiencies. The days of huge NZ factory floors employing unskilled labour are largely gone, and we will never see them again.

That is definitely a problem for those in NZ with low or no skills.

Those with low or no skills are in the same boat throughout the western world.

elZorro
11-03-2014, 05:36 PM
Here are some real export tables which show what has happened in the last year for NZ. Many engineering and standard manufacturing categories have dropped, just like I'd expected. Dairy, beef, wood exports up strongly in dollar value, but mechanical and electrical items, boats etc, down strongly.

craic
11-03-2014, 06:18 PM
And a whole bucket full of David Cunliffes will not change that.

fungus pudding
11-03-2014, 06:30 PM
Here are some real export tables which show what has happened in the last year for NZ. Many engineering and standard manufacturing categories have dropped, just like I'd expected. Dairy, beef, wood exports up strongly in dollar value, but mechanical and electrical items, boats etc, down strongly.

Oh dear. My previous post just didn't work. Too bad.

elZorro
11-03-2014, 06:32 PM
And a whole bucket full of David Cunliffes will not change that.

I beg to differ. What I am trying to paint here is a correlation between National being in office, and a decay in the manufacturing sector. There have been about 21 quarters since National got in, late 2008. Surely if they were going to bring us to a brighter future with more high-tech manufacturing and exports, we'd see that in the manufacturing stats. Correct me if I'm wrong. So here is a chart that shows a degradation over those 20 quarters, where up to 50,000 people had to try to get a job somewhere else. On top of that, we had a rising population base. You can see that manufacturing is a big employer, offering lots of FTE jobs (purple line). There are few part-timers or owners in proportion to FTEs (red and green lines).

This is a very poor look for National, can you see them popping this chart up in election year? So I'll do it.

Now National is having to adjust the timeframe for a slender budget surplus, as the tax take stubbornly refuses to meet their budgeted figures.


http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/f2109312/tax-take-continues-to-fall-short-pushing-government-finances-to-higher-deficit.html

Major von Tempsky
12-03-2014, 09:09 AM
EZ, you have a closed mind, you think that only manufacturing can offer employment and a high standard of living and rate of growth.

Not so, services and agriculture can do that. Why not just take the best path which the market discloses? If that, at the extreme, means no NZ manufacturing at all who cares if it gives us full employment and a higher standard of living than manufacturing!

Cuzzie
12-03-2014, 09:27 AM
Labour in NZ can learn from this statement: Tasmanian Labor has ended the nation's first experiment of Greens in cabinet, conceding power-sharing with the minor party alienates its core supporters, suffocates its messages and must never be repeated.

The Premier of Tasmania & Labor party member Ms Giddings said, caucus had resolved that it would never again have Greens "in cabinet" and would not make "power-sharing deals".

Read the rest here/ http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/tasmanian-labor-quits-alliance-keeps-greens-options/story-e6frgczx-1226803667681#

I say let Labour in NZ go ahead and forge that relationship with the Greens and let them find out the hard way as an opposition bi-party, not as the ruling Govt. That way the country wont suffocate under their madness.

craic
12-03-2014, 09:33 AM
You can manufacture anything you like in NZ, from a peanut slicer to a fifty ton truck. You will probably find the skilled staff do the work and you will probably receive all the accolades from politicians and others for your work. The problem is that you will not be able to sell it - unless you can find a bigger fool than you are. The cost of labour here will often be several times that of your competitors, overseas. The cost of raw materials will have the huge handling and transport costs to add to your costs. Maybe the Government will "protect" you from foreign competition, but they can't - the response from the competitors country would be "protection" from imports of milk powder, wool, logs and the like - which are far more important than your peanut slicer. We are part of a world economy where survival demands cheaper and better production of commodities that others need. I don't believe for one minute that a Labour government would disagree with this reality, regardless of the rhetoric from DC the Greens and a few other. And if anyone sees the Labour leadership as stable, look at the speed with which Shane Jones is rising to the top.

fungus pudding
12-03-2014, 09:44 AM
You can manufacture anything you like in NZ, from a peanut slicer to a fifty ton truck. You will probably find the skilled staff do the work and you will probably receive all the accolades from politicians and others for your work. The problem is that you will not be able to sell it - unless you can find a bigger fool than you are. The cost of labour here will often be several times that of your competitors, overseas. The cost of raw materials will have the huge handling and transport costs to add to your costs. Maybe the Government will "protect" you from foreign competition, but they can't - the response from the competitors country would be "protection" from imports of milk powder, wool, logs and the like - which are far more important than your peanut slicer. We are part of a world economy where survival demands cheaper and better production of commodities that others need. I don't believe for one minute that a Labour government would disagree with this reality, regardless of the rhetoric from DC the Greens and a few other. And if anyone sees the Labour leadership as stable, look at the speed with which Shane Jones is rising to the top.

You are so right. On the Shane Jones point - he's a list MP, so he obviously will have to unseat Cunliffe very soon, or he might just not be on the list come the election. So he is either playing a very dangerous game, or he has carefully weighed his support within the ranks and knows exactly what he is doing.
Of course there is always the possibility of jumping to Winston 1st. Peters won't be around much longer, so Jones could inherit a ready made party if he wants to.

slimwin
12-03-2014, 09:44 AM
Lets not forget about whole economies doing fine based on one product. Oil.

On a side note, an old collegue of mine is moving back to Nelson from Sweden. He's bought land and is getting a house built. The kicker is he's importing all the wood, windows and kitchen from Sweden as it's cheaper. Pine in Sweden takes 70 yrs before they mill so it's a semi hard wood. You buy the windows off the shelf at a selection of standard sizes rather than build a house and get them to make windows that fit. The kitchen is IKEA- a company trying to start in AKL for years now,but not being allowed.

His biggest problem is the council permissions. Seems their opinion is, if they haven't already approved it or it's not been done the NZ way,it's no good.

I think this is embarrassing to NZ. Talk about coals to newcastle with the wood component. Practically the only thing he's not bringing in from EU is the insulation. I guess he'll realise you can get aussie stuff as good that's not pink batts...

winner69
12-03-2014, 11:12 AM
Has Crusher been a little sneaky ....and what's worse she has pissed John off

Never mind .....expected normal behaviour

craic
12-03-2014, 11:52 AM
Not much of a problem when you're on the winning side.
Has Crusher been a little sneaky ....and what's worse she has pissed John off

Never mind .....expected normal behaviour

fungus pudding
12-03-2014, 12:06 PM
Not much of a problem when you're on the winning side.

No, but even the losers are entitled to dinner occasionally.

westerly
12-03-2014, 12:23 PM
No, but even the losers are entitled to dinner occasionally.

"New Zealanders will be dumbfounded these meetings weren't revealed earlier. John Key is well aware how bad this looks. This belated admission of favours for the big end of town is business as usual for the National Party."

Could almost be a party

Westerly

Sgt Pepper
12-03-2014, 12:44 PM
I would contest this could be a potentially serious blow to JCs ambitions post John Key. There is one person who could rapidly ascend to that position, no not Steven Joyce, terrible retail politician, same as Bill English. The next leader now that Judith Collins is at the point of no return is MICHAEL WOODHOUSE, met him a few times, intelligent , moderate, pragmatic, impressive Health Service background, and grew up in South Dunedin

fungus pudding
12-03-2014, 01:18 PM
I would contest this could be a potentially serious blow to JCs ambitions post John Key. There is one person who could rapidly ascend to that position, no not Steven Joyce, terrible retail politician, same as Bill English. The next leader now that Judith Collins is at the point of no return is MICHAEL WOODHOUSE, met him a few times, intelligent , moderate, pragmatic, impressive Health Service background, and grew up in South Dunedin

He's all of that, but there are many National MPs who would leave him for dead as leader.

Sgt Pepper
12-03-2014, 01:50 PM
FP who is on your list?

elZorro
12-03-2014, 02:24 PM
EZ, you have a closed mind, you think that only manufacturing can offer employment and a high standard of living and rate of growth.

Not so, services and agriculture can do that. Why not just take the best path which the market discloses? If that, at the extreme, means no NZ manufacturing at all who cares if it gives us full employment and a higher standard of living than manufacturing!

My mind is not closed, if it was, I wouldn't be out there doing it, and surviving. Hi-tech manufacturing items usually have IP, software, maybe electronics/electrical/mechanical items that are very niche or hard to build. People who design and export that sort of gear are not so much price takers, as the agricultural sector generally is. The service sector is similarly not well paid in general. So once energy costs go up, all the sectors that don't have enough margin, fail to employ at the same rate, or fail to pay as much tax as a going concern.

Retail does badly, the service sector is full of newly unemployed trying to create jobs for themselves and undercutting each other. The manufacturing sector is the canary in the mine.

My beef is that National spouts on about how they are helping this sector, how well it is going, how we are all going to move to a new hi-tech and bright future. But in fact they have left this whole area largely to its own devices, and the response from those business owners has been to reduce staff and hunker down to wait out the GFC. We've been waiting a long time. Energy costs are still high, margins are generally low.

Major von Tempsky
12-03-2014, 03:26 PM
Well as I said it doesn't actually matter in economic terms if the staff reduce to zero. You can always have fully automated factories (think drones, robots, computer driven vehicles) quite apart from a total switch to services and agriculture.
But services contains all sorts of highly paid professionals - engineers, architects, IT, accountants, economists, doctors, quantity surveyors....
As long as you have dairy factories, meatworks, timber processors, fish canners, horticulture packers there's going to be manufacturing anyway.

But I think people above were pointing out that in aggregate manufacturing and manufacturing employment has grown recently....whereas you say its decreased? Who's right - you or Statistics NZ?

Cuzzie
12-03-2014, 10:10 PM
More Kiwis say they feel safe, at the same time the crime rate slumps to its lowest since 1979.

A new report from Justice, Police and Corrections shows just a quarter of people feel like crime in their neighbourhood has increased, and 86 per cent feel safe walking in their neighbourhood at night.

The report's statistics show violent crime has fallen 13 per cent over the past five years, while youth offending is down a whopping 45 per cent.

At the same time, the prison population is getting smaller, and the rate of re-offending is also falling.

Wow, that's more great news for all NZs again, I wonder who the Justice Minister is? That's the best any Justice Minister has achieved in the past 35 years, so well done Judith Collins, you have crushed the crime rate. To bad if she has a meal with her husbands workmates, at least she is working for our country and with figures like that, she can dine with anybody she wont's.

Stats released today by News Talk ZB (http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news//1227244463-crime-rate-slumps-to-its-lowest-since-1979)

craic
13-03-2014, 10:24 AM
A significant factor in crime is the risk of being caught - criminals will avoid that at any cost. The rise in the number of surveillance devices has a strong effect. In any city or town the moving individuals are recorded over and over again. Most burglaries and similar are committed in poorer areas. Wealthy suburbs may attract the odd professional but once again, security devices deter. I fitted a camera, the type used in the bush to record game movements, near my house, before going away for a long weekend. Came back on Tuesday to 44 pictures - 4 of me, 4 of the car coming and going and the rest of rabbits carvorting arond the house at night. There is also a paid security co-op here with cameras around the area so if you come here to this part of Napier rural, you will be filmed.

slimwin
13-03-2014, 02:04 PM
I knew those rabbits were up to no good!

winner69
13-03-2014, 03:16 PM
Sounds like Crusher not living up to her name .... almost close to tears

C'mon Crusher harden up - its politics you know .... dirty politics as well .... time for you to get stuck into Shane about something

winner69
14-03-2014, 07:21 AM
So Crusher off to Mt Smart to see the Warriors ....... Block F Row 5 Seats 4and 5 .....yeah right.

Maybe Owen or Eric there in the nice sheltered corporate box

And if you do get on to the field Crusher don't forget to take the handbag

In The Herald -

Watching the Warriors at Eden Park tomorrow night will be a reprieve from the saga. She's attending the match with her husband. "I hope there'll be lots of pushes and shoves and I might just be tempted to go out on the field myself," she laughed.

elZorro
14-03-2014, 11:56 AM
Well as I said it doesn't actually matter in economic terms if the staff reduce to zero. You can always have fully automated factories (think drones, robots, computer driven vehicles) quite apart from a total switch to services and agriculture.
But services contains all sorts of highly paid professionals - engineers, architects, IT, accountants, economists, doctors, quantity surveyors....
As long as you have dairy factories, meatworks, timber processors, fish canners, horticulture packers there's going to be manufacturing anyway.

But I think people above were pointing out that in aggregate manufacturing and manufacturing employment has grown recently....whereas you say its decreased? Who's right - you or Statistics NZ?

As far as the figures go, they were pulled out of an Excel speadsheet on the stats NZ website. For some reason StatsNZ doesn't create any trend graphs from that sort of data (they do if the data is a bit more positive for National) , the public have to create them. So that showed the detail up until the end of 2013, and I assume it included dairy factories etc. Today the radio is re-reporting a press release (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/238848/manufacturing-expands-for-18th-month-in-a-row)showing manufacturing business perception is up, for the 18th month in a row. They didn't say it was the best ever, or mention any hard data behind it. So it means that of the manufacturers who responded to the survey, most continued to be in a positive frame of mind. Others would not have replied if they had nothing good to report, or if they had since gone out of business. This is PR of the worst kind, since the public at large will have no idea that in fact, NZ manufacturing has dipped heavily in terms of the number of people it is employing, and has struggled under National's rule for some years to recover.

While I agree with you MVT, the service industries do have some highly paid professionals, the reality for many is that they will be needing to mow lawns, garden, clean, provide food and beverages, caregiving etc to others for a living. Often on pay rates just above the minimum pay, and sometimes below that, when running a business. And all this money just rotates around within NZ, it doesn't directly earn any foreign exchange.

EMA comment on the interest rate increases yesterday. The banks tend to like this sort of thing. Lots of new loans being drawn as people swap from floating to fixed. And it does kickstart house sales at the front end of these dates. Surprisingly, there were two separate house transactions completed today amongst work colleagues.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/9826406/Producers-warn-high-dollar-will-cut-deep

elZorro
16-03-2014, 06:14 AM
So Crusher off to Mt Smart to see the Warriors ....... Block F Row 5 Seats 4and 5 .....yeah right.

Maybe Owen or Eric there in the nice sheltered corporate box

And if you do get on to the field Crusher don't forget to take the handbag

In The Herald -

Watching the Warriors at Eden Park tomorrow night will be a reprieve from the saga. She's attending the match with her husband. "I hope there'll be lots of pushes and shoves and I might just be tempted to go out on the field myself," she laughed.

It's interesting and a bit of a change for a slip-up from a National MP to be in the news. The press are feral.

I had no idea Oravida own a massive commercial building in Auckland, and have been leasing some of it out to govt agencies like MFAT and NZTE. Cosy.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9833191/Movers-and-shakers-surround-Oravida

craic
16-03-2014, 08:02 AM
If you Labour folk really want a meaty bone - one that would gain the party a serious number of votes - If Winston Peters doesn't get to it first, Read the article in the NZ Herald this morning titled " unwary residents caught in villages' rules trap" The bottom line is that this form of extortion is growing at a great rate and will attract more and more "investment" and may expand to become an entrenched way of squeezing more and more residents out of more and more money. A bit of legislation to restrict this gravy train would be simple enough to enact and very popular.And remember, this is not just stripping wealthy pensioners of their assets, as many rely on a large taxpayer contribution and governments are morally obliged to meet the same sort of attractions for all, not just for the few. I feel strongly enough about this article to copy and distribute it at a club to which I belong.

winner69
16-03-2014, 08:37 AM
If you Labour folk really want a meaty bone - one that would gain the party a serious number of votes - If Winston Peters doesn't get to it first, Read the article in the NZ Herald this morning titled " unwary residents caught in villages' rules trap" The bottom line is that this form of extortion is growing at a great rate and will attract more and more "investment" and may expand to become an entrenched way of squeezing more and more residents out of more and more money. A bit of legislation to restrict this gravy train would be simple enough to enact and very popular.And remember, this is not just stripping wealthy pensioners of their assets, as many rely on a large taxpayer contribution and governments are morally obliged to meet the same sort of attractions for all, not just for the few. I feel strongly enough about this article to copy and distribute it at a club to which I belong.

It is sad world

The balancing of "corporate greed" and "morality" issues are so heavily weighted to the greedy and against the weak. If a socially responsible government is serious about fairness and equality in life they should do something about this but that is not the way the game is played. But as the loyal RYM and SUM shareholders would say they are only doing a social service anyway and not being over rewarded for it

Doubt whether winston is the man to fix but like most revolutions change comes from within. You circulating the article might help that revolution. Well done

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11220355

fungus pudding
16-03-2014, 08:38 AM
If you Labour folk really want a meaty bone - one that would gain the party a serious number of votes - If Winston Peters doesn't get to it first, Read the article in the NZ Herald this morning titled " unwary residents caught in villages' rules trap" The bottom line is that this form of extortion is growing at a great rate and will attract more and more "investment" and may expand to become an entrenched way of squeezing more and more residents out of more and more money. A bit of legislation to restrict this gravy train would be simple enough to enact and very popular.And remember, this is not just stripping wealthy pensioners of their assets, as many rely on a large taxpayer contribution and governments are morally obliged to meet the same sort of attractions for all, not just for the few. I feel strongly enough about this article to copy and distribute it at a club to which I belong.

Most people who go into these things are well aware of how the license to occupy works. I went to a presentation by Summerset and they went to some lengths to explain it. Fact is - their clients are happy enough (most of them anyway) and there is nothing better available for them. I don't own shares in any of these things, and currently have no interest in them. However I can see that one day they may be an option I will consider. It's just buyer beware, and as far as I know the license purchaser is required to get independent legal advice before committing.

craic
16-03-2014, 10:11 AM
I still reckon that there has to be a better way. And a main point of my argument is that ALL pensioners at that stage are entitled to "rest home care' and this will slowly evolve with the taxpayer picking up the tab for those that can't enter into such an arrangement. Lets fix it now while we can - not later when it's too big for any government to tackle.

elZorro
16-03-2014, 11:15 AM
I still reckon that there has to be a better way. And a main point of my argument is that ALL pensioners at that stage are entitled to "rest home care' and this will slowly evolve with the taxpayer picking up the tab for those that can't enter into such an arrangement. Lets fix it now while we can - not later when it's too big for any government to tackle.

That does look like a nasty recipe for resthome residence rights, Craic. If there is a capital gain during the stay, and the resident has already put up the full capital costs at the front end and an ongoing fee, then unless those fees fall well short of the ongoing costs, they should be entitled to at least a good portion of the capital gain, and/or no final fees of a portion of the initial entitlement fee.

If the market worked perfectly (which it doesn't) there would be more polite resthome options out there.

Harvey Specter
16-03-2014, 11:45 AM
I see nothing wrong in that article. These are all people that have their own home but for one reason, they decide a village is better.

One they sign up, they still need to get their lawyer to sign that they completely understand it and can pull out for no reason very easily.

Just because you are 'old' does not mean you are vulnerable. Normally it is just the kids upset their inheritance won be as big.

Harvey Specter
16-03-2014, 11:49 AM
I still reckon that there has to be a better way. And a main point of my argument is that ALL pensioners at that stage are entitled to "rest home care' and this will slowly evolve with the taxpayer picking up the tab for those that can't enter into such an arrangement. Lets fix it now while we can - not later when it's too big for any government to tackle.sure all oldies deserve care but they don't all deserve bowling greens, pools, activities on the taxpayers dime.

These villages are for those that can afford it, and yes there is a cost. If they think they can spend their money better, then they should go ahead.

pierre
16-03-2014, 11:58 AM
I still reckon that there has to be a better way. And a main point of my argument is that ALL pensioners at that stage are entitled to "rest home care' and this will slowly evolve with the taxpayer picking up the tab for those that can't enter into such an arrangement. Lets fix it now while we can - not later when it's too big for any government to tackle.

I think there is some confusion here about Rest Home care vs Independent Living (with Licence to Occupy) in a retirement village complex. Anyone qualifying for Rest Home care does not enter into a Licence to Occupy with its associated capital deduction on termination of the agreement. Depending on their assets Rest Home occupants either pay the daily/weekly rate for their care, or if their assets are below the threshold they are already fully subsidised by the state.

People signing a Licence to Occupy agreement for Independent Living are faced with the capital deduction but the law requires the terms to be clearly explained by a lawyer before an agreement is signed. I am not aware of anyone being forced to enter a retirement village at the point of a gun and the numerous people I know who are Independent Living retirement village residents (including my own mother) love the lifestyle, the companionship and the security that it provides.

My siblings and I are well aware of the capital deduction and the absence of capital gain - what is far more important to us is that our mum is able to enjoy her twilight years safely, securely and happily. There's a cost attaching to most things in this life and the capital deduction is a price that we and she are happy to pay.

craic
16-03-2014, 12:04 PM
At 76 I am quite capable of looking after my own affairs but there are many I know who are way behind the eight-ball. If these people paid $200,000 for a home and it is now worth $300,000 AS IS why should they not be entitled to a significant portion of the gain should they move on? Why can the company give them $200,000 less 20% etc? I know one guy of my age who was in care, with liver failure, waiting to die etc for at least a year or two. He lit up one day, married his nurse aid less than half his age. I see him from time to time wandering around with a smile on his face and his wife in the other hand. My biggest problem at present is that bloody cyclone failed to deliver 1mm of rain here and not enough wind to blow out a candle.

Major von Tempsky
16-03-2014, 12:36 PM
So Australia is still moving right, not quite all the way there yet, but Tasmania's gone Liberal and looks like South Australia will have a minority Liberal government in place of Labour which leaves just ACT with a left wing socialist government which is what you expect from a lot of civil servants living off the taxpayer.

Wonder how long before the Greens replace Labour Party as the dominant opposition party in Tasmania, Australia, NZ?

fungus pudding
16-03-2014, 12:37 PM
I think there is come confusion here about Rest Home care vs Independent Living (with Licence to Occupy) in a retirement village complex. Anyone qualifying for Rest Home care does not enter into a Licence to Occupy with its associated capital deduction on termination of the agreement. Depending on their assets Rest Home occupants either pay the daily/weekly rate for their care, or if their assets are below the threshold they are already fully subsidised by the state.

People signing a Licence to Occupy agreement for Independent Living are faced with the capital deduction but the law requires the terms to be clearly explained by a lawyer before an agreement is signed. I am not aware of anyone being forced to enter a retirement village at the point of a gun and the numerous people I know who are Independent Living retirement village residents (including my own mother) love the lifestyle, the companionship and the security that it provides.

My siblings and I are well aware of the capital deduction and the absence of capital gain - what is far more important to us is that our mum is able to enjoy her twilight years safely, securely and happily. There's a cost attaching to most things in this life and the capital deduction is a price that we and she are happy to pay.

Yep - that's it. And if they don't like it they can always buy a stand-alone ownership unit. Fact is the retirement villages suit some down to the ground. Some churches operate retirement homes exactly on the same lines as Ryman and Summerset.

Major von Tempsky
16-03-2014, 01:36 PM
Yeah, yeah, it's a free world, best place for some people.

But you won't find me there.

Case in the media a little while ago about a guy who was married to an older woman, I think he was 60 and she was 67. So she died and he met a younger woman and wanted out of the Happy Farm. Cost him several hundred thousand to get some of his capital out.

Imagine being there, week after week, watching all the others, making mental bets on who goes next. If its big enough about 1 a week kicks the bucket.
I went to see an aunt in her 90s who was in one. I said I suppose you've made a few friends here? She said "No, I've stopped making friends here, they just go and die on you." My mother said the same thing later.

Imagine, you never see a cross section of society, no babies, no young people, no schoolchildren, no happy laughter and squeals and running around. And you know all the latest technology is leaving you behind. And no 50 or 60 Sky satellite and cable TV, no Internet (the other inmates don't know what it is!) and the Happy Farm managers are too mean to run to more than about 2 Sky channels.
Shhh! Quiet in the Library!
My mother used to complain one particular over large Island woman on the staff used to regularly toss her around on the bed like a tennis ball for fun. Of course there was never any proof, just the bruises and her word against theirs.

fungus pudding
16-03-2014, 02:20 PM
Yeah, yeah, it's a free world, best place for some people.

But you won't find me there.

Case in the media a little while ago about a guy who was married to an older woman, I think he was 60 and she was 67. So she died and he met a younger woman and wanted out of the Happy Farm. Cost him several hundred thousand to get some of his capital out.

Imagine being there, week after week, watching all the others, making mental bets on who goes next. If its big enough about 1 a week kicks the bucket.
I went to see an aunt in her 90s who was in one. I said I suppose you've made a few friends here? She said "No, I've stopped making friends here, they just go and die on you." My mother said the same thing later.

Imagine, you never see a cross section of society, no babies, no young people, no schoolchildren, no happy laughter and squeals and running around. And you know all the latest technology is leaving you behind. And no 50 or 60 Sky satellite and cable TV, no Internet (the other inmates don't know what it is!) and the Happy Farm managers are too mean to run to more than about 2 Sky channels.
Shhh! Quiet in the Library!
My mother used to complain one particular over large Island woman on the staff used to regularly toss her around on the bed like a tennis ball for fun. Of course there was never any proof, just the bruises and her word against theirs.

You are talking about rest home care. As pierre's post points out, that is a different arrangement than a license to occupy in a retirement village or complex.

craic
16-03-2014, 02:50 PM
Why then don't these retirement village people, including the churches simply rent the accommodation to the oldies instead of going for the jugular and taking virtually all their assets with a huge penalty for backing out? I know a lot of readers will be shareholders and probably do well out of it. Do they give you a discount?

fungus pudding
16-03-2014, 03:07 PM
Why then don't these retirement village people, including the churches simply rent the accommodation to the oldies instead of going for the jugular and taking virtually all their assets with a huge penalty for backing out? I know a lot of readers will be shareholders and probably do well out of it. Do they give you a discount?


Look at the whole package. It's more than a rental deal in the ones I know of. If they simply want a unit to rent there are other options. These outfits don't take all their assets by any means. I think the scheme I looked at had a maximum of 25% of the license price, and that applied after so many years - less if short term. They totally refurbish the units before relicensing them. Most purchasers will stay till they die so it doesn't matter to them. If it does then they will do something else. I helped an auntie of mine shift into one. She was rapt, and the complex had all sorts of amenities and their own transport arrangements for shopping trips and outings - things that are a damn sight more useful to an oldie than a bunch of money they'll never see again anyway, even if they buy a freehold or unit title property. Ask yourself why so many of them have a waiting list.

winner69
16-03-2014, 03:27 PM
A great radical left winger Tony Benn has died.

Pity there are no politicians like him in NZ at the moment .... Labour could do with a eloquent firebrand like him.

One thing Tony said was 8) “We are not just here to manage capitalism but to change society and to define its finer values.” I like it

He did a few sessions with Billy Bragg over the years. Benn would give a rousing speech and Billy would wind them up with some of his old songs. Great stuff

Billy Bragg in town again next week. Might go to his concert

winner69
16-03-2014, 03:34 PM
Talking of Billy Bragg aren't these fantastic words

Labour/Greens could even make it their anthem this election (they would have to change some of the names of course - mentioned that in case they forgot to)

Thetcherites

You thatcherites by name, lend an ear, lend an ear
You thatcherites by name lend an ear
You thatcherites by name, your faults I will proclaim,
Your doctrines I must blame, you will hear, you will hear
Your doctrines I must blame, you will hear

You privatise away what is ours, what is ours
You privatise away what is ours
You privatise away and then you make us pay
We'll take it back some day, mark my words, mark my words
We'll take it back some day, mark my words

The scabs they hide their faces in shame, yes in shame
The scabs they hide their faces in shame
They hide away in shame but we recall their names
And they know they'll share the blame for it all, for it all
They know they'll share the blame for it all

Your leader she has gone to the lords, to the lords
Your leader, she has gone to the lords
Your leader she has gone, but she's left us little john
And he's barely hanging on by his nails, by his nails
He's barely hanging on by his nails

elZorro
16-03-2014, 05:50 PM
Talking of Billy Bragg aren't these fantastic words

Labour/Greens could even make it their anthem this election (they would have to change some of the names of course - mentioned that in case they forgot to)

Thatcherites

You thatcherites by name, lend an ear, lend an ear
You thatcherites by name lend an ear
You thatcherites by name, your faults I will proclaim,
Your doctrines I must blame, you will hear, you will hear
Your doctrines I must blame, you will hear

You privatise away what is ours, what is ours
You privatise away what is ours
You privatise away and then you make us pay
We'll take it back some day, mark my words, mark my words
We'll take it back some day, mark my words

The scabs they hide their faces in shame, yes in shame
The scabs they hide their faces in shame
They hide away in shame but we recall their names
And they know they'll share the blame for it all, for it all
They know they'll share the blame for it all

Your leader she has gone to the lords, to the lords
Your leader, she has gone to the lords
Your leader she has gone, but she's left us little john
And he's barely hanging on by his nails, by his nails
He's barely hanging on by his nails

Cripes W69, you're way more left than I am. :)

I found this sound track for you. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlkXQm7tSCY&list=RDIlkXQm7tSCY#t=149)I have not been a follower of Billy Bragg.

My main reasons for voting Labour are tied up with the general direction they are heading, I know they'll put NZ in a better space than National will. They've done it in their last terms to great effect. Labour are not being so polite to the Greens lately, this is an indication they'd like to stay slightly left of centre. But just like the years when Helen Clark was in office, I wish they'd work more tightly with the Greens. Together, these two parties should be unstoppable, if they just put forward the facts and bring out their good policies.

slimwin
17-03-2014, 08:37 AM
Correction. Future leader Shane Jones hasn't been polite to the greens lately!

And labour working tightly with the greens makes them unvotable for,for a lot of people. Myself included.

Harvey Specter
17-03-2014, 09:10 AM
Correction. Future leader Shane Jones hasn't been polite to the greens lately!Of which party? His recent comments suggest he has been studying Winston's playbook with a view to taking his spot once he retires.

fungus pudding
17-03-2014, 09:23 AM
Of which party? His recent comments suggest he has been studying Winston's playbook with a view to taking his spot once he retires.

I think that's a distinct possibility. A ready made party for Shane to hijack once Winston goes, and that must be very very soon. Notice on The Nation yesterday Winnie tried to make NZ First as important as he is, :D insisting the interviewer stopped addressing questions to 'you' and burbling on about the party. He obviously wants the thing to survive him as his legacy. He'd probably be quite happy to have Jones aboard for that reason.

craic
17-03-2014, 09:36 AM
Winston Peters will never retire - if the party kicked him out he would simply start another. As to the disgruntled older right who support Winston, they would not go near Shane Jones

fungus pudding
17-03-2014, 11:13 AM
Winston Peters will never retire - if the party kicked him out he would simply start another. As to the disgruntled older right who support Winston, they would not go near Shane Jones

Smoker, boozer, Maori ...the grim reaper will be watching Winnie.

winner69
18-03-2014, 06:08 AM
That latest herald poll is a disaster for the country

Will tell billy bragg the news. Maybe he can stir the left wing to action when he tours here next week .....oops I forgot even the left have deserted labour

craic
18-03-2014, 08:43 AM
I know of several posters who will deny or excuse this reality but the facts are simple. Labour leadership is in disarray - they could not find a leader acceptable to the caucus and the public. The National party have possibly one of the most popular leaders in NZ political history. The Labour party claims that half the country is stricken with poverty while polls show that the population is happy with the country's direction. All the crap from both sides - about Judith Collins' Chinese dealings and the Labour leaders backhanders from supporters that were not declared is just a buzz of political noise. The real problem now is for the minor sects - who will see the writing on the wall and make a decision at this point to run with one of the two main parties. Who will be bold enough to say "WE have made a decision to support National/Labour into and after the next election? Who will be foolish enough to risk annihilation by thinking they can sit on the fence waiting for the "final" result?

Major von Tempsky
18-03-2014, 08:55 AM
"Support for Labour has dipped below 30 per cent, while National has the numbers to govern alone, according to a new opinion poll.

The New Zealand Herald-DigiPoll survey, out on Tuesday, has support for Labour at just 29.5 per cent, down six percentage points on the last poll in December.

It's the first opinion poll to be released since Prime Minister John Key announced the September 20 election date.

The popularity of Labour leader David Cunliffe has also slipped by a similar amount to 11.1 per cent, which is worse than the lowest rating of former leader David Shearer - 12.4 per cent.

National, with its support in the poll at 50.8 per cent, would be able to govern without the need of support partners.

The popularity of Mr Key has also climbed 4.6 percentage points to 66.5 per cent."

Anyone like to put the boot in? :-)

Cuzzie
18-03-2014, 09:02 AM
Frankly, I could not see the poll reading any other way at the moment. Are the Labour supporters on Sharetrader surprised at all? I'd love to hear their thoughts right now.
Pity the Greens have climbed up a bit. They have not said a lot lately and that speaks volumes right there.

Major von Tempsky
18-03-2014, 09:05 AM
How many more polls before Greens become bigger than Labour, as threatening in Tasmania? Would EZ switch to Green then?

Harvey Specter
18-03-2014, 09:19 AM
How many more polls before Greens become bigger than Labour, as threatening in Tasmania? Would EZ switch to Green then?Scary thought. I could handle a Labour led government but I couldn't handle a green led government. Even at their current polling, I think they would carry to much weight. IMHO they are no longer a 'green' party but a ultra left wing economic party with a few green policies.

Cuzzie
18-03-2014, 12:55 PM
Scary thought. I could handle a Labour led government but I couldn't handle a green led government. Even at their current polling, I think they would carry to much weight. IMHO they are no longer a 'green' party but a ultra left wing economic party with a few green policies.I completely agree.

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 01:52 PM
Scary thought. I could handle a Labour led government but I couldn't handle a green led government. Even at their current polling, I think they would carry to much weight. IMHO they are no longer a 'green' party but a ultra left wing economic party with a few green policies.

Do you really think that Labour under Cunliffe would not be an ultra left wing party?

Harvey Specter
18-03-2014, 02:06 PM
Do you really think that Labour under Cunliffe would not be an ultra left wing party?Russel is a (former) communist isn't he? NO, I dont think Labour are as left as the Greens.

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 02:50 PM
Russel is a (former) communist isn't he? NO, I dont think Labour are as left as the Greens.


Then you haven't listened to Cunliffe's latest utterances.

artemis
18-03-2014, 02:54 PM
Then you haven't listened to Cunliffe's latest utterances.

Which utterances would they be? The ones to the party faithful incl the unions? Or the 'hedging the bets' ones afterwards. Or the ones to business audiences?

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 02:56 PM
Which utterances would they be? The ones to the party faithful incl the unions? Or the 'hedging the bets' ones afterwards. Or the ones to business audiences?

Yeah - good question. Still, those who can't be bothered listening to him at all need only ponder on his appointment of Matt McCarten as head office boy.

Sgt Pepper
18-03-2014, 03:26 PM
Oh yes , I know what you mean about the Labour Party, golly gosh imagine if they ever attained the treasury benches again , tax rorts for property investment could be at risk. I recall that terrible thing they did years ago, remember how they recognised the Peoples Republic of China(National vehemently opposed), and before that they established this terrible system of free public health care. Next thing you know they will want to change the flag and become a republic. Sorry , changing the flag ,oh yes my mistake,thats John Keys hobby horse, Becoming a republic.?? now let me think... John Key told the London Financial Times in 2007 that he was " a little bit republican" and now since staying at Balmoral and the prospect of a Royal Visit he is now an" enthusiatic Monarchist"!!!!. John Key is very principled,( yeah right) and as Groucho Marx said " if you dont like those principles Ive got others".

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 04:57 PM
Oh yes , I know what you mean about the Labour Party, golly gosh imagine if they ever attained the treasury benches again , tax rorts for property investment could be at risk.

You may be able to help me there. As a full time property investor for many years, I've never found these 'tax rorts' you speak of. I have suffered considerably under this govt. since they decided buildings don't depreciate, so tell me what the rorts are please. I want to up my profit.

bottlerboy
18-03-2014, 05:56 PM
Oh yes , I know what you mean about the Labour Party, golly gosh imagine if they ever attained the treasury benches again . . . . . ".

Actually your post comes across as so childlike and whiny that I find it hard to believe that you have even reached voting age yet.

elZorro
18-03-2014, 05:57 PM
FP, you know we're talking about the CGT. In the meantime, if you had to borrow money to purchase a commercial or rental property, the interest can be claimed as an expense. Plus any upkeep costs, some of which could prove to be increases in the asset value as a happy coincidence. If the property is not cashflow positive, it also defrays normal income tax. Not a great situation I know, but better than the situation many face trying to pay off their first home. All of the interest comes out of their tax-paid income. If it's not a tax rort, how do property investors appear to get ahead even though it's basically a non-productive investment for NZ INC?

Regarding the Digipoll, I reckon those results are OK since we are 6 months away from an election, the public are fickle, and the whole of the Crusher Collins incident wasn't in play when most voted.


In the DigiPoll survey in the immediate after-glow of Mr Cunliffe's election, Labour polled 37.7 per cent and had enough support parties to form a government.
But Mr Cunliffe had a halting start to the political year with controversy over baby bonus details in his state of the nation speech and publicity over donations to his leadership campaign. (EZ: guess who picked away at these tiny issues to puff them up with help from the press)
Polling began on March 6, in the midst of the fallout over his use of trusts for donations.
But it continued through last week when Mr Key condemned minister Judith Collins for her failure to declare a dinner in Beijing with her husband's business associates. (EZ: But most will have voted long before this fairly big event, saving National some votes).


Here is the detail, we're talking 750 people polled throughout NZ, margin of error +/- 3.6% and:


750 eligible voters were polled from Thursday March 6 to Sunday March 16. That was a period of major negative coverage of Cunliffe but only some of the Collins milk issue.

So the timing was very fortuitous for National. Maybe that's the whole reason for the nitpicking of Labour issues right through the polling period, they'd have known it was happening. We, the public, are being played. I'll wait and see what happens during the next digipoll period.

Sgt Pepper
18-03-2014, 06:17 PM
BB yes this middle aged, conservative, high income earning monarchist has been voting for a long,long time.

westerly
18-03-2014, 06:21 PM
That latest herald poll is a disaster for the country

Will tell billy bragg the news. Maybe he can stir the left wing to action when he tours here next week .....oops I forgot even the left have deserted labour

They polled 750 throughout NZ. It would be more relevant if the number who refused to take part was published Only the politically motivated would waste their time. As this thread shows the right to far right are far more enthused to rubbish the opposition
Labour only have to motivate their supporters to vote to romp in at the next election
Westerly

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 06:39 PM
FP, you know we're talking about the CGT. In the meantime, if you had to borrow money to purchase a commercial or rental property, the interest can be claimed as an expense. Plus any upkeep costs, some of which could prove to be increases in the asset value as a happy coincidence. If the property is not cashflow positive, it also defrays normal income tax. Not a great situation I know, but better than the situation many face trying to pay off their first home. All of the interest comes out of their tax-paid income. If it's not a tax rort, how do property investors appear to get ahead even though it's basically a non-productive investment for NZ INC?




Of course interest can be claimed as an expense, simply because that's what it is. Claiming capital costs as expenses is not allowed by IRD. I daresay some get away with it as in all forms of taxation. Of course losses are offset against other income - that is standard accounting practise throughout the world. All businesses pay tax on the accumulated result. Most professional investors, builders and other property professionals and part-time traders do pay tax on gains. You know that. As far as your point goes on profitability .....one hell of a lot of investors burn their fingers. Residential would be types often have losses exceeding income. That is very very common. commercial investors can get completely wiped out by a vacancy or tenant bankruptcy. Those who win have often worked ard and long. It isn't an easy game to play, and in spite of all the waffle, the market goes through long periods where it is a buyers market - not much help to the landlord busting to get out of the game because some tenants have just wrecked his/her property.

bottlerboy
18-03-2014, 07:05 PM
BB yes this middle aged, conservative, high income earning monarchist has been voting for a long,long time.

Well at least please do try and put up well reasoned posts - like EZ for example. While I may not agree with some of his views I always admire that he posts some well thought out reasoning to support his veiws without ever stooping to "playing the man".
If you are who you say then you will have realised long ago that no government of whatever hue is ever perfect. You can cherry pick sh*t from the last ten years all you like but we can all point to inadequacies in the Clark years - so what?
At the end of the day the majority will have their say and polling trends for some time now indicate that the majority prefer a Key led government.
They simply do not find anything apealing enough in the Labour/Greens offering to change their minds.

Sgt Pepper
18-03-2014, 07:09 PM
FP You summarise the situation well and make some veryvalid points. I guess I must confess that when I look at all the PAYE tax I pay and no offsetting (apart from income insurance) i get envious .

Sgt Pepper
18-03-2014, 07:14 PM
BB fair comment, I had just got up from working all night, must have been a tad grumpy, with sleep deprivation.

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 07:25 PM
Well at least please do try and put up well reasoned posts - like EZ for example. While I may not agree with some of his views I always admire that he posts some well thought out reasoning to support his veiws without ever stooping to "playing the man".



I take issue with that. eZ throughout numerous postings over a long period of time, has hardly ever posted any of his own thoughts. All of the posts are simply urls to left wing commentators, or tracts of their script. Almost without exception.

elZorro
18-03-2014, 08:34 PM
I take issue with that. eZ throughout numerous postings over a long period of time, has hardly ever posted any of his own thoughts. All of the posts are simply urls to left wing commentators, or tracts of their script. Almost without exception.

FP, I take great umbrage at that comment.. Numerous times I have cobbled together important graphs flogged from Stats NZ, who surely are impartial as a source :). Every so often I have a comment of my own. If I see words from proper journalists and commentators that I like, I'll certainly post them in preference, mainly to bring some lefty balance into this thread. I'd rather we were talking about real facts and not hearsay.

"I don’t want to get rid of poverty just to ensure that prosperity is maintained; I want to get rid of poverty because it is bad, it is wrong, it is immoral, it is unethical, it is un-Christian, it is unfair, and it is unjust, and it is everything that is bad. I mean involuntary poverty – where a man is told that his hands are not wanted, and that his wife and his youngsters will be deprived of the necessary things for health." Michael Joseph Savage. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Joseph_Savage)

craic
18-03-2014, 10:19 PM
So the poll has been published - the facts are in - the starters are still going in. How many of you believers from the left would be willing to place a bet, say at evens, that Labour will recover and win? And how much are you prepared to wager? I would be happy to put a grand of my money on a National-led government after the next election.

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 10:55 PM
FP You summarise the situation well and make some veryvalid points. I guess I must confess that when I look at all the PAYE tax I pay and no offsetting (apart from income insurance) i get envious .

There have been plenty of times when I have been envious of those who had 'no offsetting' as you put it. Making a loss is not good business practise.

fungus pudding
18-03-2014, 11:14 PM
FP, I take great umbrage at that comment..

"I don’t want to get rid of poverty just to ensure that prosperity is maintained; I want to get rid of poverty because it is bad, it is wrong, it is immoral, it is unethical, it is un-Christian, it is unfair, and it is unjust, and it is everything that is bad. I mean involuntary poverty – where a man is told that his hands are not wanted, and that his wife and his youngsters will be deprived of the necessary things for health." Michael Joseph Savage. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Joseph_Savage)

The time to take your great umbrage was post 3013. Too late now - opportunity missed.

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?8606-If-National-wins/page201

elZorro
19-03-2014, 07:06 PM
The time to take your great umbrage was post 3013. Too late now - opportunity missed.

http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?8606-If-National-wins/page201

I'd have thought that it was a good idea to have a look at some stats every so often, after all it's taxpayer funded. There is a reason National is a bit choosy about which of these figures it puts out as PR. There is certainly a trend towards polling and feelgood ratings, rather than cold, hard, facts and trends.

I have yet to catch up with it all, but quite a bit of interesting policy from Labour and the Greens today, to do with wood etc.

Locally, PAC, who we have looked at already, announced a $75mill joint venture with a Chinese manufacturing giant who also own SAAB, to make aircraft for private Chinese consumption. Looks good at first, but PAC only have 49% of the venture, and the end game is for the aircraft to be built in China, maybe 200 a year. The NZ factory manufactures 10 or so a year, 20 at a stretch. Now if they'd been offered the Air Force contract, they'd have been in a better position to become a large employer in NZ.

fungus pudding
19-03-2014, 07:18 PM
I'd have thought that it was a good idea to have a look at some stats every so often, after all it's taxpayer funded. There is a reason National is a bit choosy about which of these figures it puts out as PR. There is certainly a trend towards polling and feelgood ratings, rather than cold, hard, facts and trends.

I have yet to catch up with it all, but quite a bit of interesting policy from Labour and the Greens today, to do with wood etc.



For Pete's sake - that's the rubbishy 'picking winners' policy that's just plain garbage. It probably flies against the FTA (introduced by Labour) as far as exporting goes. What's more if Helen Clark hadn't stopped tree felling on the West Coast by ferals as she called them, then several mills and several furniture manufacturers would still be in business. The timber business is more than capable of looking after itself. All they need from Labour is a commitment to not interfere. And if they can't make it then they shouldn't exist.

elZorro
19-03-2014, 07:58 PM
For Pete's sake - that's the rubbishy 'picking winners' policy that's just plain garbage. It probably flies against the FTA (introduced by Labour) as far as exporting goes. What's more if Helen Clark hadn't stopped tree felling on the West Coast by ferals as she called them, then several mills and several furniture manufacturers would still be in business. The timber business is more than capable of looking after itself. All they need from Labour is a commitment to not interfere. And if they can't make it then they shouldn't exist.

FP, those views are so far right I don't think you'd cope with the ACT party :)

Russel Norman said:


"Our exports of raw logs have surged while the local sawmilling and wood manufacturing industry has lost 4,000 jobs. Under National, we’ve seen a rapid simplification of our export base. “This is not a smart way to run our economy. “Rather than sending increasing amounts of low value-added raw logs overseas, the Green Party will encourage new technologies to be developed – such as structural timber – that will add value to our wood production and create good green jobs in New Zealand.”


I know someone who supplies the sawmilling industry. It's true, small mills have been closing all over the place. Over 30 years ago, all of these pine trees were planted, and now all we seem to be able to do with a lot of that timber is to cut it, strip it down to logs, and sell it to China for processing there. It's incredible, we're very good at making that type of equipment but it doesn't employ many people. A whole hectare of timber might be worth a lousy $40,000 profit, $1300 a year was achieved from 100mtr x 100mtr of land. The market is not working, the govt needs to step in, that's what it looks like to me. Most of our forestry is overseas owned, that's part of it. They don't want to spend anything extra here.

As for your idea of using 1,000 year-old native timbers today to keep sawmills running, that seems a tad shortsighted. Even recovering rotten and dying trees can make a real mess of the trees nearby. Specialised plantations, sure. Let's use a bit of foresight for once.

westerly
19-03-2014, 08:12 PM
So the poll has been published - the facts are in - the starters are still going in. How many of you believers from the left would be willing to place a bet, say at evens, that Labour will recover and win? And how much are you prepared to wager? I would be happy to put a grand of my money on a National-led government after the next election.

Craic, You would be better off paying a grand to play John Key at golf.

westerly

craic
19-03-2014, 09:58 PM
Back in the late sixties I went from a job as a carpenter with a major local milling and building company to The NZ Forest service as a Timber Inspector. I got the job against 26 others so I knew a bit about it. I inspected milling logging and exports up and down the east coast for a few years. This idea that you can create added value and hundreds of jobs by selling already-milled timber from here is a typical Greens pipe dream. The Japanese, the Koreans and the Chinese would laugh at the idea. They buy wood from here only because the log price is competitive. They have several other major suppliers including Russia and the USA. Why would the Chinese bear the costs of say $20 per man-hour added when they can employ their own millers at a fraction of that cost? A very large part of our log exports turn into crates and packaging over there. I still keep my hand in felling trees and milling the odd one with a granberg chain-saw mill, the latest to drop was yesterday morning and each time I promise my wife that it will be the last.
As to playing John Key at Golf - what is golf?

fungus pudding
19-03-2014, 10:50 PM
FP, those views are so far right I don't think you'd cope with the ACT party :




My views are simply that Cunliffe cannot surmount the difficulties that the market has not been able to. If markets would buy timber other than logs, they would be getting exactly that. I can't be bothered going through all the points Cunliffe covered except to say he appears to have received little or no advice on these things. He's way off beam. Go and ask an architect about 4 storey wooden building and you'll soon see. as for Russell Norman wanting to develop new methods for constructing timber buildings - the mind boggles. This is all plain nuts and will contribute to the end of Cunliffe. Amen.

craic
20-03-2014, 06:35 AM
I agree with the above. In the fifties and sixties we were building vast numbers of three or four bedroom wooden bungalows to meet the demand of young families and they were very easy to build, safe and secure against weather and earthquakes and most still to fulfill their purpose. Two story houses were just as easy with heavier members in the ground level but above that number of floors, problems arose. The problem is not with the construction, it's with the collection of regulations and costs and the manner in which local bodies can screw everyone in sight who looks like erecting a humble building. I share an entrance gate with my neighbour. The watermain is in the road outside.He pays close to $3,000 to get a short pipe and an outside tap installed on the edge of his section. I cannot get a pipe in the same trench to my section for under $15,000 even though the extra cost would be a length of pipe, a tap and a meter. I must pay for the watermain to go along the road to the next neighbour even though that person is on a different system. I will continue to enjoy rainwater and not having to pay water rates. I would like to see a government with the balls to say "enough is enough" We will set up plants to build simple entry level wooden bungalows with tin roofs to be transported to sites within council areas where they will be provide with basic power sewerage and water at no installation cost to the renter/buyer. The remainder of the equation can be worked out from there.

elZorro
20-03-2014, 06:37 AM
My views are simply that Cunliffe cannot surmount the difficulties that the market has not been able to. If markets would buy timber other than logs, they would be getting exactly that. I can't be bothered going through all the points Cunliffe covered except to say he appears to have received little or no advice on these things. He's way off beam. Go and ask an architect about 4 storey wooden building and you'll soon see. as for Russell Norman wanting to develop new methods for constructing timber buildings - the mind boggles. This is all plain nuts and will contribute to the end of Cunliffe. Amen.

70% of our logs are simply exported whole to China (as Craic said, often for packing crates). Maybe we could have planted some harder timbers and waited a bit longer. But if this pine is turned into high value construction materials (steel beams are expensive too), then they'd have a place here, and importing materials like that would cost a lot of freight otherwise. Labour's policy is not expensive, it's worth a go. And the Green idea for a $1mill bonus for a tall wooden building construction is simply a stretch proposal to architects, that could work too. Why not?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/agribusiness/9846410/Call-to-cut-forestry-reliance-on-log-trade

fungus pudding
20-03-2014, 08:20 AM
70% of our logs are simply exported whole to China (as Craic said, often for packing crates). Maybe we could have planted some harder timbers and waited a bit longer. But if this pine is turned into high value construction materials (steel beams are expensive too), then they'd have a place here, and importing materials like that would cost a lot of freight otherwise. Labour's policy is not expensive, it's worth a go. And the Green idea for a $1mill bonus for a tall wooden building construction is simply a stretch proposal to architects, that could work too. Why not?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/agribusiness/9846410/Call-to-cut-forestry-reliance-on-log-trade

Yo umust have wept blood when Muldoon lost in 884.

fungus pudding
20-03-2014, 08:21 AM
70% of our logs are simply exported whole to China (as Craic said, often for packing crates). Maybe we could have planted some harder timbers and waited a bit longer. But if this pine is turned into high value construction materials (steel beams are expensive too), then they'd have a place here, and importing materials like that would cost a lot of freight otherwise. Labour's policy is not expensive, it's worth a go. And the Green idea for a $1mill bonus for a tall wooden building construction is simply a stretch proposal to architects, that could work too. Why not?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/agribusiness/9846410/Call-to-cut-forestry-reliance-on-log-trade

You must have wept blood when Muldoon lost in 84.

craic
20-03-2014, 08:23 AM
There is some confusion about timber usage and terms evident in some posts. Hardwood is defined by the cellular structure of the wood - not by its hardness. Balsa is a hardwood. Durability is not defined by the density of the wood although very hard woods usually last longer untreated than untreated softwoods. Dense hardwoods are not good for construction purposes generally because they are difficult to work with and require specialist techniques. Radiata pine, properly graded and pressure treated with a copper/chrome/ arsenate liquid will have more than adequate strength and durability But theres the rub. Grading has gone to the dogs in recent times. The strict regimes of treatment inspection has been handed back to the industry to police. A large company whom you may or may not know has made millions on "alternative" materials that have, as often as not, failed to deliver on quality,durability and the rest.

elZorro
20-03-2014, 08:52 AM
Hi Craic, have an interest in one of these special partnerships for pines, and we were not told at the outset that an imaginary line through the middle of the N.I. defines the finished hardness or denseness score of pine, the more southern timber cannot be used for beams etc, but is OK in supporting walls and other jobs. It hasn't been a great money-spinner, when the normal path is to send top quality pruned softwood logs out on a boat to China.

However the partnership is going to mill the timber here, at least some of it, for the building industry. Along with everyone else.

elZorro
20-03-2014, 09:14 AM
You must have wept blood when Muldoon lost in 84.

Muldoon had a fairly good hit rate with the Think Big projects, whatever else he did. Was that state intervention, or just smart planning by the only outfit in NZ big enough to carry out those large-scale schemes?

My main beef is that now those power schemes are long paid off, National is selling them down for a bit of pocket money, to save their own backsides and meet a tiny budget surplus target, a target they made harder by not guiding the economy properly over the last few years.

craic
20-03-2014, 09:29 AM
Forget the imaginary line - it's just that. I can mill you a plank of P.Radiata that will be denser than anything you can mill. Basically, as the tree grows outwards (not up) the distance between the rings of winter wood - the dark bits - decreases and the rings are tighter. Colder climate wood will be denser and the central North Island plateau probably grows the stuff faster but it doesn't make good firewood. About the first eight rings in the centre of a log are carroty wood and under the old grading system any wood with the pith in it was downgraded to boxing because of this. But this thread is about politics and maybe we should go back to the topic.

westerly
20-03-2014, 10:28 AM
I agree with the above. In the fifties and sixties we were building vast numbers of three or four bedroom wooden bungalows to meet the demand of young families and they were very easy to build, safe and secure against weather and earthquakes and most still to fulfill their purpose. " We will set up plants to build simple entry level wooden bungalows with tin roofs to be transported to sites within council areas where they will be provide with basic power sewerage and water at no installation cost to the renter/buyer. The remainder of the equation can be worked out from there.

You mean build State Houses? As an ex State House boy -good idea.

As to playing John Key at Golf - what is golf? Golf is what John does for money for National Sort of keeps it secret though

Westerly

craic
20-03-2014, 10:52 AM
Basically the same - larger windows and a lesser roof angle. The house I'm in is one I bought second hand and trucked here from town. It was close to 100 years old and it will still be here in another 100 years. Cost $27000 for the house $10000 for the cartage, $12000 for all the plumbing, septic tank, water tank etc. Land free - I already had it.
You mean build State Houses? As an ex State House boy -good idea.

As to playing John Key at Golf - what is golf? Golf is what John does for money for National Sort of keeps it secret though

Westerly

Major von Tempsky
20-03-2014, 04:38 PM
I didn't - in practice Muldoon was the most left wing Minister of Finance NZ has ever had since WW2 including those of Labour Governments.

Direct interventions, regulations galore, red tape, new Statutes, instructions to the Reserve Bank, personal abuse, jawboning, blackmail, he was New Zealand's financial Stalin.

That was a silly question to ask a centre/right supporter, EZ, we all rejoiced when Muldoon went and wept tears of blood when Roger Douglas went.

Au contraire, I think you would have wept tears of blood when Muldoon went!

elZorro
20-03-2014, 05:28 PM
I didn't - in practice Muldoon was the most left wing Minister of Finance NZ has ever had since WW2 including those of Labour Governments.

Direct interventions, regulations galore, red tape, new Statutes, instructions to the Reserve Bank, personal abuse, jawboning, blackmail, he was New Zealand's financial Stalin.

That was a silly question to ask a centre/right supporter, EZ, we all rejoiced when Muldoon went and wept tears of blood when Roger Douglas went.

Au contraire, I think you would have wept tears of blood when Muldoon went!

Major, it was FP who reckoned I'd have liked Muldoon. For quite a while, I did. I saw the Huntly Power Station being built, and it made a huge difference to the region. People stopped what they were doing and put 4-5 years into it, all on good pay or on good profits if they were suppliers. And then the station went on to be crucial in NZ for many years, all the time keeping the local miners busy. It did also blow a heap of Maui gas, but the country had to take that under contract anyway. We're not getting that cheap energy back anytime soon.

Anyway it sounds like you knew him quite well. He must have been hard to deal with.

Major von Tempsky
21-03-2014, 10:01 AM
Muldoon also used to return Treasury proposals and papers with handwritten comments "No! This would cause unemployment!."

I think the media and some left wingers need to revise their view of Muldoon, he was one of theirs but in the National Party just like Roger Douglas was one of ours but in the Labour Party.

iceman
21-03-2014, 10:48 AM
Muldoon also used to return Treasury proposals and papers with handwritten comments "No! This would cause unemployment!."

I think the media and some left wingers need to revise their view of Muldoon, he was one of theirs but in the National Party just like Roger Douglas was one of ours but in the Labour Party.

And Shane Jones is one of Winnie's, but in the Labour Party (still) :)

elZorro
22-03-2014, 07:49 AM
Muldoon also used to return Treasury proposals and papers with handwritten comments "No! This would cause unemployment!."

I think the media and some left wingers need to revise their view of Muldoon, he was one of theirs but in the National Party just like Roger Douglas was one of ours but in the Labour Party.

I agree with that, of course Roger Douglas threw NZ into a great experiment with globalisation, definitely a neo-liberal movement rather than something at Labour's core. Muldoon was fairly successful at keeping people employed up until then, but of course it gave Douglas an excuse to slash and burn plenty of jobs to get back to a stable govt budget. This saw rural areas in particular, undergoing massive change.

Post offices shut down, work crews on roads and railways reduced heavily (the latter policy we had to pay for dearly later). Reduced numbers working on bigger farms, as subsidies were removed. Maybe that was a necessary process, but it was a painful one for many years. Farmers are now generally price takers, with the ROI of farm ownership not being that good most years. This means they can never be huge employers if they are producing milk, even less with meat or wool. That's the flip side of globalisation. The promise of cheaper primary production, but of course the primary sector has to pay the price for that.

elZorro
23-03-2014, 03:41 PM
There has been a bit of talk in the press, and on this thread, about how tough it might be for Labour to win this election, even with help from other parties forming a coalition. They argue that Labour is not presenting a solid enough reason for a change, and that National is well funded. I agree with both of these arguments. National has plenty of powerful friends, an easy source of donations. And Labour certainly needs to get some better sound bites in, most weeks.

Maybe next week, we'll hear more about these issues, to do with Sanford's fishing business. Sanford Ltd is based in Auckland, and 37% of it is owned by the family of National Party president Peter Goodfellow. These issues have been simmering away since at least 2011, and the Goodfellow family have been a bit embarrassed by it.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/5644260/National-president-in-fishing-row

In the SST today, 200 workers on foreign vessels which have fished in NZ waters while being hired to Sanford (and another 100 from another company) are going to the Employment Court of NZ to reclaim a total of $17mill in unpaid wages.


http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/8572475/Fishing-crews-chase-17m-in-unpaid-wages

Sanford also supplies Oravida, but that's because they export both milk and fish.


http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/294687/milk-company-has-hosted-other-national-high-flyers

Further research has revealed that Sanford worked proactively from 2012 (http://www.sanfordfacts.com/sf/?p=71)to sort the FCV wages for future and previous charters. But perhaps they couldn't sort out some wages that might not have been paid on their behalf before that date, and this is what the court case is about.

There is also a lot of mention about very sizeable charitable donations from the Goodfellow family that have been made over the years, and that the family helped set up NZCDC early last century. The family has assets worth around $500m according to the rich list.

winner69
23-03-2014, 04:38 PM
Hey EZ you might enjoy this

Another broken promise. Another failed test
http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/03/19/another-broken-promise-another-failed-test/

Johns famous words ' Christchurch; this is not your test, this is New Zealand’s test. I promise we will meet this'

Poor 84-year-old Margaret McGovern said “I think they are waiting for us to die”.. Sorry dear you just have to understand that you are just a victim of Disaster Capitalism. They are waiting for you to die.

I think we need some compassion and accountability. John and his party won't be doing that, not on the agenda

iceman
23-03-2014, 10:32 PM
EZ,
FCV usage is a big issue in the fishing industry. In general I don´t agree with it but do accept there are some strong arguments for their use in catching of lower value species. But there is no room in NZ for 3rd World wages and ill treatment of crew or any people full stop.

But you have turned this serious issue into a cheap political shot at National, Sanford and the Goodfellow family.
Sanford is a well managed and profitable business that is highly regarded internationally. This is good for NZ.
Sanford employs hundreds of people in the seafood industry here in NZ and I suggest most are relatively happy employees. Their inshore fishermen are some of the most highly paid fishermen in NZ and always have been. Many of their employees are low skilled local and immigrant workers working in the fish factories. The sort of people we need more employers to employ at reasonable wages and I would have thought you supported. Yes the National Party Chairman is a major shareholder and Director. So what ?

Sealords however, which was gifted (50%) to the Maoris Fisheries Commission many years ago and the other half owned by Japanese company Nissui, has been badly managed for years and for example lost $34m last year. They have financially supported Labour through Shane Jones. I have no problems with that.

Independent Fisheries, a big financial supporter of Clayton Cosgrove, fired all their NZ factory workers and fishermen last year and now run their vessels with Ukranian crew under a NZ flag !!!!
They no longer process fish in NZ.

Why did you only mention Sanford in your tirade ?

This issue is not limited to Sanford , National or the Goodfellow family, as can be assumed from reading your highly politically charged post.Your post is simply rubbish and not based on any facts, just unsubstantiated innuendo.

The Talley´s are different to the other companies in that they do fully employ NZ crews on their vessels although I believe they do have an interest in a company using FCVs in a small way.
They are very smart operators running a very successful business. And they have amassed hundreds of millions along the way so probably bad people in your books like their former business partners, the Goodfellows !!!!

I say good on both families and NZ needs a lot more good fellows like them, not less.

elZorro
24-03-2014, 06:19 AM
Iceman, apologies from me on the poor research. As you can see at the tail end of that post (3114), I began to see the full picture after another hour or so of checking the Sanford website and other accessible sites. Sanford are now the overseers of the wages paid on FCVs working on their charters in NZ waters. The amount being claimed for historical low wages (presumably shortchanged by the vessel owners, not Sanford) is about $10m.

The Goodfellow family own about 37% of Sanford, it's a listed company but I don't follow them on the NZX so I have no particular issue with the company. The Goodfellow family have been generous benefactors of educational institutions, including providing a chapel at Waikato University. In one year alone, over $200m was gifted.

Here is a better article on the Goodfellow family, they have much to be proud of I agree.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/3919712/Douglas-Goodfellow-quiet-on-success

Cuzzie
25-03-2014, 12:48 PM
Labour Party candidate gets nod to fight for the Whangarei seat. She - he - shim should fit right in. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11225571 .
Not that I have too much against people that have not got normal sexuality, more about people who represent us that have got normal sexuality. I prefer normal. If they think radically different not only to heterosexual males & females and go against the grain of their very own makeup, I wont be supporting them to represent me. Is it OK to have that thought, or am I liable for discrimination & why is it always the Labour party that people with abnormal sexuality are attracted to?

stones
25-03-2014, 12:57 PM
Labour Party candidate gets nod to fight for the Whangarei seat. She - he - shim should fit right in. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11225571 .
Not that I have too much against people that have not got normal sexuality, more about people who represent us that have got normal sexuality. I prefer normal. If they think radically different not only to heterosexual males & females and go against the grain of their very own makeup, I wont be supporting them to represent me. Is it OK to have that thought, or am I liable for discrimination & why is it always the Labour party that people with abnormal sexuality are attracted to?

Nor me mate....and I'm sure its OK to think that way nor is it discriminatory. Unfortunately the I feel that the Labour Party have a "bent"that way.

fungus pudding
25-03-2014, 12:57 PM
Labour Party candidate gets nod to fight for the Whangarei seat. She - he - shim should fit right in. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11225571 .
Not that I have too much against people that have not got normal sexuality, more about people who represent us that have got normal sexuality. I prefer normal. If they think radically different not only to heterosexual males & females and go against the grain of their very own makeup, I wont be supporting them to represent me. Is it OK to have that thought, or am I liable for discrimination & why is it always the Labour party that people with abnormal sexuality are attracted to?

Of course it's okay to think what you do. Just remember it's discrimination as you say so don't say it out loud.

Sgt Pepper
25-03-2014, 01:39 PM
F.P. Not quite sure what the issue is regarding the linkage between an MP fullffiling their obligations and their orientation. Personally I don't care nor am I particularly interested. One of the most outstanding National MPs in the 1980's was Marliyn Waring, who was gay. Our current Attorney General Chris Finlayson, has an outstanding record as a Lawyer is apparently gay. So what?? Or is it a case of one rule for National Candidiates and another for all other parties

fungus pudding
25-03-2014, 02:07 PM
F.P. Not quite sure what the issue is regarding the linkage between an MP fullffiling their obligations and their orientation. Personally I don't care nor am I particularly interested. One of the most outstanding National MPs in the 1980's was Marliyn Waring, who was gay. Our current Attorney General Chris Finlayson, has an outstanding record as a Lawyer is apparently gay. So what?? Or is it a case of one rule for National Candidiates and another for all other parties

I was answering the question in cuzzie's post. If anyone wants to discriminate in any way about anything, that's fine. But they should keep their reasons to themselves because of a ridiculous law.

elZorro
25-03-2014, 04:56 PM
F.P. Not quite sure what the issue is regarding the linkage between an MP fullffiling their obligations and their orientation. Personally I don't care nor am I particularly interested. One of the most outstanding National MPs in the 1980's was Marliyn Waring, who was gay. Our current Attorney General Chris Finlayson, has an outstanding record as a Lawyer is apparently gay. So what?? Or is it a case of one rule for National Candidiates and another for all other parties

Sgt Pepper, yes she was amazing. Apparently when the candidate selections were being held for Waipa, she was the standout presenter, and that helped win her the nomination for the National Party. Of course, she was diplomatic about Muldoon outside parliament, but eventually she helped bring that era to an end.

Strange how that event swapped NZ from being a leftie National Govt, into a temporary right-wing/liberal Labour Govt. It's no wonder people couldn't figure out if there was any difference between the parties after that. It's more obvious now.

Major von Tempsky
26-03-2014, 03:30 PM
"One of the most outstanding National MPs in the 1980's was Marliyn Waring".
Marilyn, actually.

I think sober historians would differ.
Name me one landmark piece of legislation that has survived which she was responsible for?

fungus pudding
26-03-2014, 04:48 PM
"One of the most outstanding National MPs in the 1980's was Marliyn Waring".
Marilyn, actually.

I think sober historians would differ.
Name me one landmark piece of legislation that has survived which she was responsible for?

I'm not an historian, but I am sober and I certainly can't think of anything.

blackcap
26-03-2014, 05:11 PM
THe whole dotcom saga gets more interesting. TV 3 just said that he has a copy of Mein Kampf in his collection......

BIRMANBOY
26-03-2014, 07:25 PM
Tabloids....they misquoted/couldn't understand his accent...what he was saying was referring to his early days in the scouts...my camp photos.
THe whole dotcom saga gets more interesting. TV 3 just said that he has a copy of Mein Kampf in his collection......

iceman
26-03-2014, 08:14 PM
So Dotcom is now yet again planning to coat tail on somebody elses work (Hone Harawhira´s in this case) to get HIS people into our Parliament for his own personal purposes. This is how he has made his fortune, by freeloading of other people´s hard work (artists). His life since his teens seems to have been about bending abd breaking any rules possible and he seems to have spent a large part of his life running away and hiding from various authorities and jurisdictions.
He talks loftily about freedom, but is the first to run to the courts to gag his former employees, many of whom have been paid less than the minimum wage according to reports, if they´ve been paid at all.

To even consider putting up one list for two "parties" that have no common policies whatsoever (1 has NO policies)and intend to work separately as 2 parties in Parliament after the election, is nothing short of blatantly defrauding our very silly and already stretched MMP system.

I hope the NZ voting public sees through these antics and throws out Harawhira and ensures Dotcom doesn´t get anywhere near Parliament.
He sure as hell can´t do it on his own and is therefore thinking about the easiest way to bend the rules.

The sooner he is deported, the better for NZ.

I haven´t often found myself in agreement with Sue Bradford but on this issue she has spoken a lot of sense and shown considerable integrity. Full marks to her for staying firmly with her unquestionable conviction.

craic
26-03-2014, 09:38 PM
Mana have spoken and Humpty dumpty is not in the equation any more. He needs to be removed from the political arena and given an ultimatum - go back to Germany where you come from or on to USA where you deserve to be. You add nothing to NZ apart from some easy copy for reporters.

elZorro
27-03-2014, 06:40 AM
Fair enough Craic.

Saw this item, it looks scary: Treasury suggesting to the govt that selling off schools etc, would be one way of getting some cash in.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11226941

This is the sort of idea that started us on the NZ Experiment in 1984. Those changes, all added up, heavily modified the social fabric of NZ.

Far smarter would be the govt of the day sitting down and at least working on a plan for us to be better niche exporters. There are many ways they could help encourage that.

craic
27-03-2014, 08:13 AM
The homogenised school system here is not universal. There is room for variation and, dare I say it, commercialism, in education. My grandson who is nine has just passed the entrance exams for a couple of London schools. They charge 100 pounds just to sit the exam. For every 200 applicants fifteen will pass and of those, eight or nine will be accepted. He is nine years old and cannot start at either of the colleges 'till he is eleven. Then his parents must find the equivalent of $10,000 per term, school fees. The schools concerned are Hampton and St Pauls. I have stories of his fathers crap treatment in the NZ education system.

Sgt Pepper
27-03-2014, 12:56 PM
MVT
Well regarding Marilyn Waring I would make the following observation. She was selected as a National candidate at the age of 23 which was extraordinary, especially in the 1970s. She impressed Rob Muldoon enough to appoint her to be, at the age of 26, Chairperson of the Public Expenditure committee in 1978. They of course had a parting of the way with her declared support pf Nuclear Free Legislation in 1983, thus leading to the loss of the 1984 election. Barry Gustaffson in his history of the National Party rated her very highly.
Anyway just my opinion, a share enthusiast who also has a history degree.

elZorro
27-03-2014, 04:20 PM
MVT
Well regarding Marilyn Waring I would make the following observation. She was selected as a National candidate at the age of 23 which was extraordinary, especially in the 1970s. She impressed Rob Muldoon enough to appoint her to be, at the age of 26, Chairperson of the Public Expenditure committee in 1978. They of course had a parting of the way with her declared support pf Nuclear Free Legislation in 1983, thus leading to the loss of the 1984 election. Barry Gustaffson in his history of the National Party rated her very highly.
Anyway just my opinion, a share enthusiast who also has a history degree.

My father was at the meeting where she gained the National Party nomination. It was an eyopener apparently.

But I think MVT might know Marilyn Waring quite well. Even if all she did was to hasten the departure of Rob Muldoon, that might have been worth her stint in office. Changes came thick and fast after the next election, but NZ's economy didn't really respond for several years. It looked good, but didn't fire. p.s. I'm reading 'The NZ Experiment' at the moment..

Export receipts are up: almost all due to 26% increases in dairy products, meat and wood. So this is a measure of how far our economy has progressed in the bright future - major receipts are still from dessicated cow's milk, the flesh of farm-raised animals, and the unprocessed logs from our plantation forests.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11227781

craic
28-03-2014, 06:32 PM
I find it hard to understand why this and other topics die on fridays. Are the intelligeensia totally absorbed with the weekend? For my lot a decision to unite in NZ for Xmas is the big distraction. Chistmas. We have accommodate and amuse seven adults and three children. sixty years of marriage is cheaper but it has its challenges

elZorro
29-03-2014, 02:14 PM
I find it hard to understand why this and other topics die on fridays. Are the intelligeensia totally absorbed with the weekend? For my lot a decision to unite in NZ for Xmas is the big distraction. Chistmas. We have accommodate and amuse seven adults and three children. sixty years of marriage is cheaper but it has its challenges

Craic, guess I was busy, but I did try to get an argument going in my last post. Too obvious? :)

Sounds like you'll have a great Christmas event.

Matthew Hooten started off a great article with all the cronyism National has been involved in, and then tried to pin the same sort of activity on Labour. Not correct.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/labour-abandons-higher-ground-corporate-welfare-weekend-review-bd-153751

I think what happened was that the sawmill said they would invest $120mill in their own plant, if Labour got in and brought through the policy on timber fabrication being more widely used in buildings. So that's smart policy, designed to add value to our timber industry, and it's also opening up added value exports. It's not 'picking winners' either, something which National has done unashamedly. But National have also chopped out smaller local businesses that are not on their radar, from participating in large contracts.

For example, Novopay is an ongoing festering sore. Apparently NZ's Datacom have been asked on numerous occasions to ensure they have a backup plan in case Novopay needs to be dropped. There might be a lot of staff in education, but how many permutations in wage paypackets can there be? The programming team must be too large, they are not linking up their code properly, is all I can think would cause the ongoing errors. Surely one person could have written the main core of the program. Or they could have used Excel! A lot of the wasted millions have gone offshore on this project. And it went offshore because surely this firm knew more than NZ firms?

BlackPeter
29-03-2014, 05:48 PM
For example, Novopay is an ongoing festering sore. Apparently NZ's Datacom have been asked on numerous occasions to ensure they have a backup plan in case Novopay needs to be dropped. There might be a lot of staff in education, but how many permutations in wage paypackets can there be? The programming team must be too large, they are not linking up their code properly, is all I can think would cause the ongoing errors. Surely one person could have written the main core of the program. Or they could have used Excel! A lot of the wasted millions have gone offshore on this project. And it went offshore because surely this firm knew more than NZ firms?

Hi elZorro, I always enjoy your posts, though admittedly don't normally share your political views. However - I am wondering whether I clearly understand the message you want to give us with the NovoPay example?

First - I absolutely agree with you that Novopay has been (and probably still is) a good example for a poorly designed and implemented pay roll system.

The decision to go with such a system is clearly an embarrassment for any capable government.

However - it is my understanding that this decision (for Novopay) has been made in 2005 (not sure about the month, so it was either late in Helen's second term or early in her third). National just inherited the mess, and admittedly noticed too late what time bomb the previous government has left for them.

So the question is - are you recommending that we avoid in future to vote for the party which made the Novopay decision (Labour)? If that's what you are saying, than you have my full backing and support - where can I sign up?

The bigger problem is then to find a party worthwhile voting for - Labour is (not just economical) incompetent and National has clearly little or no regard for individual freedom, i.e. both are in my view not electable - but this is another discussion ...

fungus pudding
29-03-2014, 08:34 PM
Hi
The bigger problem is then to find a party worthwhile voting for - Labour is (not just economical) incompetent and National has clearly little or no regard for individual freedom, i.e. both are in my view not electable - but this is another discussion ...

Surely you can use your vote against the party you see as doing the most damage, even if you do not like either. It's most unlikely that any more than a handful of voters will like everything about any-one party.

BlackPeter
29-03-2014, 09:16 PM
Surely you can use your vote against the party you see as doing the most damage, even if you do not like either. It's most unlikely that any more than a handful of voters will like everything about any-one party.

Agreed. Did not say that I do not intend to vote. Just not sure yet which party "deserves" my vote, however I am sure it won't be Labour and unlikely National.

elZorro
29-03-2014, 09:33 PM
Hi elZorro, I always enjoy your posts, though admittedly don't normally share your political views. However - I am wondering whether I clearly understand the message you want to give us with the NovoPay example?

First - I absolutely agree with you that Novopay has been (and probably still is) a good example for a poorly designed and implemented pay roll system.

The decision to go with such a system is clearly an embarrassment for any capable government.

However - it is my understanding that this decision (for Novopay) has been made in 2005 (not sure about the month, so it was either late in Helen's second term or early in her third). National just inherited the mess, and admittedly noticed too late what time bomb the previous government has left for them.

So the question is - are you recommending that we avoid in future to vote for the party which made the Novopay decision (Labour)? If that's what you are saying, than you have my full backing and support - where can I sign up?

The bigger problem is then to find a party worthwhile voting for - Labour is (not just economical) incompetent and National has clearly little or no regard for individual freedom, i.e. both are in my view not electable - but this is another discussion ...

I have to partly agree with you BlackPeter. It is perhaps an inconvenient truth that


The Novopay contract was signed off in September 2008 by the previous Labour government.

So Labour approved starting the ball rolling with a new provider, Talent2. There must have been some education ministry people who decided on tender proposals. But in any case, very soon after, National was in power, and they are the ones who decided to push Novopay out a few years later, even though it was still buggy, and they had been told this by Talent2, or an external party who had checked the software. They presumably even had a chance to cancel the contract during all this time, if they were unhappy with progress. When it rolled out, there were over 140 known bugs.


One of the bugs in the system caused long or hyphenated names to appear twice in the payroll.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novopay#cite_note-20)


Here is a lot more detail, probably more accurate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novopay

But Labour's nine years in office showed that they were very good at managing the country's finances, choose any metric you like.

Budget surpluses every year (National, record deficits)
Old core govt debt paid off (National, we are now heavily back in debt)
Unemployment down to 3% (National, up to 7% or more)
Improved GDP per capita (National, lower GDP per capita)
High numbers of SMEs (Reduced under National)

I don't know why Labour ministers approved the idea of using Aussie programmers for the pay system, when it had already been dropped by at least one Australian user. I hope all politicians learnt something from that. But normally, Labour people would have backed the local software engineers and companies. National have shown all through their last two terms, that the price for goods and services means everything to them. They don't look at the big picture that often.

fungus pudding
30-03-2014, 07:22 AM
Agreed. Did not say that I do not intend to vote. Just not sure yet which party "deserves" my vote, however I am sure it won't be Labour and unlikely National.


That's sort of what I mean. Mine will almost certainly be National, mainly because I would hate to see this current Labour lot in and it looks like a National vote might be the best protection.

elZorro
30-03-2014, 08:25 AM
That's sort of what I mean. Mine will almost certainly be National, mainly because I would hate to see this current Labour lot in and it looks like a National vote might be the best protection.

So FP, you are a swinging voter? A few posts back you were voting ACT.

What is the worst that a Labour government would do to you? Best to be prepared, as I was told yesterday that a Labour coalition will win this election. OK, to be fair, he was a Labour candidate.:)

Rod Oram in the SST today: despite record high prices for our milkpowder, Fonterra has had an issue with its farmer supplier pricing, they needed to peg it back a bit, otherwise they'd have had a loss. Dairy farmers will still get a record payout this year, and it is being noticed in the provinces. Fonterra will pay a smaller dividend to shareholders, and have made about 5% profit on turnover. They have not been able to fully 'make hay' from the milkpowder prices, generated by strong Chinese demand. This is because their plants are mostly mixed use, and expect proportions of product to be taken out and used in other product lines. There's more profit in milkpowder at the moment. Fonterra will be building two more powder driers, despite saying earlier, they wanted to move into high-value areas. Chinese manufacturers appear to be capturing more of the value-add, and it's not being done in NZ.

And: NZers are still paying a lot more for retail milk than anyone in the UK, Canada, or Australia. Farmers get 55c a litre, we pay $2.08 or more a litre for branded milk. The extra profit is shared between the factories and the retailers, and is a trade secret. The govt gets 15% GST out of all of it, of course.

craic
30-03-2014, 08:35 AM
I have to partly agree with you BlackPeter. It is perhaps an inconvenient truth that

Exactly the same as it does to most people. I buy a 1kg block of tasty cheddar in the supermarket that is two dollars cheaper than the others - I don't mind the Made in Australia bit one iota. The tractor battery I purchased yesterday was on the basis of reputation and price. The chainsaw parts I purchased last week were from a new? Australian retailer who has set up shop in nz and can deliver any part at great prices within 48 hours. Why should I buy from some local trader who orders from someone else usually overseas, takes weeks to deliver and then adds his 60% markup ( EZ's original post National have shown all through their last two terms, that the price for goods and services means everything to them. They don't look at the big picture that often.) 1234567890

elZorro
30-03-2014, 08:49 AM
1234567890

Craic, you can delete a post anytime.. However I think you should be berated/horsewhipped for not buying NZ Made, on every occasion products are alongside each other in the marketplace! But I agree with you, sometimes it's hard to see value in big mark-ups, when no value has been added here.

I hope the purchase of new chainsaw parts is not going to result in another account of you being nearly squashed by falling timber.:D

BlackPeter
30-03-2014, 11:01 AM
....
But Labour's nine years in office showed that they were very good at managing the country's finances, choose any metric you like.

Budget surpluses every year (National, record deficits)
Old core govt debt paid off (National, we are now heavily back in debt)
Unemployment down to 3% (National, up to 7% or more)
Improved GDP per capita (National, lower GDP per capita)
High numbers of SMEs (Reduced under National)
....


actually - I am probably not the right person to defend National, as I said, I don't particularly like their current course (maybe somebody else wants to take over here :sneaky2:?

However, it looks like that the comparison you provided needs a bit of context: Labours most recent stunt in government happened mainly throughout the pre GFC area (and some people might even argue, that their politics contributed to creating it). It was not very difficult in a time of growing economy and huge tax incomes (not Labours fault, just the international economical conditions) to deliver low unemployment. Hiring any remaining unemployed clowns as Senior Policy Advisor for Helen's government (my apologies to all hard working clowns - no offence intended) helped further to make the stats look nice. Unfortunately taxpayers had to pay the bill for a hugely inflated and inefficient bureaucratic system.

National inherited in 2009 a hardly limping post GFC economy and had to struggle with cutting down all the wasteful systems their predecessors put in place. Agreed - they made a lot of mistakes as well and wasted e.g. lots of taxpayers money to bail out their cronies instead of letting them pay for their sometimes even criminal offences. However - no surprise that the economical KPI's of governing throughout a crisis National didn't cause look worse than Labours KPI's while they could live off the savings of the earlier National government.

I think if we look at the results in context than it is in my view at best a stalemate in economical competence between Labour 1999 to 2008 and National 2009 and 2014 (they have been different, but both not smelling like roses). What makes things worse for Labour is that they seemed to have lost (or demoted) over the last 6 years any voices of economical reason - and a Cunliff / Green / Mana / KDC government trying to screw our economy to death would really frighten me ....

fungus pudding
30-03-2014, 11:09 AM
So FP, you are a swinging voter? A few posts back you were voting ACT.


And that's still possible although I dislike their latest policies; a far cry from the original Act proposals, but I'll see how the polls look. Whatever looks like the best way of keeping Labour out is where my vote will go. Yes, I am a swinging voter. I follow policies, not parties generally. I have voted Labour more times than I have voted National.

Sgt Pepper
30-03-2014, 11:53 AM
FP I am intrigued that you would ever have voted for Labour Party ! What policy would have attracted your vote, and what do you find so unattractive now. It was interesting,a few months ago Rodney Hide was being interviewed and he made an interesting observation, as an outsider and former ACT Leader, that there was little of substance in reality between Labour and National.When I was young my father was a very hard working, small businessman, who had rental properties,etc, but was a lifelong Labour Party voter, as were most of his friends. He explained to me that the National Party was the party of entrenched interests and were unsupportive for those who had aspirations. Different era I guess FP.

stones
30-03-2014, 12:00 PM
And that's still possible although I dislike their latest policies; a far cry from the original Act proposals, but I'll see how the polls look. Whatever looks like the best way of keeping Labour out is where my vote will go. Yes, I am a swinging voter. I follow policies, not parties generally. I have voted Labour more times than I have voted National.

Well done for your philosophy re your second sentence. That Labour/Green mob must not get within a bulls roar of getting in otherwise we are doomed and scuttled.

fungus pudding
30-03-2014, 12:14 PM
FP I am intrigued that you would ever have voted for Labour Party ! What policy would have attracted your vote, and what do you find so unattractive now. It was interesting,a few months ago Rodney Hide was being interviewed and he made an interesting observation, as an outsider and former ACT Leader, that there was little of substance in reality between Labour and National.When I was young my father was a very hard working, small businessman, who had rental properties,etc, but was a lifelong Labour Party voter, as were most of his friends. He explained to me that the National Party was the party of entrenched interests and were unsupportive for those who had aspirations. Different era I guess FP.

Why I won't vote Labour now would take more space than the internet can provide. Suffice to say they scatter polices around that are designed with one thing in mind - to sound good to voters. Also I do not like or trust Cunliffe and would not like to see him as P.M. or Russell Norman as deputy; and Parker is an absolute horror story.

elZorro
30-03-2014, 12:47 PM
actually - I am probably not the right person to defend National, as I said, I don't particularly like their current course (maybe somebody else wants to take over here :sneaky2:?

However, it looks like that the comparison you provided needs a bit of context: Labours most recent stunt in government happened mainly throughout the pre GFC area (and some people might even argue, that their politics contributed to creating it). It was not very difficult in a time of growing economy and huge tax incomes (not Labours fault, just the international economical conditions) to deliver low unemployment. Hiring any remaining unemployed clowns as Senior Policy Advisor for Helen's government (my apologies to all hard working clowns - no offence intended) helped further to make the stats look nice. Unfortunately taxpayers had to pay the bill for a hugely inflated and inefficient bureaucratic system.

National inherited in 2009 a hardly limping post GFC economy and had to struggle with cutting down all the wasteful systems their predecessors put in place. Agreed - they made a lot of mistakes as well and wasted e.g. lots of taxpayers money to bail out their cronies instead of letting them pay for their sometimes even criminal offences. However - no surprise that the economical KPI's of governing throughout a crisis National didn't cause look worse than Labours KPI's while they could live off the savings of the earlier National government.

I think if we look at the results in context than it is in my view at best a stalemate in economical competence between Labour 1999 to 2008 and National 2009 and 2014 (they have been different, but both not smelling like roses). What makes things worse for Labour is that they seemed to have lost (or demoted) over the last 6 years any voices of economical reason - and a Cunliff / Green / Mana / KDC government trying to screw our economy to death would really frighten me ....

BlackPeter, the fifth Labour Government achieved quite a lot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NewZealandCabinet.jpg), and although treasury might have predicted future budget deficits in 2008, they probably weren't expecting record deficits of the kind National has 'achieved'. I think I've looked at the possible costs to the taxpayer of increased numbers in the parliamentary area, and it wasn't huge, when you compare it to the costs of those people being on the dole and not spending as much in the economy.

Of course you could employ about 10,000 people for a year for a billion, about the sort of money the National Govt paid out to SCF investors because they didn't monitor the finance sector hard enough. They didn't monitor our mines very well either, and we had Pike River. So did Labour have a 'hugely bloated and inefficient bureaucratic system' or was it of an appropriate size, after building it back from National's last terms in office, and allowing for population increases?

You cannot argue, that the Labour Govt was spending beyond its means until 2008. It paid for this extra staff, boosted tax receipts in an even-handed way, and paid off old debt. Given that the GFC was just starting, they'd have acted in a similar way to National, but left in place some of their good policies, which would have brought NZ through in better condition.

There is no reason to fear a Labour/Green coalition. Quite the opposite. I don't have an entrenched position, and I'm very keen to see if some or all of their new policies will work. They look like they will.

JBmurc
30-03-2014, 03:45 PM
I was told yesterday that a Labour coalition will win this election------

Yeah and the all blacks will lose to USA

Sgt Pepper
30-03-2014, 03:50 PM
FP

re your observation about Labour scattering policies around to sound good to voters.Your observation has merit in so far as an opposition can at times be so reactive that policy may be , or perceived to be, just a random collection of ideas. The nature of our Westminster adversarial system however means that the function of Opposition is in essence to oppose. I would argue that this criticism could equally be directed against any party who happens to be in opposition. I would cite three major historical policy examples which Labour implemented and National vigorously opposed and would value your perspective.

Labour initiated GST,

National opposed.

Labour abolished RNZAF Jet fighter force in 2002,

National opposed vehemently and significantly undertook to reestablish that capability once it regained the Treasury benches. Yet we see nothing in their defence policy indicating this undertaking.

Working For Familes:

National it could be argued,made some valid observations opposing this policy yet since attaining power and having the ability to make material changes and demonstrate adherence to principle and courage of conviction have elected to do nothing.

I think your assessment of David Parker is very unfair. He had a high profile pre his political career in Dunedin with property investment/development and helped BLIS tecnologies establish when spun off from Otago University

artemis
30-03-2014, 03:59 PM
Well done for your philosophy re your second sentence. That Labour/Green mob must not get within a bulls roar of getting in otherwise we are doomed and scuttled.

DPF at Kiwiblog has posted today a truly scary prospect:

"On current polls if there was a Labour/Green Government you’d expect Labour to have 70% of the Cabinet and Ministry and Greens 30%. If you assume a Ministry of 28, then you’d have 8 Green Party Ministers. Based on their draft list ranking they would be:

Metiria Turei
Russell Norman
Kevin Hague
Eugenie Sage
Catherine Delahunty
Gareth Hughes
Kennedy Graham
Julie Anne Genter"

fungus pudding
30-03-2014, 04:29 PM
I think your assessment of David Parker is very unfair. He had a high profile pre his political career in Dunedin with property investment/development and helped BLIS tecnologies establish when spun off from Otago University


Have you spoken to his creditors, or do you just assume that all property developers pay their bills and are successful? When you've got that one sorted out, have a look at Blis. I doubt if any of their shareholders are exactly over the moon. I don't know why you consider he has a high profile, but obviously you know little about the man.

Sgt Pepper
30-03-2014, 04:39 PM
FP
I was looking forward to your response, defence of national to GST, working for families and the promise regarding re establishing the jet fighter strike capability, come on FP throw this old dog a bone

artemis
30-03-2014, 04:57 PM
FP I was looking forward to your response, defence of national to GST, working for families and the promise regarding re establishing the jet fighter strike capability, come on FP throw this old dog a bone

I am not FP, and can't comment on GST or jets. But I'd say WfF, and also interest free student loans, would have been seen as 'dead rats' which, if not swallowed would probably have lost National the respective elections. The current government has closed some loopholes (eg income diverted to trusts to enable families to qualify for WfF), and tightened up on several aspects of student loans (eg age and number of years limits, higher repayments, chasing up overseas arrears). So, there are tradeoffs. Always are.

fungus pudding
30-03-2014, 05:45 PM
FP
I was looking forward to your response, defence of national to GST, working for families and the promise regarding re establishing the jet fighter strike capability, come on FP throw this old dog a bone

For a start, I don't know what you mean by 'defence of National to GST'.

BlackPeter
30-03-2014, 06:00 PM
BlackPeter, the fifth Labour Government achieved quite a lot (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NewZealandCabinet.jpg), and although treasury might have predicted future budget deficits in 2008, they probably weren't expecting record deficits of the kind National has 'achieved'. I think I've looked at the possible costs to the taxpayer of increased numbers in the parliamentary area, and it wasn't huge, when you compare it to the costs of those people being on the dole and not spending as much in the economy.

Of course you could employ about 10,000 people for a year for a billion, about the sort of money the National Govt paid out to SCF investors because they didn't monitor the finance sector hard enough. They didn't monitor our mines very well either, and we had Pike River. So did Labour have a 'hugely bloated and inefficient bureaucratic system' or was it of an appropriate size, after building it back from National's last terms in office, and allowing for population increases?

You cannot argue, that the Labour Govt was spending beyond its means until 2008. It paid for this extra staff, boosted tax receipts in an even-handed way, and paid off old debt. Given that the GFC was just starting, they'd have acted in a similar way to National, but left in place some of their good policies, which would have brought NZ through in better condition.

There is no reason to fear a Labour/Green coalition. Quite the opposite. I don't have an entrenched position, and I'm very keen to see if some or all of their new policies will work. They look like they will.

Hi elZorro, happy to acknowledge that not everything the last Labour government did was wasteful. Yes, Kiwisaver, the Super Fund and Kiwibank have been good ideas ...

What your graph shows is only that governments of all colours reduced debt prior to the GFC (until 2008) and increased it afterwards to fight a real economic crisis coming up - nothing to do with Labour / National.

However - lets not dwell too much on the past.

You said that you see some Labour / Green policies which you think could work - and I was just wondering whether I missed their announcement in the news? Of substantial Labour / Green policies do I remember so far Cunliff's baby money lolly scramble which will obviously increase our tax burden and simultaneously reduce the employability for women in child bearing age - and I remember the Green idea of subsidizing solar panels to ensure we increase the mining boom in China (you need lots of rare earths to manufacture solar panels), increase our CO2 foot print (you need more energy to manufacture solar panels than you get back from them during their life time) and reduce our economic well being (power from solar panels is highly incompetitive with other energy sources - and you normally have the power when you don't need it ....).

If you remember any other new Labour / Green policies (other than increasing the tax burden, inflating bureaucracy and stop the industry in their tracks), than I would be interested to hear about them and discuss ...

elZorro
30-03-2014, 07:10 PM
Hi elZorro, happy to acknowledge that not everything the last Labour government did was wasteful. Yes, Kiwisaver, the Super Fund and Kiwibank have been good ideas ...

What your graph shows is only that governments of all colours reduced debt prior to the GFC (until 2008) and increased it afterwards to fight a real economic crisis coming up - nothing to do with Labour / National.

However - lets not dwell too much on the past.

You said that you see some Labour / Green policies which you think could work - and I was just wondering whether I missed their announcement in the news? Of substantial Labour / Green policies do I remember so far Cunliff's baby money lolly scramble which will obviously increase our tax burden and simultaneously reduce the employability for women in child bearing age - and I remember the Green idea of subsidizing solar panels to ensure we increase the mining boom in China (you need lots of rare earths to manufacture solar panels), increase our CO2 foot print (you need more energy to manufacture solar panels than you get back from them during their life time) and reduce our economic well being (power from solar panels is highly incompetitive with other energy sources - and you normally have the power when you don't need it ....).

If you remember any other new Labour / Green policies (other than increasing the tax burden, inflating bureaucracy and stop the industry in their tracks), than I would be interested to hear about them and discuss ...

BlackPeter: the govt funding for those having babies is just an extension of an existing policy, and is a move towards more equality. We also need more workers to fund the rising superannuitants, so it's thinking ahead. Solar panels can be a good idea, I'm not sure why they're not talking about water heating systems too, but distributed PV solar is OK anytime of the day if it feeds the grid, even better if it's used on household applicances scheduled to run in daylight hours, like washing machines. Solar panels have never been cheaper, 70c a watt, check out new figures, I think it would pay off the materials Ok in the 25-30 yr lifetime, with cost inflation included. And if you're isolated from the grid by 1000 metres or so, it'll pay off easily.

Other policies - 10,000 homes a year, how many will that employ immediately, what will that do for the economy? And the private sector would never do it, not at the cheap end of the market. This can only be done by govt working with the private sector.
R&D Tax credits, little mentioned, but this should be huge for SMEs in the manufacturing and export sector.

Sgt Pepper
30-03-2014, 07:22 PM
FP
dont be so grumpy you know what I mean, National opposed GST, opposed WFF, and Bill English as Leader of the Opposition in 2002 indicated that a future National Government would restore Jet Fighter capability. My point is that this is what Oppositions do so it seems unfair labeling Labour Greems as constantly negative when National had no hesitation about indulging as well .
My point about the Skyhawks is that I, and many others, including an airforce NCO I met on a flight to Wellington last year actually believed as a matter of principle they would be true to their word, and that it was not politicing. Another example was tax deductions for medical insurance for over 6os which at a candidates meeting in 2008 the National man indicated would be implemented I am still waiting,

fungus pudding
30-03-2014, 08:32 PM
FP
dont be so grumpy you know what I mean, National opposed GST, opposed WWF, and Bill English as Leader of the Opposition in 2002 indicated that a future National Government would restore Jet Fighter capability. My point is that this is what Oppositions do so it seems unfair labeling Labour Greems as constantly negative when National had no hesitation about indulging as well .
My point about the Skyhawks is that I, and many others, including an airforce NCO I met on a flight to Wellington last year actually believed as a matter of principle they would be true to their word, and that it was not politicing. Another example was tax deductions for medical insurance for over 6os which at a candidates meeting in 2008 the National man indicated would be implemented I am still waiting,

Now I know what you mean. It was your grammar, not my grumpiness! Yes, Bolger had some dopey X-tax scheme as an alternative to GST. But GST, particularly the no exemption scheme NZ has, is the best tax scheme in the world - the envy of many countries with complex versions. Consumption taxes are better than income taxes. Never punish anyone for earning - but hit them a little for spending seems sensible to me. All power to Labour for that one, and so much of what they achieved from 84 till Lange lost his marbles. But what have previous parties got to do with it? Labour have had good times and bad, and so have National. I'm not here to defend previous National or Labour govts. Obviously things like WFF once in are almost impossible to get rid of, although a complete re-arrangement of WFF an d the tax system would be desirable, probably to both parties, but political suicide. The one thing I will say is the gutsiest govt. in my lifetime was Labour 84 to 90, and they achieved a great deal. NZ was a dreary, dull place before 1984. The most economic inept govt. was National from 75 to 84 under Muldoon. One thing that sticks in my mind was the damage and waste of opportunity his income tax rate of 66% brought about. I paid it realising it was unlikely to last, but most of my colleagues went into ludicrous schemes to avoid it. Current Labour politicians ignore those lessons. As far as Labour/Greens negativity goes - there's a difference between opposing policies and genuinely negative people. Norman is a negative person - can't decide what Cunliffe is, but Labour do have their share of negative people, and on that point the most negative and depressed man in the country by a mile, Rod Oram, is a Labour man. The most negative woman, Pam Corkery, is also a Labour supporter. Think long and hard about why these two, and others of their ilk, seem to align with the current Labour lot. If Labour knew the answer they'd rocket up in the polls, but they don't - so they won't.

Sgt Pepper
30-03-2014, 08:54 PM
FP
Rod Oram?? a leftie??? he was a journalist for the London Financial Times, hardly a breeding ground for unreconstructed Marxists in my opinion. Seems an enthusiast for the freemarket system when I have listened to him and read his articles. His wife is an economist as well.
But in the best traditions of 1950s McCarthyist paranoia, you never know, could all be just a facade

GTM 3442
30-03-2014, 09:19 PM
I think that there's an enormous groundswell of dissatisfaction and general "pissed-offedness" in present-day New Zealand, which Norman Kirk or David Lange would have had no trouble at all translating into votes.

I had thought that the 2014 election would be a fairly sure thing for Labour, but now I rather think that we're back to it being National's to lose this time round - Labour sure aren't going to win it.

winner69
31-03-2014, 05:36 AM
I think that there's an enormous groundswell of dissatisfaction and general "pissed-offedness" in present-day New Zealand, which Norman Kirk or David Lange would have had no trouble at all translating into votes.

I had thought that the 2014 election would be a fairly sure thing for Labour, but now I rather think that we're back to it being National's to lose this time round - Labour sure aren't going to win it.

Right on there gtm

Labour/ Cunliffe has no narrative or story which says vote for us. Maybe because they are actually pretty much aligned with National anyway which would make a winning narrative rather hypocritical anyway.

Unfortunately for NZ the Greens are in the same boat. They are losing their chance to be the second party in NZ

elZorro
31-03-2014, 06:44 AM
Maybe Labour and the Greens are keeping their best policies and press releases until closer to the election day. At least the Greens and NZ First gained some percentage points in the latest poll. Both are more natural coalition parties for Labour.

There is also a general feeling that the income gap in NZ is widening.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11229270

If this was not the case, there would be more NZers owning their own homes, but there are less. Increasingly, the housing stock is being held by fewer people. The done thing appears to be to own about 10 houses, or a few blocks of flats. I still find it hard to understand why some of these urban properties are built new, to be used as rentals. If it's cheaper that way, than buying an existing house, why can't young couples afford to do this easily in NZ?

winner69
31-03-2014, 07:18 AM
But EZ what are those policies and press releases gong to be based on .....all supporting a good narrative? No because Labour don't have that story so any policies are all going to be reactive and a real hotch pot. The narrative has to be out there now.

Kirk and Lange had those stories and they won

in the UK the Conservative ruled from 1951-64, a period when Harold Macmillan said the people had ‘never had it so good’. But Labour’s Harold Wilson was able to convince the nation that the Tories were decrepit, and what Britain needed was the ‘white heat of the technological revolution’. What a narrative and they swept to power.

In the 90's Tony Blair swept to power with the Conservatives mired in allegations of sleaze and corruption, the stuff that became the narrative at that time

So what is NZ Labours narrative of today ....the compelling consistent story that will win an election? The answer they don't have one - mainly because they essentially sharing the same views as the Nats.

This may be The last election where Labour are even considered as a serious contender

BlackPeter
31-03-2014, 08:23 AM
the govt funding for those having babies is just an extension of an existing policy, and is a move towards more equality. We also need more workers to fund the rising superannuitants, so it's thinking ahead.
And I thought it is Cunliff's big hit - given the noise with which he announced it? So you mean there is worse to come, do you? Increasing equality - maybe, but whether this is a good thing, I don't know. Look at Russia or North Korea - 2 states who worked for generations to increase equality - would you want to live there?" I certainly would not!

And if Labour wants to seriously increase the number of young people (to have more future workers), than they should look at making it easier for families to raise children, not just pay a bribe for the first (still quite cheap) 1 to 3 years and than let the families struggle on for the next 15 to 20 years without further support. Just another semi cooked Labour policy!


Solar panels can be a good idea, I'm not sure why they're not talking about water heating systems too, but distributed PV solar is OK anytime of the day if it feeds the grid, even better if it's used on household applicances scheduled to run in daylight hours, like washing machines. Solar panels have never been cheaper, 70c a watt, check out new figures, I think it would pay off the materials Ok in the 25-30 yr lifetime, with cost inflation included. And if you're isolated from the grid by 1000 metres or so, it'll pay off easily.

If you really want to dig into this subject - there is already plenty of material on the web. Of course - if you are off the grid, than solar panels can be for the individual (not necessarily the ecology) an economical sensible option, but I haven't yet seen any holistic business case (neither economical nor ecological) for feeding the power from solar cells back into the grid. BTW - it looks like even the Greens started to realise what nonsense they were proposing - they just changed their proposal to put instead a windmill on every roof:

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/greens-latest-fiddle-windmills-roofs

Maybe somebody can tell them that their own clientele will complain about the noise - please build all these windmills, but please not in our green and quiet neighbourhood ... as well - did they look at the NWF shares - windmills appear to be really economical:t_down:



Other policies - 10,000 homes a year, how many will that employ immediately, what will that do for the economy? And the private sector would never do it, not at the cheap end of the market. This can only be done by govt working with the private sector.

Isn't this a Mana policy? And what's the policy anyway? Just promising to spend more money they have not got in order to satisfy the needs of their specific clientele is not really a policy - its just another election bribe ...

Sorry elZorro - but I am still not sure what workable and sensible Labour policies you are referring to ...

winner69
31-03-2014, 06:18 PM
I thought Labour must have a narrative, the short story why vote for us to lead you in government

So had a look at their website, never done that before and unlikely to do that again.

There is a Page showing Labour's Principle and also a mind boggling 64 page document titled N Z LABOUR PARTY POLICY PLATFORM

But no narrative

Skimming through the documents it does appear as if they are words only .....some of the things Cunliffe et al say do seem at odds with those words.

They are doomed ...unless Matt can sort them out pronto

elZorro
31-03-2014, 07:21 PM
I thought Labour must have a narrative, the short story why vote for us to lead you in government

So had a look at their website, never done that before and unlikely to do that again.

There is a Page showing Labour's Principle and also a mind boggling 64 page document titled N Z LABOUR PARTY POLICY PLATFORM

But no narrative

Skimming through the documents it does appear as if they are words only .....some of the things Cunliffe et al say do seem at odds with those words.

They are doomed ...unless Matt can sort them out pronto

W69, maybe there is no short snappy narrative yet, but they'll have one, or be working on one. Did you get as far as finding this page on KiwiBuild, it makes perfect sense to me. There are over 4,000 builders in NZ who only build one house a year. They are not going to build a cheap home, and they are also not going to be efficient. A completely different process is required for the 10,000 house target, one that has to involve government.

https://www.labour.org.nz/media/speech-prefabrication-new-zealand-conference

winner69
31-03-2014, 08:09 PM
W69, maybe there is no short snappy narrative yet, but they'll have one, or be working on one. Did you get as far as finding this page on KiwiBuild, it makes perfect sense to me. There are over 4,000 builders in NZ who only build one house a year. They are not going to build a cheap home, and they are also not going to be efficient. A completely different process is required for the 10,000 house target, one that has to involve government.

https://www.labour.org.nz/media/speech-prefabrication-new-zealand-conference

OMG - el zorro, are we heading back to the god old days

Social disaster
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ONEYGU_7EqU

elZorro
31-03-2014, 08:25 PM
OMG - el zorro, are we heading back to the good old days

Social disaster
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ONEYGU_7EqU

They all look the same already, it's just they cost too much. New houses are so big for the section size, there's hardly enough room for a clothes line in the yard. Seems like it anyway. I would assume there would be lots of different plans and options, the main feature being a scale in purchasing of fittings, and in prefabricated components. I don't live in one of these newer suburbs, I'm just not a fan of having so little space, and up until recently, I distrusted the new housing materials, for good reason. Some of the houses would be apartments or taller structures, or would be infill housing, so I'd expect we wouldn't see state housing clusters, not in the older style anyway. I'm sure we've moved on from that.

elZorro
01-04-2014, 06:16 AM
At last, some signs of reason when offering contracts for large NZ projects. In this case, a big job of 1300 tonne of structural steel for a roadway viaduct at Karapiro. I saw this in today's Waikato Times, but in fact the press release was put out on 25th March.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1403/S00881/napier-firm-wins-waikato-expressway-steel-bridge-contract.htm

A state tender that will keep manufacturing here, will see an extra $800,000 in taxes paid, and in addition will be using known quality steel. Well done to Eastbridge, for most likely setting out all the additional costs and risks if the work had gone offshore, in their tender document.

Thinking about it though, it is election year. National won't want to give the opposition much to go on, either.

David Cunliffe was just on TV1, and made mention of the hypocrisy of John Key attacking him over a very small trust he set up within the rules and outside the electoral process, when National has trusts that are top secret, and into which millions of dollars have purportedly been paid.

Scramble as the rules changed in 2008. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/latest-edition/249774/Nats-call-in-secret-donations)


So far Labour has limited itself to an attack by front bencher Chris Hipkins, who said earlier today: "John Key can’t claim that people donating to the campaigns of Labour leadership contenders somehow have a secret agenda but duck for cover when it comes to revealing those donating thousands of dollars to the National Party, Labour MP Chris Hipkins says.
“It’s utter hypocrisy for John Key to try to establish a new level of transparency for donations to Labour and then resort to technicalities when questioned about donations he has assisted the National Party in soliciting.
“He is being tricky. The same standards must apply to National.
“For decades the National Party has raked in millions of dollars in anonymous donations using trusts to hide the true identity of donors. It’s a bit rich for them to start throwing around accusations about secret agendas now."

Major von Tempsky
01-04-2014, 06:59 AM
But is it, or should it be "outside the electoral process" when the money was political and for electioneering?
It's very much parallel to Banks trying to pretend he didn't know where the money came from.

It's a huge question mark over the integrity and character of Cunliffe.

Cuzzie
01-04-2014, 08:09 AM
They are doomed ...unless Matt can sort them out pronto
Your right winner they are doomed. Here's how Matt is sorting out Dave. I call it controlling a control freak/

Memo to: David Cunliffe, Leader of the Opposition

From: Matt McCarten, Chief of Staff

From now on you do nothing, say nothing, think nothing. Not until you run it past me. Better yet, just do, say and think what I tell you. That saves time and minimises risk.

What part of your political brain thought it a good idea to run donations through a secret trust?

No. Forget I even asked. I don't want to know.

Secret trusts? Anonymous donations? Big business? US bagman? That's how we attack Tories. Now they are attacking us. Just be thankful they suck at it. Imagine if Trevor Mallard, the duck, was doing you over.

Did you not notice passing laws stopping this carry-on? We made it so political parties can't hide donors behind trusts. We changed Standing Orders so MPs must declare gifts and donations. You were in Cabinet. It was a Big Deal.

Oh, I know our law never contemplated a leadership primary but the spirit is clear. That's what you broke. National can hit you with this from now until the election.

You look sleazy. You look tricky. You look like a hypocrite.

From now on tell me everything. And I mean everything. I need full disclosure. I can't operate if I am learning what you have done through the Tory press. By then it's too late. That's Politics 101.

You were right to 'fess up. But you should have spilled the lot. You let them drag it out of you bit by bit. That kept the story alive. And you should have blamed your campaign manager. Greg Presland would understand. I would have thrown him under the bus. And kept you clear.

We must name the two unnamed donors. We can't allow your enemies both inside and outside to start speculating on them. That could be bad. Very bad. It doesn't matter that you are giving their money back. You took it last year when you didn't think you would be caught. Handing it back now makes it look too dodgy. Who are they? They are not dodgy, are they?

Don't worry. I will handle them. That's my job.

I told you I can look past the Harvard education, the flash house in Herne Bay and the undisclosed investment trust.

I can work with that. But I can't work with incompetence. Or amateurs. You must be the real deal. That's why you must do, say and think as I tell you. I will make you be your true self. A man of the people.

You might think I'm harsh. This is nothing. Just watch when I find the traitorous twerp who leaked this. I will be showing them harsh. Let's both hope it's The Duck.

Your comrade,
Matt

From the NZ Herald: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11216531

artemis
01-04-2014, 08:31 AM
........................There is also a general feeling that the income gap in NZ is widening.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11229270

If this was not the case, there would be more NZers owning their own homes, but there are less. Increasingly, the housing stock is being held by fewer people. The done thing appears to be to own about 10 houses, or a few blocks of flats. I still find it hard to understand why some of these urban properties are built new, to be used as rentals. If it's cheaper that way, than buying an existing house, why can't young couples afford to do this easily in NZ?

The numbers do not take into account the number of NZ family and other trusts, which could be up to 500,000 according to Martin Hawes. Many rentals in family trusts, or owned by individuals, are rented to family members who will probably inherit them eventually. Significant advantage for the owners (expenses are deductible), and for the 'tenants' who have a stable home and probably pay less than average rent.

The 'done thing' is to own 10 houses or a few blocks of flats. Doubt it - where did you get those figures from. The Propertytalk site did a survey a couple of years back and most respondents had less than 5 rentals. The members on that site are mainly property investors.

elZorro
01-04-2014, 08:41 AM
But is it, or should it be "outside the electoral process" when the money was political and for electioneering?
It's very much parallel to Banks trying to pretend he didn't know where the money came from.

It's a huge question mark over the integrity and character of Cunliffe.

John Key pretended he didn't know where the Antoine's money came from, when he was there giving them a dinner talk, and was probably bailed up by some of them, telling him what direction to take the party. In just one evening, National took in eight times more money than David Cunliffe ever had in that trust account. His trust account was helping fund an internal bid for the Labour Party leadership, it was not electioneering. It was also within the rules, well within.

I have a feeling you'd know some of the people and businesses who have put substantial funds into anonymous National Party trusts over the years, MVT. Who's being tricky now?

artemis
01-04-2014, 09:21 AM
....................... If this was not the case, there would be more NZers owning their own homes, but there are less. Increasingly, the housing stock is being held by fewer people. The done thing appears to be to own about 10 houses, or a few blocks of flats. I still find it hard to understand why some of these urban properties are built new, to be used as rentals. If it's cheaper that way, than buying an existing house, why can't young couples afford to do this easily in NZ?

And following on from my earlier post, here are some numbers from the 2006 census. So - not the done thing then?

"Of those households that owned investment property, Scobie et al found around 50% owned two investment properties and around a third own one property."

http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/dpmc/publications/hpr-report/hpr-4

elZorro
01-04-2014, 12:21 PM
And following on from my earlier post, here are some numbers from the 2006 census. So - not the done thing then?

"Of those households that owned investment property, Scobie et al found around 50% owned two investment properties and around a third own one property."

http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/dpmc/publications/hpr-report/hpr-4

Fair enough Artemis, I didn't have any real figures to work on, so I was using hearsay. In the 10 years between 1996 and 2006, another 100,000 houses became rentals. It's uncertain what has happened since then, from the link you posted. In 2006, 366,000 dwellings were rented out, about 33.1% of the stock. Sure, a lot of people got into renting in the last few years, and they only own one or two properties by and large. Of the three people I know in that position of owning one extra property, one sold a long time ago and it was a bad investment, one sold fairly quickly to buy a bach instead, and one is considering selling as a retirement plan, and over the long term it was OK.

But I know two others who do have multiple properties, of the order of 10 or more each. They have been doing this for quite a while, so will have capital gains locked in. In one case, low maintenance properties and flats are bought, and in the other new houses are built to suit renting. These are not trusts for family use, they are rented out in the market. So while the numbers of landlords in this category might be smaller, they will hold significant housing stocks.

Those holding just one or two properties might be more transient, as they have changing needs for the capital, and/or find it's not as easy as they thought. For some, it's as basic as not being able to sell their first house, but being keen on another one. So they rent one out for a while.

The trend has been for more houses to be rented, as a proportion, that's correct.

elZorro
01-04-2014, 02:31 PM
The internet is awash with such ... Its slowly becoming a mountain of dodgy doggy doo-doos!

Yes, quite right, although your post is tardy Belgarian, where have you been the last few days, surely in the leadup to an election you need to be proactive?

I have done some more research for FP, because he enjoys it..

More houses moving into the rental pool by 2013.

(http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/fms/Colleges/College%20of%20Business/School%20of%20Economics%20&%20Finance/research-outputs/mureau/nz-residential-rental/NZRRMDec2013.pdf?F5F1F02ECDD775E811DD2290862DBAEA)

iceman
01-04-2014, 02:37 PM
This could be significant !
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9891929/Clergy-switch-from-Labour-to-National

Sgt Pepper
01-04-2014, 03:13 PM
Iceman
yes it could be significant. Labour has traditionally engaged better than National with the Pacifica Community but that could well be changing It may well have consequences for Labour in the medium political term. But political popularity cycles are just that. Regardless there is a high probability that we will have a National lead government after September, as there does not seem to be a desire for change that I can detect. Notwithtstanding this the biggest threat to National in their third term will come from their traditional support base the " married and mortgaged" who are going to be increasingly stressed and grumpy with mortgage increases. For me a 10% mortgage rate is normal, I took my first mortgage in 1981, but we now have a whole cohort of borrowers who have only experienced, and budgeted for, 5-7% rates. I am not blaming the government its just that human nature, being what it is they will direct their anger at someone. Of more concern are young , indebted dairy farmers, who would be extremely challenged if confronting a double whammy of interest rate spikes and any cyclical decrease in milk powder prices, the consequences for the dairy industry could be dire indeed, lets hope the benign times continue on that front

iceman
01-04-2014, 04:50 PM
Alas elZ, as per the opening post on this thread I'm looking at moving overseas, taking my assets and experience with me, and leaving kiwis in the hands of a very mediocre National government. If kiwis don't vote then there's no stopping them getting fleeced by the rich!

National must be doing OK for you Belgie since you're still only thinking/talking about it 3 years later :)

fungus pudding
01-04-2014, 05:30 PM
Alas elZ, as per the opening post on this thread I'm looking at moving overseas, taking my assets and experience with me, and leaving kiwis in the hands of a very mediocre National government. If kiwis don't vote then there's no stopping them getting fleeced by the rich!

So you want to go somewhere where the less capable are rewarded equally along with the successful enterprising productive types. Why not just raise your skills or work harder?

Sgt Pepper
01-04-2014, 06:02 PM
Moving to another country? I have always thought a good little business would be providing information to NZers regarding dual citizenship, many people are entitled but are unaware.

elZorro
01-04-2014, 07:08 PM
Alas elZ, as per the opening post on this thread I'm looking at moving overseas, taking my assets and experience with me, and leaving kiwis in the hands of a very mediocre National government. If kiwis don't vote then there's no stopping them getting fleeced by the rich!

OK, but it sounded like you had an interesting job in IT. Everyone says that's where the jobs are in NZ these days.. and I guess you can get an overseas trip in now and then.

What do you think Labour's chances are?

elZorro
02-04-2014, 06:53 AM
The IMF put out a report on NZ recently. It suggested we watch out for spiralling house prices, and that if we have a windfall in the govt finances, it should be used to pay down debt.

Labour did that (in the face of National hounding them about it), but in stark contrast National have been unable to do anything more than borrow to keep things going. They are still borrowing like there is no tomorrow.


T Hollis wrote a good comment in interest.co.nz:


Bill talks about the positives. But he dosn't mention that the IMF says:


the dollar is overvalued
houses are overvalued
we have a big overseas debt ie "relatively high net external liabilities".
the house price spiral is in danger of getting going again
current account deficit is a problem


"Current account. New Zealand’s persistent current account deficits and relatively high net external liabilities reflect structural saving-investment imbalances...Reducing pressure on the exchange rate and limiting the current account deficit in a lasting way will require structural measures to address the savings-investment gap, rather than being the task of short-term macroeconomic management."
The chronic current account deficit means we owe a huge amount overseas. The wholesale sell off of NZ by this governemnt means that more and more profits go offshore. This means that even when we have a good year, we have a bad year due to our owners sending money offshore.


Cuzzie, I know Labour had a high current account deficit when they were in office. But after the GFC, this pulled back a lot, but it's now sharply on the increase. It seems to be one macroeconomic factor that governments aren't keen on trying to keep under control. Because it involves telling voters to stop spending so much, and to start saving instead.

But we have another problem that is getting worse, we're selling off our profitable stuff, and not building NZ-owned powerhouse industries and businesses to replace them. Not at the required rate anyway. This is a prime area where the govt needs to use some of the levers of power. National have done very little, that I can think of, to directly stimulate industry. They have helped to disincentivise the manufacturing and even the IT sector though, through their buying decisions over the last few years.

slimwin
02-04-2014, 09:26 AM
Labour have not said they will pay down debt now. Quite the opposite. Everything they have come out with for this election so far involves borrowing more money.

elZorro
02-04-2014, 10:08 AM
Labour have not said they will pay down debt now. Quite the opposite. Everything they have come out with for this election so far involves borrowing more money.

Slimwin, that might be the case in the short term. My argument is that if Labour had been in during the GFC, we'd have seen a quicker return to a budget surplus, for lots of reasons. More dividends from the electricity sector. More tax from the already well-off. More tax from increased numbers employed. Less costs on the dole queue. More true investment in NZ businesses through R&D tax credit incentives, etc.. By now the KiwiBuild housing project would have been started.

National has not given NZ businesses the direction they so sorely needed, post the GFC. Up until recently, the message was 'hunker down, wait it out'. Now it's election year, and suddenly we have a rock-star economy. I don't believe that to be the case, the overall trend figures don't support it, the market has simply bumbled along in its ad-hoc way, and the government has been largely directionless.

iceman
02-04-2014, 10:34 AM
My argument is that if Labour had been in during the GFC, we'd have seen a quicker return to a budget surplus, for lots of reasons. More dividends from the electricity sector.

Are you saying if we'd had Labour in Government over the last 2 terms, electricity prices would have risen much more, like they did during Clark's 9 years, to allow the generators to pay more dividends for Labour to fund their projects ?
How else would they've received more dividends, bearing in mind that the generators were in 100% Government ownership during the GFC, which we are now out of quicker than most countries !!

Sgt Pepper
02-04-2014, 12:28 PM
iceman
Difficult to determine how history will judge the selling of assets since 1986 inclusive of the latest round. One challenge for the next National government will be how to address the expectations of its more economically purist supporters who I guess are numerous, wealthy and influential.One scenario is as follows:
One wing of the National party will be lobbying hard to bed in further changes as the expectation to be mindful of reelection in 2017 will be lower as under MMP or even first past the post 4 terms is virtually impossible, John Key will be considering exiting politics, and political ambitions within the National party to replace him will be significant . Renconciling these will be challenging to say the least

Harvey Specter
02-04-2014, 12:39 PM
I see Cunliffe making more sh!t up - this time blaming National for not leading the Whaling court case even though it was Clark how decided not too. Luckily National decided to help out the Ozzies.

Can we believe anything that comes out of his mouth.

fungus pudding
02-04-2014, 01:06 PM
iceman
Difficult to determine how history will judge the selling of assets since 1986 inclusive of the latest round. One challenge for the next National government will be how to address the expectations of its more economically purist supporters who I guess are numerous, wealthy and influential.One scenario is as follows:
One wing of the National party will be lobbying hard to bed in further changes as the expectation to be mindful of reelection in 2017 will be lower as under MMP or even first past the post 4 terms is virtually impossible, John Key will be considering exiting politics, and political ambitions within the National party to replace him will be significant . Renconciling these will be challenging to say the least

I've got a feeling National may be in for a fourth term or more. Labour are weak and the Greens are picking up their losses, and gaining some support which Labour may never regain. Unless something changes drastically Labour will be seen as Labour/Green and they will not be able to campaign on believable and definite policies. Coalition with a minor partner is difficult enough, but with a strong partner they have little hope of making progress. Voters will see that - they are already.

Sgt Pepper
02-04-2014, 01:51 PM
FP
I am not sure , don't forget many were writing Nationals obituary after the 2002 election with only 21% of the vote

slimwin
02-04-2014, 02:01 PM
Half heard a report on the radio saying Labour in it's last 5 years in office added @ 2.5 billion in new spending( per year?). National has addeded @ 250 mil. So who borrowed all that cash to put us in a hole? lets not left the hole left in ACC as a welcome present to the new govt from l\the last labour govt.

Labour + green = economice sabotage/suicide.

slimwin
02-04-2014, 02:06 PM
Half heard a report on the radio saying Labour in it's last 5 years in office added @ 2.5 billion in new spending( per year?). National has addeded @ 250 mil. So who borrowed all that cash to put us in a hole? Lets not forget the hole left in ACC as a welcome present to the new govt from the last labour govt.

Labour + green = economice sabotage/suicide.

iceman
02-04-2014, 02:14 PM
Half heard a report on the radio saying Labour in it's last 5 years in office added @ 2.5 billion in new spending( per year?). National has addeded @ 250 mil. So who borrowed all that cash to put us in a hole? lets not left the hole left in ACC as a welcome present to the new govt from l\the last labour govt.

Labour + green = economice sabotage/suicide.

Yes correct and it was new operational spending per year. In the last 5 desperate years of Clark/Cullen, Government overall spending went up 50% in dollar terms, to reach just under 35% of GDP. This has since dropped to or just below 30%.