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

Cuzzie
27-06-2014, 08:15 AM
Here's your chance, National Party voters, to bask in the glory of your leader, by purchasing his new biography. Carefully timed to affect the election, but as this Trademe listing shows, not all of us believe everything we read about the National Party and its MPs. Great questions on this listing.
I think I'll wait for D.C's real life soap opera biography to come out - that will be more juicy and entertaining. John Key's biography will just be to boring because of the lack of drama. Colourful characters with long noses make for better reading don't you think EZ .... belg? Helens books sold well.

fungus pudding
27-06-2014, 08:30 AM
Their total tax is still very low. If you consider that they receive more 'tax credits' than they pay in tax, GST is therefore the only major tax they pay (I wont count vice taxes like alcohol and tabacco, though you could argue fuel tax should be included too). So even if they spend their entire income, their 'tax rate is still only a max of 15%, less the tax credits they get on their income. .




Very few will pay 15% on the total, as most will pay a reasonable amount in mortgage interest or rent, both exempt.
So if they pay 50% in interest and spend the rest it totals only 7.5%.

craic
27-06-2014, 08:36 AM
Sorry but the next big drama will be the efforts of the left to try and convince the public that they can manufacture a government out of their own entrails, Dotcom, Hone, the greens etc and any other fellow-travellers and sell this to the public as the social miracle that will cure all ills. Bit like feeding babies to the crocodiles as a means of population control.

Sgt Pepper
27-06-2014, 09:18 AM
Very few will pay 15% on the total, as most will pay a reasonable amount in mortgage interest or rent, both exempt.
So if they pay 50% in interest and spend the rest it totals only 7.5%.
FP
You may be somewhat surprised by my next comments, as you have no doubt guessed I am a social democrat. HOWEVER I don't believe it is fair or wise that with WFF great swathes of the population pay no nett income tax at all. Now before I could be accused of being an old grump I know well the financial challenges of a young family. When our three children were small( all adults now) there was no WFF, no free 20hours childcare etc etc, and it was at times difficult, but we paid our share of income tax. After doing the hard yards back then I must admit when I look at our total tax per annum, I do get a bit.. grumpy

Sgt Pepper
27-06-2014, 10:34 AM
Think of how your kid's will benefit when they have kids.

I'd call it progress, e.g. no point in getting grumpy about their being no internet when I was kid.

Belg, good point, I am less grumpy already

fungus pudding
27-06-2014, 11:36 AM
Think of how your kid's will benefit when they have kids.

I'd call it progress, e.g. no point in getting grumpy about their being no internet when I was kid.

Progress would be learning the meaning and use of e.g. and the difference between their and there.

blackcap
27-06-2014, 11:47 AM
Someone was so confident on National winning the election they took my 1.10 offer on Betfair that National would win. So they paid $100 to win $10 if National wins. I on the other hand now lose $10 if National win but I win $100 if Labour win. Don't know who I hope wins the election now ;) (tongue firmly in cheek)

fungus pudding
27-06-2014, 12:23 PM
Yeah. I've been trying to teach the autocorrect how to get it write but it keeps getting it wrong. I have now given up.

Oh dear. That's worse.

Major von Tempsky
27-06-2014, 04:34 PM
"Heads will need to role too. You read it here first ."sic.

Belge, today in the post above.
He's not getting any better...

fungus pudding
27-06-2014, 04:41 PM
"Heads will need to role too. You read it here first ."sic.

Belge, today in the post above.
He's not getting any better...


Your dead write their.

westerly
27-06-2014, 05:46 PM
The system currently handles multiple rates so a 0 rate shouldn't be a major issue. The real issue is that you think it benefits low income earners but they pay no net income tax due to WFF etc.

If/When National does announce tax cuts, I expect it to me minor drops across the board and/or increasing the threasholds (eg. Reduce bottom rate to 10% and increase the range it applies to, no change to 33% rate but up the threshold from $70k to $80 or $90k.)

There are many low income workers who have no children but still pay tax. National raise taxes by subterfuge, another 3 cents on petrol next week. Expect Key to promise tax cuts nearer the election. Even if they have to borrow a few more billion to keep the dream going.

westerly

elZorro
27-06-2014, 07:19 PM
There are many low income workers who have no children but still pay tax. National raise taxes by subterfuge, another 3 cents on petrol next week. Expect Key to promise tax cuts nearer the election. Even if they have to borrow a few more billion to keep the dream going.

westerly

Yes, even the 3c a litre on about 3 billion litres of petrol a year, is $90mill extra tax taken. Business owners get to treat some of that as a business cost, so don't see the full effect. They'll also claim back the GST on business use. Employees and the unwaged see the whole fee for petrol, and that's why many of them buy fuel $10 at a time. Just enough to travel 50km.

winner69
27-06-2014, 07:43 PM
Yes, even the 3c a litre on about 3 billion litres of petrol a year, is $90mill extra tax taken. Business owners get to treat some of that as a business cost, so don't see the full effect. They'll also claim back the GST on business use. Employees and the unwaged see the whole fee for petrol, and that's why many of them buy fuel $10 at a time. Just enough to travel 50km.

.....and some of it feeds through to increased prices (inflation)

Sgt Pepper
27-06-2014, 07:59 PM
Your dead write their.

FP To be honest I find John Keys diction ( or lack of) much more entertaining. According to the Herald apparently he has been spending time lately watching videos of Bill Clinton to get some professional pointers.

I rest my case

fungus pudding
28-06-2014, 04:02 AM
FP To be honest I find John Keys diction ( or lack of) much more entertaining. According to the Herald apparently he has been spending time lately watching videos of Bill Clinton to get some professional pointers.

I rest my case

That's hardly a case. I hope you are right. Most public speakers put a bit of effort into their performance and Key is capable of learning and needs to. Good on him. Just as contributors to internet forums should learn the difference between roll/role, write/right and their/there if they expect to be taken seriously.

fungus pudding
28-06-2014, 07:24 AM
And if they know the difference but enjoy the pomposity it invokes from others then what then ...

Such a person would be an ignoramus.

fungus pudding
28-06-2014, 08:59 AM
Hmmm ... ignoramus = "an ignorant or stupid person."

As a statement of fact I suspect most people would say its the author who is the showing such symptoms. As an outright insult, maybe the right word, which is no doubt what you were aiming for.



Not at all. But I cannot imagine why anyone would deliberately portray themselves as either uneducated, disinterested or simply of low intellect.

BIRMANBOY
28-06-2014, 11:33 AM
You want pompous ???
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSF3IllhensfASr7aARqMJYAGiFQ3d0a 32PXhFvo8bQD8icrCz1 (http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/imgres?imgurl=http%3A%2F%2Fenglish4fun.altervista. org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2F14967362-british-cat-looking-up-through-hole-in-paper-great-britain-flag.jpg&imgrefurl=http%3A%2F%2Ffunny-pictures.picphotos.net%2Faltervista-org-wp-content-uploads-2011-09-sad-baby-pic-2011-jpg%2Fincondivisione.altervista.org*wp-content*uploads*2014*03*immagini-divertenti-funny-pics-incondivisione.altervista.org-188.jpg%2F&docid=lpMEqshfWm0BCM&tbnid=kiZq7tL6C2UgVM%3A&w=1200&h=1035&ei=rQyuU-mPLMOHkQWq0IDIDg&ved=0CAIQxiAwAA&iact=c):)

Because it exposes the pompous amongst us?

fungus pudding
29-06-2014, 07:33 AM
Key and senior ministers yesterday spoke at the conference about the instability of a multi-pronged left-wing Government.

[Key said]"This is an election campaign being fought between the centre-right and the far left and as long as New Zealanders understand that then they go to the polls with complete knowledge of what they are voting for."
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11283859

Made me laugh out loud. If Key thinks the alternative to National is the "far left" then he obviously hasn't read the policies from any of the opposition parties. "Slightly left of centre" would be more truthful.

However, such statements will get lapped up by the likes of cuzzie et al. I wonder how far away Key is from playing the "reds under the beds" card?

He may partially right about the "instability of a multi-pronged" Government should the opposition parties win over the incumbent National govt tho. I, for one, don't see it as anything but a good thing after 6 years of that "nice Mr Key" smiling and waving and issuing pathetic jokes from his filthy rich, smug face.

In fact the more I think about it, the diversity from a diverse and eclectic coalition seems like a huge amount of fun after the iron rule the Nats have had.

National are a long way left of centre by most definitions. That makes your heroes far left of centre. .

craic
29-06-2014, 07:36 AM
What are the policies of the various parties to resolve this?

Note: don't need National's policies as they've been in govt for six years and, by all accounts, its been getting worse and worse under their control.
"by all accounts" means according to the Labour fanatics, desperate to salvage anything from the wreckage of their party and, as the polls prove, is ignored by almost all. Maybe you would like to wager on this Belgarion? I stll have a bit left after a day in the glorious Hawkes Bay at the Hastings Winter Carnival Races yesterday.

blackcap
29-06-2014, 08:20 AM
I just can't imagine how the wee one survived.

Thanks for giving me my morning laugh :)

craic
29-06-2014, 08:40 AM
No I'm saying that the Labour carnage and the desperate spin that results from it is ignored by the majority of voters. Trying to suggest that Labour will save the world is, was, and always will be rubbish. The political cannabalism within, the lack of effective leadership, and the incredible lengths that they are prepared to go to - everything from retired communists and obese capatalist millionaires and the odd indescribable - will see them in the wilderness for a year or two and it might be argued that an effective Labour leader is probably still in primary school, if he/she has been born yet.

elZorro
30-06-2014, 06:55 AM
No I'm saying that the Labour carnage and the desperate spin that results from it is ignored by the majority of voters. Trying to suggest that Labour will save the world is, was, and always will be rubbish. The political cannabalism within, the lack of effective leadership, and the incredible lengths that they are prepared to go to - everything from retired communists and obese capatalist millionaires and the odd indescribable - will see them in the wilderness for a year or two and it might be argued that an effective Labour leader is probably still in primary school, if he/she has been born yet.

Will no-one save us from more globalisation activities for another three years? One face of this, a growing dairying industry, without major environmental shackles, was in the spotlight over the weekend.
http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/impacts-dairying-freshwater-worse-dr-mike-joy-video-6014577

MPI are not doing what they should be doing in setting up suitable rules and enforcing them. When SAFE filmed a terrible pig farm, they recently refused to take the video they were offered. Why? because if they admitted it was real, they'd have to do something about it. I've seen rats running around in pig pens, that happens because they are fed meal and grain. I've never seen grown pigs dying, or subjected to those tight miserable conditions.

So here we have two big situations where the government agencies should step up. If they don't, the government is saying there is just one valid business motive, and that is profit.

fungus pudding
30-06-2014, 07:47 AM
So you're saying Key's statement that they are "right of centre" is wrong then?

Yes.
.

Sgt Pepper
30-06-2014, 08:35 AM
Yes.
.

I was intrigued and somewhat surprised at John Keys candid response to questions on income tax reform on Q&A. Surprised in so far his response that the corporate tax rate must be about right as they are not " hammering" the government about it and the general response that tax cuts are "enormously expensive". So for those on higher salaries and business owners/corporates is this as good as it is going to get? The subtext: "there is no way I am going to reverse any large expensive government programmes that will compromise the governments popularity." Sound to me like
MULDOON!!
I have posted before that in my observation Phil O,Reilly the CEO Of Business NZ, seems far too close to the government and very reluctant to criticise it. John Keys response that corporate tax is about right because they are not being "hammered" about it reinforces this perception. There is a blistering criticism of John Key on the True Blue( right wing website )which traverses his alleged economic transgressions

craic
30-06-2014, 08:39 AM
MPI are not doing what they should be doing in setting up suitable rules and enforcing them. When SAFE filmed a terrible pig farm, they recently refused to take the video they were offered. Why? because if they admitted it was real, they'd have to do something about it. I've seen rats running around in pig pens, that happens because they are fed meal and grain. I've never seen grown pigs dying, or subjected to those tight miserable conditions.

Having spent a small fortune on rat baits over the past few years I have a great deal of respect for this creature and a lot of sympathy for those who have to deal with them. I have about five bait stations and about a dozen bait blocks nailed to the walls, inaccessible to pets and livestock so I put out thirty or so bait blocks at a time. One of the problems for pig farmers is that pigs will sometimes eat dead rats. My problem is that rats are attracted to my distillery. While everything edible can be stored in steel drums they have chewed the plastic tops off flavour bottles and anything else there. I didn't watch the programme but I did see an "escape to the Country" programme last week that featured an English pig farmer with a free range farm where he produces 1,000 piglets every week on open sandy ground with shelters all over the place. That would be a good standard to aim for. Imagine how the whole political/farming scene here would change if only we could convince the arabs and jews to eat pork.

fungus pudding
30-06-2014, 09:04 AM
I was intrigued and somewhat surprised at John Keys candid response to questions on income tax reform on Q&A. Surprised in so far his response that the corporate tax rate must be about right as they are not " hammering" the government about it and the general response that tax cuts are "enormously expensive". So for those on higher salaries and business owners/corporates is this as good as it is going to get? The subtext: "there is no way I am going to reverse any large expensive government programmes that will compromise the governments popularity." Sound to me like
MULDOON!!


You obviously weren't around in Muldoon's time.

Sgt Pepper
30-06-2014, 09:09 AM
You obviously weren't around in Muldoon's time.


Yes I sure was

fungus pudding
30-06-2014, 09:37 AM
Yes I sure was

Obviously still in nappies then, if you really think there is any similarity between National's policies of today, and those of Muldoon's time.

Sgt Pepper
30-06-2014, 10:00 AM
Not in nappies FP. Ok how can I prove it. For one I attended his election meeting in October 1975 at the Dunedin Town Hall, Richard Walls won Dunedin North for National, the National candidate for St Kilda electorate ( as it was called then) was Stewart Clark . Bill Fraser won for Labour. National had its offices in the Harvest Court Mall.
Now do you believe me

fungus pudding
30-06-2014, 11:00 AM
Not in nappies FP. Ok how can I prove it. For one I attended his election meeting in October 1975 at the Dunedin Town Hall, Richard Walls won Dunedin North for National, the National candidate for St Kilda electorate ( as it was called then) was Stewart Clark . Bill Fraser won for Labour. National had its offices in the Harvest Court Mall.
Now do you believe me

Of course - always did. And I'm sure you'll believe me when I say the minister of speeches, aka Bill Fraser, was the most useless MP ever; perhaps with the exception of Brian MacDonell. BTW, I was there too. Might have been sitting beside you.

fungus pudding
30-06-2014, 11:02 AM
Not in nappies FP. Ok how can I prove it. For one I attended his election meeting in October 1975 at the Dunedin Town Hall, Richard Walls won Dunedin North for National, the National candidate for St Kilda electorate ( as it was called then) was Stewart Clark . Bill Fraser won for Labour. National had its offices in the Harvest Court Mall.
Now do you believe me

Of course - always did. And I'm sure you'll believe me when I say the minister of speeches, aka Bill Fraser, was the most useless MP ever; perhaps with the exception of Brian MacDonell. BTW, I was there too. Might have been sitting beside you.

craic
30-06-2014, 12:06 PM
Every liklihood it was a walnut tree. Rats love walnuts, also rats retrieve food and take it back to the nest rather than eating on site, hence the hole through the middle of rat blocks to secure them. Could never figure out how I could find a nest of ten or twelve eggs out on the hill, remove ten and come back to check the next day only to find the other two destroyed by rats. Nests on a steep bank over a driveway did not suffer the same fate. Worked it out that rats follow human scent every time and find the nest on the ground. Following the scent down the driveway confused them because the nest was up five or six feet on the bank and they didn't find it. Conservation staff probably cause much of the destruction of native ground dwellers because they leave the human scent trail that means food to rats. Now back to politics.

craic
01-07-2014, 08:41 AM
That there is no magic bullet is a simple truth - no country or nation in the world has ever achieved equality for all. only equality of opportunity. And in this fair land, where we are argueably better off than most of the world, there is equality of opportunity but. There are those who reach out and grab every opportunity with enthusiasm and there are those who can't be bothered getting out of bed in the morning. "Rats in a barrel" some will fight their way to the top and some will smother.

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 08:43 AM
Housing Minister Nick Smith said the consent data was encouraging, particularly in Christchurch.

"The Government has a wide programme of work in place to address New Zealand's housing challenge. There is no magic bullet.

We are making good progress - we are freeing up land supply, reducing building material costs, reining in development contributions, cutting compliance costs, investing in skills and productivity in the construction sector, and supporting first-home buyers through our Welcome Home Loan and KiwiSaver First Home Deposit Subsidy schemes."

Ummm ... So Nick Smith (National Party) does your wide range of policies include a Capital Gains Tax which all economists agree would slow house price inflation? ...


[/I]

Not correct. Plenty of economists disagree. NZ's experience with Rowling's spec tax pointed to the opposite effect - prices skyrocketing by a slower market. (People not selling)

Here is one opinion.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/business/307562/gains-tax-devil-lurks-detail

Whatever the merits of CGT lowering house prices is not one of them.

Harvey Specter
01-07-2014, 08:58 AM
Is this the real election 2014 issue?I think it is but more around the middle 50% (who can vote either way) than the bottom 25% (who will vote for handouts from the left). National has made a clear move to the centre to try to get these voters. These voters are workers and I dont think $300 reduction in power prices will do it when power prices increased at twice the rate under Labour as they have under National.


Ummm ... So Nick Smith (National Party) does your wide range of policies include a Capital Gains Tax which all economists agree would slow house price inflation? ... Yes but Economists say it would slow house price inflation due to slower economic growth, which also impacts on wage growth. It isn't as simple as Labour suggests.

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 09:15 AM
But belg, the US GDP for Q1 suffered a significant revision when the third estimate was released on Thursday night (NZT). The annualised decline was put at 2.9% over the quarter, down from an already-revised 1% contraction at the previous estimate. It was the biggest revision since 1976 and worst quarterly outcome for growth since early 2009.
Fragile recoveries and central bankers committed to loose monetary policy in the major economies of the World make NZ’s position stand out big time. Growth here is nearing 4% and the RBNZ’s interest rate hikes stick out like a sore thumb compared to most other central banks. In such an environment, NZ looks very attractive to international capital, so it is no surprise that the NZD continues to trade near all-time highs. Other countries are envious of us - right now. John Key deserves at least some credit even from non-National voters for that belg & you know it.

The other factor providing support to the NZD is of course demand for NZ’s exports. The positives here certainly outweigh the negatives, despite the headwind of a strong dollar, NZ continues to record some strong trade surpluses on the back of Chinese commodity demand. And the silver lining of a strong currency is that it serves to keep down the cost of imported goods, materials and equipment. That reduces inflationary pressure and the amount of heavy lifting the RBNZ has to do via the OCR. The poor and Labour fan-boys win here too belg - thanks to National.

Don't forget NZ has just posted a seventh monthly trade surplus in May. The country had a trade surplus of $285 million in May, from $498 million in April and $40 million a year earlier & that's straight from Statistics New Zealand. Also, the annual trade balance turned to a surplus of $1.37 billion from a deficit of $901 million a year earlier. The trade figures lagged expectations for a monthly surplus of $300 million and an annual surplus of $1.43 billion in a Reuters poll of economists.

Demand for primary products from an expanding and wealthier Chinese economy has spurred demand for New Zealand exports. China held its position as New Zealand's top trading partner, with annual two-way trade between the nations exceeding $20 billion for the first time - wow $20 billion, ahead of the government's 2015 target. We, "New Zealand" as a country are going great guns which of course is bad news if you support the opposition & that's what we see from the likes of belg, EZ and co.

NZ is doing great belg, but you will always go looking for the negatives out of a positive and will always find it (your version anyway). New Zealand is doing great and if the poor, useless and unemployed want a piece of it, they can - but there lies the problem - they are too bloody lazy to help themselves. Labour's plan for them as always is to control them by making them used to handouts, dumbify them even more (if that is possible) and be their voice of anger to show them that they(Labour) are their voice of reason - come on man ... wake up. With Labour polling under 30% constantly these days I think some of them have.

Harvey Specter
01-07-2014, 09:50 AM
This is actually a very common misconception. The bottom 25% generally don't know what they're voting for if they do vote and most don't vote.

Umm ... You'll need quote someone with a good grasp of economics to back that one up as I've not heard that said in real terms. Nominal terms maybe but real terms no. And when a CGT has been introduced in other countries history hasn't confirmed this effect.

Agree with your first point. The young and the poor are less likely to vote. National agrues the missing million are also national voters as they saw reduced voting in their safe seats - without seeing the data, I assume that is because there is no point voting for anyone else in a safe seat (people still dont understand MMP).

I cant quote anyone on that comment but it was what I heard at an (bank) economists briefing. He agreed CGT would slow house prices but that's just because it would take the top off the growth they expect over the next few years (alot of which is based on Chch which will be more short lived than people expect).

Harvey Specter
01-07-2014, 09:56 AM
Not correct. Plenty of economists disagree. NZ's experience with Rowling's spec tax pointed to the opposite effect - prices skyrocketing by a slower market. (People not selling)

Here is one opinion.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/business/307562/gains-tax-devil-lurks-detail

Whatever the merits of CGT lowering house prices is not one of them.That article is actual a very good summary of a lot of the issues that need to be considered.

The CGT wont impact house prices, but it will impact the economy which will impact house prices.

My view of CGT is that is probalby more hassle than it is worth but if it does go ahead, it should be designed properly and with no exemption (but roll over relief) for the family home.

artemis
01-07-2014, 10:40 AM
That article is actual a very good summary of a lot of the issues that need to be considered. The CGT wont impact house prices, but it will impact the economy which will impact house prices. My view of CGT is that is probalby more hassle than it is worth but if it does go ahead, it should be designed properly and with no exemption (but roll over relief) for the family home.

What about other exemptions currently in Labour's policy. Such as some small businesses (but only some), boats, high value art and antiques? What say the art is a Rothko valued at tens of millions? It would almost certainly be considered an investment as much as say Xero shares. (OK maybe more so right now.) Once exemptions are allowed, it is a slippery slope.

artemis
01-07-2014, 10:44 AM
I can't imagine how this sort of thing occurs in NZ ... Sure, there are the odd situations where contributing factors; such as mental illness; are root causes but every report I read seems to suggest its common. And people at the city mission say its very bad and has been getting worse ........ .


Anecdata. It means very little, especially during an election campaign.

My take on this case is that there is a lot of help available but it cannot be given if people don't ask for it. Once it was known that help was needed, it was right there,

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 11:02 AM
So it's John Key? Not the National Party then? Are you another victim of the personality cult? Lets turn that around, you always go on about John Key, so in your mind is it him that you are targeting and not the whole National Party. What does that make you guilty of. Silly really belg.


Its not "the other factor" as you suggest. It is the major factor. Are you going to claim (AGAIN!) that trade with China - pushed hard and developed by the Labour Party under Auntie Helen - is the result of the Key govt? Please don't. Its a ridiculous argument to suggest that National has any influence the mega economy that is China's. If that is the case where is the results Auntie Helen can claim? I go by results and results only. That's sort of saying a Fords Perfect is a better car than a 2014 Toyota. Or a Caveman thought of going to the moon first. Results belg - results and that is something the Caveman, plus Clark and Co failed to do. National has results as per the quote I gave you, is not that great for NZ?


Is NZ really doing great Cuzzie? Such statements remind me of the old joke: No belg the joke is on you, take off those rose tinted glasses and you might see. NZ is going great guns now, but not under Labour and the massive debt they left National.


Quite frankly, National supporters seem to be a pretty selfish bunch. Now see this is exactly where Labour get it wrong. What happens when you feed the ducks all the time? They don't go and find their own food, some idiot is going to turn up and give it to them. That becomes the ducks rights and demands free food for life. belg wants to carry on feeding the ducks, but I say let ducks be ducks, quack their rights & let them work for their meal. Labour is being selfish from handbraking their opportunities. I find that cruel ,barbaric and repulsive. Every New Zealander has equal rights to go as far as they like. A good example is John Key from his humble beginnings and NZ's wealthiest man Graeme Hart who was a panel beater & tow truck driver. Funny how we just hear from the rich Labour fanboys on this site and not the poor ones that are really suffering. How so they speak for them and what is the real reason they support Labour? belg, EZ, SP anyone?

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 12:09 PM
Using one opinion does not contradict the majority. And did you read the link? Mr Turner is not against a CGT at all. He is saying that it needs to be carefully designed. And that it is simple and broad based. And, as you and I have agreed in the past, the family home should NOT be exempt.



Nobody is saying that a CGT will lower house prices. What it will do is reduce demand as those with spare capital consider and buy assets of other classes.



The only exempt asset will be the primary residence, and yes - more money will go into top end housing.

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 12:12 PM
Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. #teamkey

This bloke didn't listen.

http://iforce.co.nz/i/4u3gvzqq.155.jpg

artemis
01-07-2014, 12:16 PM
Is this Anecdata too? ;) But, Yes. I checked up. The immediate help was given but it didn't come from government. They have no money and the "system" requires a huge amount of paperwork. It came from "charity". Not surprisingly, the charities are supported by the wealthy from the left and the right who clearly think that "nice Mr Key" just isn't doing a good job at all. The current, very mediocre National government, isn't well loved by real Kiwis. No matter ... Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. #teamkey

Not everything needs to be directly government funded, ie by a government department. Many service providers, including charities, receive a lot of government funding in one way or another.

You may be right about 'real Kiwis', whoever they may be. Hopefully they exercise their democratic right and turn out on September 20th.

artemis
01-07-2014, 12:18 PM
The only exempt asset will be the primary residence, and yes - more money will go into top end housing.

Labour's policy includes a lot of exempt assets.

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 12:34 PM
Labour's policy includes a lot of exempt assets.

Only a handful, such as long held small businesses and a few bits and pieces; but the claim CGT will force investors to look at alternatives to housing doesn't make sense. All other income producing assets will be subject to the tax Labour proposes.

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 12:58 PM
Please explain your rationale. References required!


All income producing investments which are likely to change in value will be treated like rental property. So property will have no comparative disadvantage compared with other investments.

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 01:07 PM
Cussie, Most of your post we've been over before and you've had no factual response ... Just more b.s. Consequently I won't waste my time.

However ...



So you're saying that NZ should just rip away all welfare? Sink or Swim? Is that it?

Okay! A grand idea.

Um ... But where would that nice Mr Key and Paula Bennet be then?

Cuzzie. If we do not look after EVERYONE in New Zealand then, rest assured, people with honour and a sense of justice will feel completely vindicated in using whatever means, and I mean whatever means, to ensure everyone is looked after.

But - the real issue for those in poverty is JOBS.

I find it sad that every National Party supporter on this site starts abusing those in poverty with opening line that they are don't have JOBS because they are lazy. Actually they usually imply that they are "lazy scum".

Um. Have any of these selfish National bigots actually ever attempted to understand poverty? Clearly not.

Mostly, its about jobs.

Has National made getting people into work a priority? No, they have not.

What policies do they have in place to get more people into job? None. Well, perhaps not true. They want to slash the people in poverty's benefits until they are forced to work and buggr the consequences on their children.

If, cuzzie, NZ is doing so spectacturaly well ... as you continuously claim ... why isn't the unemployment rate down to 3-4% which is about where most economists agree is about optimum?

Simple. The National Party, supported by selfish pricks, just don't care. After all, those in poverty are just lazy scum. And, of course, or at least according to the National party supporters, even if jobs were available they wouldn't work. Isn't that right Cuzzie?


Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. #teamkeyMy dad was raised in a cow shed on a dirt floor after my Granddad died during WW2 and they got kick out of their house because the mortgage could not be paid any more. He took all opportunities that came his way, all legal BTW and has always voted National. So yeah, most of those who have not worked in many years are there because of their mindset and people like you who feed the ducks. Do-gooders or a Bleeding Heart Liberals like you that do no good except stuff up the economy and tax the workers more to feed the ducks.

Definition of a Do-gooder: Someone who thinks they are helping society by championing oppressed minority groups, when in fact they are ruining society and crippling free speech.

Definition of a Bleeding Heart Liberal: A lefty who is considered excessively sympathetic toward those who claim to be underprivileged or exploited."

You are both belg, [modified by STMOD] that champions the oppressed and stuffing them up for good by moving opportunities further away from them. This part way explains why National it Positive and Labour is negatively geared.

Harvey Specter
01-07-2014, 01:24 PM
but the claim CGT will force investors to look at alternatives to housing doesn't make sense. All other income producing assets will be subject to the tax Labour proposes.Agree. you are more likely to hold a rental property for a longer time than a NZ share investment.

artemis
01-07-2014, 01:48 PM
Only a handful, such as long held small businesses and a few bits and pieces; but the claim CGT will force investors to look at alternatives to housing doesn't make sense. All other income producing assets will be subject to the tax Labour proposes.

Not just income producing assets. Growth shares which don't pay a div, XRO for example. Some of us hold growth shares rather than income producing shares, for preference. Tax considerations may be a factor in that.

GTM 3442
01-07-2014, 04:01 PM
We can be pretty confident that we know what will happen should National win.

But are we so sure about what will happen should Labour lose.

Historically, Labour has been the political wing of the union movement. As time has passed, it has become a convenient coalition for a number of distinct interest groups. Without the prospect of electoral success, how long will it be before this coalition starts to fragment into a series of single-issue parties?

What are the political implications for New Zealand of a single "major" party (National) and a constellation of smallish interest-group-based parties ?

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 04:10 PM
What are the political implications for New Zealand of a single "major" party (National) and a constellation of smallish interest-group-based parties ?

That's very likely over the next decade or so. Parties in opposition to National will need to form a semi-permanent coalition, sort of like the Alliance, and probably led by the Greens. That'll be fun!

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 05:42 PM
People: Try and be reasonably civil in your debate here and avoid descending into name calling please.

STMODSorry about that STMOD and fair enough too. I was just following belgarion's lead from earlier on today where he used the offending word first. I wrongly presumed that such language was acceptable on Sharetrader as it was used by a member of this site since 2002 and has posted over 4500 times. You may want to remove that word from his post too. I have quoting him using that word to help you doing your edit from his post which was # 4406 Thanks for that, cuzzie.





Simple. The National Party, supported by selfish pricks, just don't care. After all, those in poverty are just lazy scum. And, of course, or at least according to the National party supporters, even if jobs were available they wouldn't work. Isn't that right Cuzzie?

westerly
01-07-2014, 06:11 PM
[FONT=arial]Definition of a Do-gooder: Someone who thinks they are helping society by championing oppressed minority groups, when in fact they are ruining society and crippling free speech.

Definition of a Bleeding Heart Liberal: A lefty who is considered excessively sympathetic toward those who claim to be underprivileged or exploited."

You are both belg, [modified by STMOD] that champions the oppressed and stuffing them up for good by moving opportunities further away from them. This part way explains why National it Positive and Labour is negatively geared.

Definition of a liberterian somewhere right of Ghengis Khan -- Cussie

westerly

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 06:29 PM
Definition of a liberterian somewhere right of Ghengis Khan -- Cussie

westerly May I remind you what was said above!!!

People: Try and be reasonably civil in your debate here and avoid descending into name calling please.

STMOD I think you will find my name is Cuzzie, but you carry on trying to be funny, because I'm having a good old laugh at you westerly.

Well it looks like the Labour fanboys can now see the writing on the wall. Not only on the polls but right here on Share Trader and what do they do when their ship starts to sink? westerly resorts to name calling and belg complains about a word being used he uses constantly. At least three of us knows you are a hypocrite belg, you, me and STMOD - that's enough for me.

Anybody want to talk about how well National are going to do at the next election? EZ has gone quite, maybe he is working an extra job to pay craic the money he will owe him shortly.

It is fair to say that I'm a very happy camper right now and feel comfortable about NZ's future for at least the next three and a bit years - Thank God for National.

Sgt Pepper
01-07-2014, 06:53 PM
May I remind you what was said above!!!
I think you will find my name is Cuzzie, but you carry on trying to be funny, because I'm having a good old laugh at you westerly.

Well it looks like the Labour fanboys can now see the writing on the wall. Not only on the polls but right here on Share Trader and what do they do when their ship starts to sink? westerly resorts to name calling and belg complains about a word being used he uses constantly. At least three of us knows you are a hypocrite belg, you, me and STMOD - that's enough for me.

Anybody want to talk about how well National are going to do at the next election? EZ has gone quite, maybe he is working an extra job to pay craic the money he will owe him shortly.

It is fair to say that I'm a very happy camper right now and feel comfortable about NZ's future for at least the next three and a bit years - Thank God for National.
Cuzzie

What do you think of John Keys responses to questions regarding income tax reductions. He was very non committal at best, indicating that the business tax rate was " about right" and that tax reductions were "enormously expensive". Do you think that will be very disappointing to many National supporters and will they become attracted to ACT

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 07:09 PM
Cuzzie

What do you think of John Keys responses to questions regarding income tax reductions. He was very non committal at best, indicating that the business tax rate was " about right" and that tax reductions were "enormously expensive". Do you think that will be very disappointing to many National supporters and will they become attracted to ACTJ.K told 600 delegates to a party's conference in Wellington, "The National Party respected New Zealanders and their hard-earned incomes".

Then added "If we can't use that money as well as you can, then it's simple - you should keep it." I like that, you S.P?

I LIKE THIS EVEN BETTER - Steven Joyce said, "If Laila Harre, Hone Harawira, Pam Corkery, Kim Dotcom, Russel Norman, Metiria Turei, David Cunliffe, Matt McCarten, and John Minto are the answer, can we please have another look at the question?" In fact I love that and will re-post it again for sure.

slimwin
01-07-2014, 07:10 PM
This is getting boring.

Cuzzie
01-07-2014, 07:18 PM
This is getting boring. And that would be a by-product of National humming along nicely. You want non-boring talk about Labour & Co and their latest foolish, outrageous and amusing behaviour. I'm not into Soaps, but I hear Labour & Co have better ratings than Shortland St these days.

artemis
01-07-2014, 07:40 PM
.................... Anybody want to talk about how well National are going to do at the next election? .......................................

Well I certainly don't see a National led government as a done deal. Though Labour is in disarray, the current opposition might still cobble together a majority on the day. Mr Mallard's 'moa recreation' is not going to help them though. What was he thinking?

elZorro
01-07-2014, 09:47 PM
Well I certainly don't see a National led government as a done deal. Though Labour is in disarray, the current opposition might still cobble together a majority on the day. Mr Mallard's 'moa recreation' is not going to help them though. What was he thinking?

Well, we're all talking about him, that's something. Anyway, I hate to break it to you Artemis, but all he says is correct, it could be done if enough good DNA was found.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-10/10/dna-half-life

Whether a stable population of differing genetics could be recreated, that might be harder.

He makes a lot more sense than someone in the USA who reckoned his electoral opponent (who is in office) actually died two years ago, and has been replaced with a very realistic robot. Maybe he just got the country wrong, and it's a few National MPs who have been replaced..

iceman
01-07-2014, 10:08 PM
Cuzzie

What do you think of John Keys responses to questions regarding income tax reductions. He was very non committal at best, indicating that the business tax rate was " about right" and that tax reductions were "enormously expensive". Do you think that will be very disappointing to many National supporters and will they become attracted to ACT

Here is what I would like to see National come out with and promise on the tax front for the next term, should they get back in :
1. Abandon WFF entirely
2. Reintroduce interest on student loans and make it tied to 10 year Government Bonds
3. Make the lowest tax rate of 10.5% redundant by making the first $ 14k of income tax free,
$ 28k for a legal couple.
4. Leave all other rates the same but tie bracket limits to inflation to stop people creeping into higher
tax brackets

But no doubt way too radical :(

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 10:15 PM
Well I certainly don't see a National led government as a done deal. Though Labour is in disarray, the current opposition might still cobble together a majority on the day. Mr Mallard's 'moa recreation' is not going to help them though. What was he thinking?


He was trying to upstage Cunliffe for media attention. He's a troublemaker - and good at it, and not happy with his party.

fungus pudding
01-07-2014, 10:16 PM
Here is what I would like to see National come out with and promise on the tax front for the next term, should they get back in :
1. Abandon WFF entirely
2. Reintroduce interest on student loans and make it tied to 10 year Government Bonds
3. Make the lowest tax rate of 10.5% redundant by making the first $ 14k of income tax free,
$ 28k for a legal couple.
4. Leave all other rates the same but tie bracket limits to inflation to stop people creeping into higher
tax brackets

But no doubt way too radical :(


What is an illegal couple?

iceman
01-07-2014, 10:22 PM
What is an illegal couple?

LOL. I wrote " married couple" first but then realised that is not politically correct today. But I think you know what I mean. 2 people living together in a recognised (by the state) relationship, whatever they are called these days !

craic
01-07-2014, 10:28 PM
In all fairness, I think Trevor Mallards Moa project is tongue in cheek and can not be used to question his credibility - he does have a sense of humour. As far as revenue gathering is concerned, I would love to see a huge tax on sugar. It probably kills more people than smoking ever did. Its getting harder to find manufactured foods that are not loaded with the stuff and the makers and bakers know that if they want their product to sell, just add more sugar. Surprised the Greens haven't got on to this one.

slimwin
02-07-2014, 07:46 AM
No! They use sugar to make my beer. Not another tax on my fun!!

Harvey Specter
02-07-2014, 08:02 AM
Here is what I would like to see National come out with and promise on the tax front for the next term, should they get back in :
1. Abandon WFF entirely
2. Reintroduce interest on student loans and make it tied to 10 year Government Bonds
3. Make the lowest tax rate of 10.5% redundant by making the first $ 14k of income tax free,
$ 28k for a legal couple.
4. Leave all other rates the same but tie bracket limits to inflation to stop people creeping into higher
tax brackets
1. I dont think you can get rid of it completely but by doing some of your other changes, it can be reduced significantly
2. Agree completely. Interest free while studying (though limits 3y for Bachelors, up to say 7 years for PhD)
3. Yes but very expensive. It would also benefit everyone, including high income earns. Could reduce the cost by having reducing the top rate of 33 down to a lower threashold so that the benefit is reduced for higher earners. This also links into WFF above.
4. When combined with 3. to costly as noted but agree that brackets should increase with inflation (once reset to cater for new threasholds).

I would also like to see:
5. a signal that free (or highly subsidised - ie. nominal $5 cost) for children will be increase over time up to end of school age (18ish) as the budget allows.
6. signal the opening of a multi party discussion on superannuation with age, means testing, etc to be discussed. There may be no consensus but would be good to have the multi party (and economist, academic) discussion refreshed.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 08:08 AM
No! They use sugar to make my beer. Not another tax on my fun!!Lots of sugar in beer, I brewed it for many years. Salt is over used in commercially made food too and just as bad for you. They use salt to bring the flavour out and sugar to counteract the salt. One of the worst additives is Preservative 220 and that is in all non-organic wine. Talk about this too much though and my Greenie side will take over. That's my common sense Greenie side, not at all like the pretenders in Parliament.

Sgt Pepper
02-07-2014, 08:40 AM
1. I dont think you can get rid of it completely but by doing some of your other changes, it can be reduced significantly
2. Agree completely. Interest free while studying (though limits 3y for Bachelors, up to say 7 years for PhD)
3. Yes but very expensive. It would also benefit everyone, including high income earns. Could reduce the cost by having reducing the top rate of 33 down to a lower threashold so that the benefit is reduced for higher earners. This also links into WFF above.
4. When combined with 3. to costly as noted but agree that brackets should increase with inflation (once reset to cater for new threasholds).

I would also like to see:
5. a signal that free (or highly subsidised - ie. nominal $5 cost) for children will be increase over time up to end of school age (18ish) as the budget allows.
6. signal the opening of a multi party discussion on superannuation with age, means testing, etc to be discussed. There may be no consensus but would be good to have the multi party (and economist, academic) discussion refreshed.

HS
Do you see a point in time when National Party supporters will no longer accept that "pragmatism" demands that effective tax reductions, that is tax reductions that Businesses and Wage and Salary earners notice, are only some vague aspirational goal given at best lip service to. As time goes on many may question that their support is being taken for granted, and that simply "we have got to keep Labour out" no matter what the cost will rapidly erode as a motivation to return National.

To be quite honest I don't think John Key gives a dam, as he is planning his post political career already.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 09:01 AM
S.P as far as I'm aware National is looking to the future which includes John Key and also for students leaving school with their new Creative Industries Vocational Pathway that was announced yesterday by Employment Minister Steven Joyce. “Vocational Pathways helps students to better plan their studies and set themselves up for their future. They can use the pathways as a framework to help choose their subjects and also see how they relate to future job or career opportunities.”
Mr Joyce said employers need qualified, skilled and creative young talent.
The Vocational Pathways are part of the Youth Guarantee Scheme, which assists schools and tertiary providers to develop more relevant learning opportunities. Sounds great to me, meanwhile signs of optimism have emerged from employers. After a drop in positive hiring intentions over the past two consecutive quarters, intentions to hire are on the rise in New Zealand, up 4.5pp to 31.8% . Here is a link to that which contains graphs. Hudson (http://nz.hudson.com/KnowledgeCentre/HudsonReportQ32014)
Looks like unemployment figures will be adjusted down thanks to the good work done by Joyce and National as a whole. Like I said, give somebody an opportunity to be successful in life and get them before a duck feeder turns up and they will prosper. Keep the Bleeding Heart Liberals at bay and our country will prosper too and we are now seeing the results of that very thing happening right now. Three more years and let the good times roll. That's why Labour need to win this election and that don't care how, because if National gets another three years, it could take Labour twenty years before they get another sniff. I like that thought right there.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 10:31 AM
I wondered how that statement fitted in the asset sales (MEL, MRP, etc.) Could you explain that, Cuzzie, when you have a moment? Don't forget to factor in the various commentators who made it clear that the ROI was far greater than the cost of borrowed money and actually represented a very worthwhile, long term income stream.It would fit in quite nicely for you if he actually said that in reference to asset sales - but he didn't did he. This was about tax, so that explains that. Please do stick to quotes accurately to prevent misguidance on you part belg.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 11:04 AM
And where did the government get the money from in the first place? TAX?

And in the absence of the additional revenue stream provided by those assets where will the money come from? TAX?belg, all money is related to tax somewhere down the line. That is an awfully big umbrella you are using to raine in a statement John Key has made directly at tax, but nothing to do with asset sales. His statement has nothing to do with asset sales and I can't possibly add anything more except to say once again, stick to what has been quoted and that subject line, then you will be fine.

iceman
02-07-2014, 11:07 AM
1. Why would you abandon WFF? It is a sliding scale, targeted support scheme for families that encourages parents to work while ensuring a minimum income for families. Internationally it is recognised as being quite a bit better than a fairly okay scheme and far better than what it replaced. (And it has the added "benefit" of ensuring people get into the IRD systems.)

2. Agreed. BTW, as someone who had part time jobs during term and full time in holidays and was flatting while at Uni and left with more assets than I started with, I struggle to understand how some of these students rack up such huge amounts of debt.

3. Very expensive indeed. But, I'd be in favour of making income tax bit more "targeted" and far smoother as you earn more, i.e. based on gross income rather than bands. E.g. 0% to 14K, 1% when 15k, 2% when 16k, 2.5% when 17k, etc., etc. (ignore percentages as I've not tried to work them out.) Doing it that way ensures those earning less than 14k don't get taxed while those on 150k will still get taxed on the first 14k. Such an approach allows very targeted tax gathering and partially removes the artificial boundaries that exist around the current bands. Actually, this might be far simpler ... I.e. if you earn 156k, you look up the rate, say 25% and your tax is 156 * 0.25 = 39k. Simpler?

4. See 3 above.

Re WFF, the answer is because it is very costly middle class welfare-ism. Much simpler to have tax free thresholds like the one I suggested, where a family/partners can fully benefit whether one or both are working. I fully realise the tax free threshold I suggested is costly and the numbers would obviously need to be worked on. But abandoning WFF would save a lot of money towards it probably a lot more than people realise.

I don't agree with you on one point though Belg. I think ALL tax payers (yes high income earners too) should get a tax cut when the time allows and a tax free threshold at the bottom end is a fair way of doing it. This is common in the Nordic countries and has overall cross party support.

We could also stop Government contributions to Kiwisaver to save a bot more unnecessary expenditure !!!

Agree HS about a cross party consensus on super. It simply has to happen. The eligibility age needs and should go to 70 years. Something like going to 67 in 2020, 68 in 2023, 69 in 2026 and 70 in 2029.
This is the issue where I am the most disappointed with Key and National.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 11:36 AM
Nice try, Cuz. But the inconsistencies are quite clear to those of us that aren't National party sycophants.

Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey
No nice try belg, just didn't play your little game. Give me an actual quote from John Key and you will get a straight answer, but if you want a hypothetical answer I suggest you hop on your playstation or something. I'm not in the habit of manufacturing an answer just for the sake of it.



BTW, I fixed your slogin for you.



PLEASE WORK HARDER! THERE ARE MILLIONS ON WELFARE COUNTING ON YOU. Labour & Co

westerly
02-07-2014, 11:37 AM
Quote Originally Posted by westerly View Post
Definition of a liberterian somewhere right of Ghengis Khan -- Cussie

westerly
May I remind you what was said above!!!
Quote Originally Posted by STMOD View Post
People: Try and be reasonably civil in your debate here and avoid descending into name calling please.

STMOD
I think you will find my name is Cuzzie, but you carry on trying to be funny, because I'm having a good old laugh at you westerly.

Cuzzie, Apologies for the misspelt name. It was not name calling but a reference to your political philosophy, basically everyman for himself

The only thing John Key and myself have in common is we were both state house boys. There is where he has lost his roots, National have no housing policy apart from freeing up more land , reducing regulations, and leaving it to developers to provide the house. The result being 4 bedroom, houses with built in garages, fully fenced and landscaped. This way the developer maximizes his profits. My first house was built on a bare section, no garage, no fences.
It was paid for with a 5% loan from State Advances. You only got one loan from SA but it housed large numbers in well built homes. And builders built houses to qualify within the loan limits.
Now the present day first home buyer borrow massive amounts from an overseas owned bank, pays market interest rates, or rents and has no hope of his own home. Welcome to the world of National.

westerly

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 12:15 PM
Quote Originally Posted by westerly View Post
Definition of a liberterian somewhere right of Ghengis Khan -- Cussie

westerly
May I remind you what was said above!!!
Quote Originally Posted by STMOD View Post
People: Try and be reasonably civil in your debate here and avoid descending into name calling please.

STMOD
I think you will find my name is Cuzzie, but you carry on trying to be funny, because I'm having a good old laugh at you westerly.

Cuzzie, Apologies for the misspelt name. It was not name calling but a reference to your political philosophy, basically everyman for himself

The only thing John Key and myself have in common is we were both state house boys. There is where he has lost his roots, National have no housing policy apart from freeing up more land , reducing regulations, and leaving it to developers to provide the house. The result being 4 bedroom, houses with built in garages, fully fenced and landscaped. This way the developer maximizes his profits. My first house was built on a bare section, no garage, no fences.
It was paid for with a 5% loan from State Advances. You only got one loan from SA but it housed large numbers in well built homes. And builders built houses to qualify within the loan limits.
Now the present day first home buyer borrow massive amounts from an overseas owned bank, pays market interest rates, or rents and has no hope of his own home. Welcome to the world of National.

westerlywesterly, I do have the figures for Auckland dating back to 1999 when Helen Clark took over which were around the $350,000 median price and in 2008 when she got voted out the median price for Auckland was $600,000.

When John Key took office the price has risen from $600,000 to $713,709 for May 2014. Now in the last two years the house prices have shot up by at least 30% in Auckland, but back in 2012 prices were $25,000 cheaper than the Helen Clark days.


My information is withheld in the hope that you to do the research on this. I will post them later if you like. Shocked? I must admit I didn't think housing got so expensive under Clark. I, like you feel housing is far to expensive for young families trying to buy a house, but blaming National alone is totally incorrect. Under Clark the price increase was $250,000 and under Key it has increased about $114,000.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 12:40 PM
Here is another stat: Hamilton City has risen 0.3% over the past three months, and 4.8% over the past year and values there are now only 0.7% above the 2007 peak.

This is quoted on June 6, 2014


Could carry on if you like.

Harvey Specter
02-07-2014, 01:15 PM
HS
Do you see a point in time when National Party supporters will no longer accept that "pragmatism" demands that effective tax reductions, that is tax reductions that Businesses and Wage and Salary earners notice, are only some vague aspirational goal given at best lip service to. As time goes on many may question that their support is being taken for granted, and that simply "we have got to keep Labour out" no matter what the cost will rapidly erode as a motivation to return National. On a much broader view, my disappointment where NZ has gone politically is that:

- ACT is a joke. We need a ultra right party. As such, National now caters to everything from the far right to the centre ground (and moving more to the left every election) such that they now dont really speak for anyone.
- Greens have become ultra left as opposed to sticking to environmental issues. (this is natural as they try to grow their base but there are right wing environmentalists)


Re WFF, the answer is because it is very costly middle class welfare-ism. Much simpler to have tax free thresholds like the one I suggested, where a family/partners can fully benefit whether one or both are working. I fully realise the tax free threshold I suggested is costly and the numbers would obviously need to be worked on. But abandoning WFF would save a lot of money towards it probably a lot more than people realise.

I don't agree with you on one point though Belg. I think ALL tax payers (yes high income earners too) should get a tax cut when the time allows and a tax free threshold at the bottom end is a fair way of doing it. This is common in the Nordic countries and has overall cross party support.

We could also stop Government contributions to Kiwisaver to save a bot more unnecessary expenditure !!!

Agree HS about a cross party consensus on super. It simply has to happen. The eligibility age needs and should go to 70 years. Something like going to 67 in 2020, 68 in 2023, 69 in 2026 and 70 in 2029.
This is the issue where I am the most disappointed with Key and National.
I think you still need WFF at the lower end but by doing the tax free threshold, you could have it reducing over a much shorter income range. (It goes to over $100k if you have enough kids!, it shouldn't go anywhere near close to that.)

While I suggested dropping the top rate threshold so top earners don't benefit as much for a tax free amount, this is to make the shift revenue neutral. you then have a secondary decision to raise or lower the tax free amount as tax revenue/govt spending requires such that all benefit from tax cuts.

Agree to stop the regular govt contributions to kiwisaver - why have them? Or maybe limit to a max of 5 years so your fund gets to a certain scale.

Stop the start up kiwisaver contribution, or at the least, only provide it to those who enroll when first entitled. If you decide to opt out at that stage, you lose the bonus should you join at a later date.

Retirement is a bit more difficult that that as some (manual labour etc) need to retire at 65. Maybe means test it upto 70, then universal. Use same look through for trusts/companies as WFF.

BIRMANBOY
02-07-2014, 01:17 PM
You guys are all trying to politicize an economic event(s). KISS.... houses, stamps, wine and old coca cola bottles go up and down in price because either there are more buyers or more sellers. Its got very little to do with politics...if it did why didn't the house prices all over the country go up at the same pace???
Nice to see you admit that your hero Key has FAILED too.

Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey

artemis
02-07-2014, 01:18 PM
Lots of sugar in beer, I brewed it for many years. Salt is over used in commercially made food too and just as bad for you. They use salt to bring the flavour out and sugar to counteract the salt. One of the worst additives is Preservative 220 and that is in all non-organic wine. Talk about this too much though and my Greenie side will take over. That's my common sense Greenie side, not at all like the pretenders in Parliament.

Some, incl me, think the jury is still out on salt. If you google 'the great salt debate' there are many on each side of the argument. It is by no means a sure thing one way or the other. Yet.

craic
02-07-2014, 02:34 PM
I use at least 50kg of dextrose every year in my still. Its dearer than cane sugar but easier to use and I read somewhere that it is absorbed differently to the other stuff but you drink alcohol, not sugar regardless of the process. I would be more than happy to pay an extra dollar per kg. Salt, in my view is a critical component in diet. I've come off the hill in hot summer after fighting with a tree that I was converting into wood and ended up in the middle of the night with screaming leg cramps that sent me scurrying for a glass of salty water. But back to politics - a question.

Let's say that the prophets are right and JK gets in to power with a clear majority. What are you Gentlemen of the Left going to do in the immediate future? I mean DO, not say nor wish or imagine - What do you plan to do for the future of yourself/ yourfamily/the nation?

Harvey Specter
02-07-2014, 03:08 PM
Let's say that the prophets are right and JK gets in to power with a clear majority. What are you Gentlemen of the Left going to do in the immediate future? I mean DO, not say nor wish or imagine - What do you plan to do for the future of yourself/ yourfamily/the nation?What do you do - you start looking for a job as you are likely to get kicked out - if your lucky you will get a overseas posting, if your not, a union job. There is a lot of old wood in Labour and they would be moved on on short notice in my opinion. Those will electorates may be safe (especially if in a marginal seat, not so a safe labour seat) as the risk of further defeat wouldn't be tolerated.

blackcap
02-07-2014, 03:09 PM
I just put a $40 bet on Labour to win the election. If they win I win $400, yes that is right, $400. If Labour lose obviously I lose my $40. Labour are now a 10/1 shot of winning.

(Craic, if you want to lay off some of your exposure to ElZorro just go to betfair.com :) )

Xerof
02-07-2014, 03:43 PM
I just put a $40 bet on Labour to win the election. If they win I win $400, yes that is right, $400. If Labour lose obviously I lose my $40. Labour are now a 10/1 shot of winning.

(Craic, if you want to lay off some of your exposure to ElZorro just go to betfair.com :) )

Is that bet for Labour ALONE? you have lost it already if the fine print doesn't allow you a coalition

blackcap
02-07-2014, 04:06 PM
Is that bet for Labour ALONE? you have lost it already if the fine print doesn't allow you a coalition

Sorry I should have been more specific. Generally do not get caught out by that sort of thing anymore.

"Which of these parties will provide the Prime Minister of New Zealand following the next General Election? This market will be turned IN PLAY with unmatched bets cancelled at the start of polling on Election Day. Thereafter unmatched bets will not be cancelled at any time by Betfair and the market will not be actively managed."

Xerof
02-07-2014, 04:13 PM
A sound risk/reward bet in my view at 10/1 - it's tight and not a done deal for the Nats

But I won't take it.....:p

blackcap
02-07-2014, 04:22 PM
A sound risk/reward bet in my view at 10/1 - it's tight and not a done deal for the Nats

But I won't take it.....:p

haha fair enough. Not a done deal for sure and Ipredict only have the Nats at about a 82% chance of having the next prime minister. But they are steadily moving upwards the closer we get to the election.

fungus pudding
02-07-2014, 04:28 PM
haha fair enough. Not a done deal for sure and Ipredict only have the Nats at about a 82% chance of having the next prime minister. But they are steadily moving upwards the closer we get to the election.

ipredict suggests a National/NZ First coalition will be the next govt. (as long as Winston lasts until the election)

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 05:28 PM
Nice to see you admit that your hero Key has FAILED too.

Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey

Funny you didn't mention Labours bigger failure concerning house prices. The way I see it National has slowed house prices from the peak in 2007. I call that success from Labour's failure.




Don't let Labour steal your hard earnt money and freedom

Vote National!!!

craic
02-07-2014, 06:09 PM
I off-set this bet several times over by the certainties of the market that use to cover most of my gambling. And, as I said before, I am happy to go again for the same amount.
I just put a $40 bet on Labour to win the election. If they win I win $400, yes that is right, $400. If Labour lose obviously I lose my $40. Labour are now a 10/1 shot of winning.

(Craic, if you want to lay off some of your exposure to ElZorro just go to betfair.com :) )

westerly
02-07-2014, 06:42 PM
Here is another stat: Hamilton City has risen 0.3% over the past three months, and 4.8% over the past year and values there are now only 0.7% above the 2007 peak.

This is quoted on June 6, 2014


Could carry on if you like.

Cuzzie, House prices in Auckland and elsewhere have many economists worried, because any drop in price could severely damage the economy as mortgages are so big zero equity could result. National along with the banks have a vested interest in keeping prices rising.
A politicians first priority is to get reelected just as a bank economist must treat his employers interests as priority. The good of society is a secondary consideration. As a bit of a cynic I regard all political promises from that viewpoint along with commentary from vested interests such as business organizations ( nearly put an s in there instead of a z) Federated Farmers and even Unions who are all promoting their members interests as being for the good of the country.
National record is boosted by the ChCh earthquake, dairy prices and heavy borrowing. These are not sustainable into the future.
You can produce all the stats you like but comparing the record of the present with the past govt. is not relevant. What is is the the future policy of the opposition and what the incumbent has achieved and proposes.

westerly

fungus pudding
02-07-2014, 07:12 PM
Cuzzie, House prices in Auckland and elsewhere have many economists worried, because any drop in price could severely damage the economy as mortgages are so big zero equity could result. National along with the banks have a vested interest in keeping prices rising.
A politicians first priority is to get reelected just as a bank economist must treat his employers interests as priority. The good of society is a secondary consideration. As a bit of a cynic I regard all political promises from that viewpoint along with commentary from vested interests such as business organizations ( nearly put an s in there instead of a z)

You should have. American English uses Z. British English - s. No need to thank me.

Cuzzie
02-07-2014, 07:52 PM
Cuzzie, House prices in Auckland and elsewhere have many economists worried, because any drop in price could severely damage the economy as mortgages are so big zero equity could result. National along with the banks have a vested interest in keeping prices rising.
A politicians first priority is to get reelected just as a bank economist must treat his employers interests as priority. The good of society is a secondary consideration. As a bit of a cynic I regard all political promises from that viewpoint along with commentary from vested interests such as business organizations ( nearly put an s in there instead of a z) Federated Farmers and even Unions who are all promoting their members interests as being for the good of the country.
National record is boosted by the ChCh earthquake, dairy prices and heavy borrowing. These are not sustainable into the future.
You can produce all the stats you like but comparing the record of the present with the past govt. is not relevant. What is is the the future policy of the opposition and what the incumbent has achieved and proposes.

westerlyNot sure why you want to go on with this as Labour tenure inflicted a far greater house price increase than Nationals time in Govt. The largest ever in NZs history. National has steady the increase somewhat and now you say its National with the vested interest to keep prices rising. That's an own goal by you westerly due to the fact under National house price increases have slowed dramatically. It is clearly Labour with the vested interest to have even more control on people working the system, not for the system and Labour will turn up and feed the ducks. I'm proud to say that "I'm Pro New Zealand, Anti Labour & try my best not to feed the ducks".
westerly, forget about ChCh, the Dairy Industry or anything else you can blame for National for driving our economy, National is directing NZ out of the red Labour left us in and back towards where we belong. It doesn't matter what is driving it, as long as National gets on board and keeps the momentum moving forward. But you're negitive geared and will always look for things that aren't there. I feel great as most NZers do, infact westerly so should you too even though it is not your team doing all the great work. After all our country - your country is in good shape and heading for even better times, forget about what colour you vote for, just embrace.

BTW, I almost forgot, too much salt is very bad for your blood pressure. It adds extra fluid running around in your body. Heart Attack material stuff for sure.

Major von Tempsky
02-07-2014, 08:54 PM
Hear! Hear! I'm with Cuzzie! :-)

elZorro
02-07-2014, 09:06 PM
Cuzzie, if Labour is so bad for business and employment options, why is it that Labour's last terms produced record numbers of SMEs and self-employed people? This ramping trend stopped when National got in, they slipped backwards and even now, long after the GFC, have not recovered to that level.

I met a well-presented guy the other day who has been struggling for a while to find fulltime work. He has one contract job and is looking for another. He's been working for $16 an hour and also $18 an hour on contract as a technician. Could be OK you think, except he's probably 45 years old, and has a BSc in Chemistry. What the hell is going on, when firms know they can get away with employing graduates on a contract for that sort of money? What sort of an economy do we have at the moment? A fairly shot one I reckon.

Cuzzie, you cannot say that National are leading us out of the red and into the black. They have done nothing of the kind. Unless you mean that they took us into the red, and after nearly six years, have finally been getting close to climbing out of a deep hole. More by good luck than anything, and lowering dairy payments may soon mean they'll be revising their breakeven budget estimate into something further into the future. They are bereft of ideas, and like Westerly and Belgarion, I don't want to see what sort of a crap job National would do with another three years at the 'helm'. It's a rudderless boat, or more correctly we are sailing on the winds of market forces.

craic
02-07-2014, 09:58 PM
"Sailing on the winds of market forces" is exactly how it works. You look for the best value for money, you don't buy from the other guy with the higher price just because he has six kids and a mortgage to service. The guy who is 45 with a degree and working for $18 an hour got there by his own efforts - if he has the brains to get a degree he should have the nous to be away ahead by middle age.

iceman
02-07-2014, 11:40 PM
like Westerly and Belgarion, I don't want to see what sort of a crap job National would do with another three years at the 'helm'. It's a rudderless boat, or more correctly we are sailing on the winds of market forces.

Luckily for NZ, a healthy majority of voters look at the real world around us with open eyes and disagree with the 3 of you.

elZorro
03-07-2014, 06:29 AM
Sorry, the stats don't lie, not when a whole cohort of them are locked into the same message in showing how well-tuned the NZ economy had been by 2008, and how those good results retreated once National had power. Treasury had predicted budget deficits for 10 years in 2008 at the start of the GFC, but these were all small deficits, and in any case the predictions for anything past a couple of years were no more than informed guesses.

Fast-forward to 2014, and National's prediction of budget breakeven after record-topping deficits for several years, is in danger from a lower dairy cheque, an internationally set price that they have no control over. NZ is heavily dependent on dairy, meat and wood exports still. We have learnt nothing from National's tenure. We have not been led anywhere, and old money has simply stayed in the normal spots, by and large.

More state assets have been sold off, the opposite of what NZers want. Manufacturing jobs and many retail businesses are at a low ebb, we have a big welfare cheque to cover, and that won't go away just wishing for it. Where are the policies? If you have a look at Labour's, there are heaps of them that have a good chance of working in NZ's favour.

The voting public have to look past the Crosby-Textor and press brainwashing and vote for change, we need to expect more.

slimwin
03-07-2014, 07:49 AM
Nearly every orderly at wlg hospital has a BSc in Chem. It's not very useful in itself. He needs to then specialize or become a school teacher...

Harvey Specter
03-07-2014, 09:02 AM
You should have. American English uses Z. British English - s. No need to thank me.Should that be American Englizh or British English.

Does anyone really care about the distinction anymore (ie. there are 2 spelling for the same word) given that most auto correct and spell checkers default to American Englizh.

Cuzzie
03-07-2014, 09:02 AM
EZ & belg, it's just the same old dribble from you both. How you think you can reverse Labours overspending and National's fantastic recovery to date is beyond me. Keep on talking Crosby-Textor, keep on talking Labour is great and National has performed badly, because living in a world of un-truths will not help you or Labour one little bit. Face up to Labour's poor performance in their tenour & try to rectify the massive problems Labour have right now with a very poor performing leader if you want to do something for your party. Get mad, get p***ed off and demand better, but don't talk them up to something they are not. BTW, I'm liking your denials as somebody who reads such nonsense from you both, which is a massive magnitude of denial, a denial of epic proportions - Talk them up and keep talking - Talk them all the way to below 20% at the next election - I'm liking that. Labour and their supporters need to move on from all this negative rubbish, find a new positive leader after they lose the next election and move forward towards in a new era for their very own survival.

Just a quick stat that I have left over from yesterday.
During the Clark years the median price for a house in Auckland increased $250'000 from $350'000 to $600'000. That equates to a 71.5% increase.
So far during the Key years the median price for a house in Auckland increased about $114'000 from $600'000 to $713'709(May 2014). That equates to a 19% increase. Play with those figures all you like EZ, even you would not risk flipping those results. To make it even worse for Labour and make National look better with these results, only National has Governed in recent times where the house shortage in Auckland & ChCh has really come into play. I will somewhat give you a get out of jail card here though and say, "Global influence has an impact on real estate prices to and due to the major shortage of new housing in areas like ChCh and Auckland, cheaper housing has come into play". That been said though, if we calculate the 71.5% increase from the Clark years into National's start figure of $600'000 the median price for a house in Auckland would now be $1'029'000. That's "One Million & twenty nine thousand smackaroos". EZ, the stats don't lie.;)
I would say that is the end of that westerly and the findings are. - That under the Labour Govt., Clark & Co has made it near impossible for new homeowners to enter the market. Welcome to the world of Labour.

slimwin
03-07-2014, 09:13 AM
I don't believe so Belg. My brother is the guy that employs them. It was his reply when I suggested I wanted my son to study chemistry at varsity. Maybe an exageration but in essence true.

Sgt Pepper
03-07-2014, 09:16 AM
Yip. Boom bust cycles are good for everyone aren't they Craic?

The Global Financial Crisis had its roots in the deregulation of banking rules some ten years before. The argument was that these rules were no longer required as "market forces" would self-regulate the market. Except it didn't. And it never has.

Bit like Auckland's housing market. A mini GFC in the making for our largest city. Not if, just a when.

Just smile and wave boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey

Belg
Listened to the dairy analyst for Rabobank on national radio, she sounded a bit alarmed at the trend(downwards that is ) for dairy prices. The EU is racheting up its production and so is the US. Combine that with the inevitable housing "correction" and rising interest rates then the fall out for National in the coming 3 years wont be pretty. What do you think, am I being too pessimistic?

westerly
03-07-2014, 09:38 AM
You should have. American English uses Z. British English - s. No need to thank me.

Do not wish to upset Cuzzie

westerly

artemis
03-07-2014, 09:46 AM
....... BTW, I almost forgot, too much salt is very bad for your blood pressure. It adds extra fluid running around in your body. Heart Attack material stuff for sure.

OT WARNING!! It is true that some science says that. It is also true that other science says it ain't so. Most of it more recent. As I posted earlier - the jury is still out.

fungus pudding
03-07-2014, 09:53 AM
Nope. Its a very real "perfect storm" for NZ.

FYI: It takes about 3-5 years for dairy markets to ratchet up so the flood of additional supply, with the falling prices, is to be expected. The question is tho: how much investment, or over-investment was made by the dairy industry in response to record prices? If it was way too much ... Dairy prices have a long way further to go down before an equilibrium is restored once the marginal producers have been forces out of the market - about another 3-5 years - and this will hurt NZ big time as, unlike the US and the EU, we don't have BMWs or Catapillas and Boeing jets to augment our economy.

discl: I am largely cashing up anything that looks "frothy" (alas, a large chunk of my portfolio) and will sit safely on cash and near-cash to pick up the flotsam and jetsam after the storm. "Goldilocks" and "rock star" economies have a bad habit of falling from grace - suddenly and hard. They are temporary things without strong leadership (e.g. Singapore) or rock solid backbones (e.g. Norway) - of which we have neither. I actually hope National do wing in on a very small majority as the storm, if it comes, will hit in the next three years.

Just smile and wave boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey

Just to help us all out, could you tell us the date?

Sgt Pepper
03-07-2014, 12:12 PM
Nope. Its a very real "perfect storm" for NZ.

FYI: It takes about 3-5 years for dairy markets to ratchet up so the flood of additional supply, with the falling prices, is to be expected. The question is tho: how much investment, or over-investment was made by the dairy industry in response to record prices? If it was way too much ... Dairy prices have a long way further to go down before an equilibrium is restored once the marginal producers have been forces out of the market - about another 3-5 years - and this will hurt NZ big time as, unlike the US and the EU, we don't have BMWs or Catapillas and Boeing jets to augment our economy.

discl: I am largely cashing up anything that looks "frothy" (alas, a large chunk of my portfolio) and will sit safely on cash and near-cash to pick up the flotsam and jetsam after the storm. "Goldilocks" and "rock star" economies have a bad habit of falling from grace - suddenly and hard. They are temporary things without strong leadership (e.g. Singapore) or rock solid backbones (e.g. Norway) - of which we have neither. I actually hope National do wing in on a very small majority as the storm, if it comes, will hit in the next three years.

Just smile and wave boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey

Belg Good analysis.Naturally we hope it does not happen for all all our sakes, however the signs are indeed ominous. John Key seems in a state of denial, very concerning for the next three years. I am uncertain when any potential downturn will occur but at a guess I think economic indicators will start turning significantly by the beginning of 2016. The list of icebergs we could strike

1. Interest rates increasing faster than anticipated
2. Property crash in China, banks defaulting, decreased consumer demand
3.Property crash in Auckland rapidly spiralling into negative equity for thousands of the "married and mortgaged" .Mortgagee sales
4. Dairy prices decreasing to $4.00perkg milk solid early 2016.
5. Destabilising of oil supplies/ uncertainty with the entrenchment of ISIS as the default government of Iraq. Any threats by ISIS to Saudi Arabian security will see oil prices rapidly increasing to $200 per barrel.
6. Untidy unravelling by US Federal Reserve of quantitative easing.

Belg, my friend, I think you are very wise to cash up and hunker down

elZorro
03-07-2014, 01:06 PM
I am already cashed up, mainly because I'm a poor investor outside my business area.
Harvey Specter, shouldn't it be Harvey Spectre?

Cuzzie, you have managed to encapsulate the biggest lot of lies in one sentence that I've ever seen.

How you think you can reverse Labours overspending and National's fantastic recovery to date is beyond me.


Barf. Labour had managed to nearly remove all Crown debt, was running strong budget surpluses, how could they have been overspending? You think we all have the memory of a gnat or something? And we've been rebutting your lies for months, but still you come out with them.

Yes, I could make my business look good if I borrowed millions from some investors, but at the end of the next year or two they'd be wanting to see a return. National has not returned a stable economic result for NZ. They have repaid the comparatively very small favours that National party funders have thrown in, handsomely. They got that right.

Cuzzie
03-07-2014, 01:09 PM
Nope. Its a very real "perfect storm" for NZ.

FYI: It takes about 3-5 years for dairy markets to ratchet up so the flood of additional supply, with the falling prices, is to be expected. The question is tho: how much investment, or over-investment was made by the dairy industry in response to record prices? If it was way too much ... Dairy prices have a long way further to go down before an equilibrium is restored once the marginal producers have been forces out of the market - about another 3-5 years - and this will hurt NZ big time as, unlike the US and the EU, we don't have BMWs or Catapillas and Boeing jets to augment our economy.A perfect storm for NZ for somebody that is negative geared like you belg. National is already onto it, as is the booming oil & gas industry that is about to explode here. Another reason Labour so dearly wanted to win this time around, to take credit for what is about to happen. Key has made every and I mean everything possible to make this happen. He has been very proactive and must be congratulated. I agree with EZ's post a few days ago with the pollution of our waterways caused by the dairy expansion that has gone on this past couple of years. It should've been looked into 18 months ago and some from of tax added by now to go towards cleaning up our waterways & or education and work habits for farmers.

Modern oil juniors like TAG Oil use the latest techniques and is now a very clean industry. The dairy farms around Taranaki could clean up their act by allowing more drilling in the region. So drill for a cleaner environment - that's common sense Green thinking in your face for you. Corps like TAG & NZEC are getting more oil now from the old and disused drill sites vs. when they were in full production years ago. Add the west coast pool that was discovered two weeks ago, the Canterbury Basin, the East Coast of the N.I & Northland and we have an industry worth three Dairy Farming incomes.

But you are probably going to moan about that too aye!!!



Whats the difference between a lefty and a pizza?
A pizza can feed a family of four.

Cuzzie
03-07-2014, 01:11 PM
Cuzzie, you have managed to encapsulate the biggest lot of lies in one sentence that I've ever seen.


You carry on thinking that EZ, I LIKE THAT A LOT. You just can't fix stupid.

elZorro
03-07-2014, 01:48 PM
You carry on thinking that EZ, I LIKE THAT A LOT. You just can't fix stupid.

And your rebuttal is? Never on a debating team huh?

Harvey Specter
03-07-2014, 02:20 PM
Harvey Specter, shouldn't it be Harvey Spectre? ???

You’re never going to win big if you only look to minimize your losses.http://elitedaily.com/money/entrepreneurship/the-10-things-we-can-learn-from-harvey-specter-from-suits/

craic
03-07-2014, 02:55 PM
Cashing up as you claim is just swapping one bit of paper for another albeit they are now electronic. Negative equity -in homes - is of no consequence to the majority who work, pay their mortgage and live in the property. All the prophets of doom will not, between them, cause one drop of rain to fall that was not going to fall anyway.

fungus pudding
03-07-2014, 04:24 PM
The diplomat allowed to leave New Zealand after an alleged sexual assault will return to face the charges, the Malaysian Government has announced
...
It heads off an escalating diplomatic crisis as police moved to investigate his extradition.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10225839/Malaysian-diplomat-to-face-charges

Now that's it a police matter the facts of what Govt ministers did (i.e. National's McCully or even Key as he claims to have known about it for some time) or what MFAT did are now going to be hidden for some time. Allen has offered to resign too I believe.

Still a good result for the victim and good on the Malaysian govt for doing the right thing.


Victim? Complainant maybe. The diplomat is still innocent.

elZorro
03-07-2014, 06:12 PM
???

You’re never going to win big if you only look to minimize your losses.

http://elitedaily.com/money/entrepreneurship/the-10-things-we-can-learn-from-harvey-specter-from-suits/

Ah, sorry for my ignorance. However, and maybe this applies to Cuzzie more:


I don’t know what imaginary world you’re skipping in right now, but it’s time you joined us in the real world.

Sgt Pepper
03-07-2014, 06:25 PM
Victim? Complainant maybe. The diplomat is still innocent.

My goodness John Keys good, the Murray McCully "problem" solved.
Colin Craig will be very happy, Murray McCully will be NZs next ambassador to ???

fungus pudding
03-07-2014, 06:48 PM
My goodness John Keys good, the Murray McCully "problem" solved.
Colin Craig will be very happy, Murray McCully will be NZs next ambassador to ???

Nothing to do with Key.

elZorro
03-07-2014, 07:09 PM
A perfect storm for NZ for somebody that is negative geared like you belg. National is already onto it, as is the booming oil & gas industry that is about to explode here. Another reason Labour so dearly wanted to win this time around, to take credit for what is about to happen. Key has made every and I mean everything possible to make this happen. He has been very proactive and must be congratulated. I agree with EZ's post a few days ago with the pollution of our waterways caused by the dairy expansion that has gone on this past couple of years. It should've been looked into 18 months ago and some from of tax added by now to go towards cleaning up our waterways & or education and work habits for farmers.

Modern oil juniors like TAG Oil use the latest techniques and is now a very clean industry. The dairy farms around Taranaki could clean up their act by allowing more drilling in the region. So drill for a cleaner environment - that's common sense Green thinking in your face for you. Corps like TAG & NZEC are getting more oil now from the old and disused drill sites vs. when they were in full production years ago. Add the west coast pool that was discovered two weeks ago, the Canterbury Basin, the East Coast of the N.I & Northland and we have an industry worth three Dairy Farming incomes.

But you are probably going to moan about that too aye!!!



Whats the difference between a lefty and a pizza?
A pizza can feed a family of four.


Drill for a cleaner environment? - well that's hard to do when the oil you extract, comes back up with extra radiation that was formerly locked well under the surface. Some NZ farms have apparently been used as landfill for fracking test material, until some testing showed it up as not such a good idea.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-15/radioactive-waste-booms-with-oil-as-new-rules-mulled.html

Radium, that's the stuff. It registers as background radiation just about everywhere. Especially in Taranaki.

http://business.scoop.co.nz/2012/11/28/fracking-still-too-risky/

When drilling slurries and material are buried 250mm underground and then tests of the overburden are made by a single right-wing researcher, and without a single reference to the word Radium, it all looks OK.

http://www.trc.govt.nz/assets/Publications/reviews-of-landfarming/Edmeades-landfarms-Sept2013-web.pdf

elZorro
03-07-2014, 08:00 PM
I have pointed out before, the striking correlation over recent decades, of Labour terms with low unemployment, and National terms with higher unemployment.


Great summary of the current political gridlock by Dean Baker and Jared Bernstein:

There are many policies that can reduce inequality, but there is none as straightforward conceptually and as difficult politically as full employment. The basic point is simple: at low rates of unemployment, the demand for labor allows workers at the middle and bottom of the wage distribution to achieve gains in hourly wages, annual hours of work, and thus income.
Levels of unemployment are not the gift or curse of the gods; they are the result of conscious economic policy. The decision to tolerate high rates of unemployment is a choice. It is one that has enormous implications not just for the millions of people (USA) who are needlessly unemployed or underemployed but also for tens of millions of workers in the bottom half of the wage distribution whose bargaining power is undermined by high unemployment.

Cuzzie
03-07-2014, 10:12 PM
Cuz, we know you work in oil and/or mining sector ... Goggle tells us that.

Miners and oilers I know in NZ, mainly engineers, aren't reporting an industry that is about to explode. So, spill the beans ... What do you know? Has National done some back room deals with big oil?

Is this why you froth at the mouth so when any criticism is levelled at that "nice Mr Key" and the National party?belg, clearly you need to find new contacts with regards to the oil & gas industry. I don't need to spill the beans ... it's out there. National has done deals you're right and no I've always voted for National.

Cuzzie
03-07-2014, 10:44 PM
Drill for a cleaner environment? - well that's hard to do when the oil you extract, comes back up with extra radiation that was formerly locked well under the surface. Some NZ farms have apparently been used as landfill for fracking test material, until some testing showed it up as not such a good idea.

Radium, that's the stuff. It registers as background radiation just about everywhere. Especially in Taranaki.
When drilling slurries and material are buried 250mm underground and then tests of the overburden are made by a single right-wing researcher, and without a single reference to the word Radium, it all looks OK.
Well then EZ you are going to love the naturally fracked Waipawa and Whangai Formation source rocks on the East Coast Basin. No fracking needed, maybe just a tickle up by perforating the oil well casing. The pressure is strong and they may not even need to perf. After testing the Ngapaeruru-1 well, TAG needed to seal off with an oversize cap. Not that Fracking is bad and despite your scaremongering, no where as bad as pollution from Dairy Farming.
Case in action, Taranaki speaker for Don't Frack the Bay & dairy farmer Sarah Roberts condemned the industry. TAG's Cheal oil field is right next door to her Dairy Farm and she was making a big song and dance about her family falling ill due to chemicals from fracking. The Taranaki Regional Council did a series of tests and found contamination plenty of it and all from chemicals she had been using on the farm. The decision was - The study found the only contamination is from farming, not drilling. She poisoned herself. No Radiation, no Radium no contamination period from drilling and fracking right next door. May I suggest you research more, look for links relevant to the O&G Industry in NZ and maybe you can compete with some that has far more knowledge than you on the subject. Your 2nd link states, "The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has indicated fracking can be safe if the process is properly regulated". That is 100% correct. Listen to what your link states, it's dam good advice.

fungus pudding
04-07-2014, 03:14 AM
The police are satisfied that she is a victim. ... http://www.thefreedictionary.com/victim

The police will be well aware of the law and the presumption of innocence.

elZorro
04-07-2014, 06:20 AM
Well then EZ you are going to love the naturally fracked Waipawa and Whangai Formation source rocks on the East Coast Basin. No fracking needed, maybe just a tickle up by perforating the oil well casing. The pressure is strong and they may not even need to perf. After testing the Ngapaeruru-1 well, TAG needed to seal off with an oversize cap. Not that Fracking is bad and despite your scaremongering, no where as bad as pollution from Dairy Farming.
Case in action, Taranaki speaker for Don't Frack the Bay & dairy farmer Sarah Roberts condemned the industry. TAG's Cheal oil field is right next door to her Dairy Farm and she was making a big song and dance about her family falling ill due to chemicals from fracking. The Taranaki Regional Council did a series of tests and found contamination plenty of it and all from chemicals she had been using on the farm. The decision was - The study found the only contamination is from farming, not drilling. She poisoned herself. No Radiation, no Radium no contamination period from drilling and fracking right next door. May I suggest you research more, look for links relevant to the O&G Industry in NZ and maybe you can compete with some that has far more knowledge than you on the subject. Your 2nd link states, "The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has indicated fracking can be safe if the process is properly regulated". That is 100% correct. Listen to what your link states, it's dam good advice.

I guess there are two issues, one is that oil from shale rock (even if not fracked) often brings up extra radium with it, and tonnes of filter material that generally show high Radium concentrations have to be disposed of somehow. Then there are special chemicals and even radioactive tracers that are used to improve and measure the effects of fracking.

Let's say I was disturbed to find a forage scientist testing soils and forage on a land farm, but only the top soil layer that was the original replaced overburden, and no mention of any Radium testing. Then it's all written up as a 'scientific' report.

Your other report about a neighbour of Cheal is probably also correct, but again no mention of Radium levels. Why not test the levels and report on them in that case?

p.s. for further reference you need to add an n for "damn'. :)

fungus pudding
04-07-2014, 08:13 AM
McCully was told about the incident on May 12 but did not hear about it again until it was raised by the media. Mfat chief executive John Allen says he learned about the incident for the first time last week.

On May 10, Muhammad Rizalman bin Ismail was arrested on charges of burglary and attempted rape in relation to an alleged attack on a 21 year-old woman in her home in Brooklyn in Wellington.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10230402/Mfat-official-takes-blame-for-diplomat-bungle

Very odd goings on. McCully knew way before and chain of command not being followed? What was Oliver's relationship with McCully then?

By the way FP, is English not your first language? Or were trying to imply the victim is not to be believed?

It is for a court of law to decide whether the alleged victim is to be believed. Not you, me or the police.

Cuzzie
04-07-2014, 08:40 AM
I guess there are two issues, one is that oil from shale rock (even if not fracked) often brings up extra radium with it, and tonnes of filter material that generally show high Radium concentrations have to be disposed of somehow. Then there are special chemicals and even radioactive tracers that are used to improve and measure the effects of fracking.

Let's say I was disturbed to find a forage scientist testing soils and forage on a land farm, but only the top soil layer that was the original replaced overburden, and no mention of any Radium testing. Then it's all written up as a 'scientific' report.

Your other report about a neighbour of Cheal is probably also correct, but again no mention of Radium levels. Why not test the levels and report on them in that case?

p.s. for further reference you need to add an n for "damn'. :)EZ, radium is as natural as oil lets not forget that. This is not a man made chemical. It is natural and occurs is very low ratios. Water also is found where oil is and when oil & ground water mix you get concentrations of dissolved components that can build during rock & water contact. To add to that, it also depends of the elements within the water and rock. For example these trace elements could contain Aluminum, Molybdenum, Uranium, Barium, Lead & Chloride plus many many more. All of these elements can also be a by-product of drilling for oil. Some of them like Chloride intensifies the solubility for other elements and when that happens (for Chloride anyway) Radium will be present. Key words here EZ are - when Chloride is a trace element of ground water, very low levels of Radium & concentrations of dissolved components. It's no issue unless you read propaganda website like Climate justice Taranaki or Frack Free Hawkes Bay. The oil itself is a far greater danger than small trace elements and that is exactly why the Oil & Gas Industry is safe due to intense regulations.

You may or may not be aware of contents of the Gisborne City Council resource consent that has just been granted to TAG Oil to drill an exploration Well on Waitangi Hill. If you are not, read up on it and tell me it's not a water-tight binding contract for environmental issues. TAG had no problem signing.

Finally, thanks for resorting to being the spelling police chief again. That's a sure sign lack of debating tacit knowledge. BTW, why we are on that subject, your spelling has improved greatly EZ, well done - Keep it up. :cool:

Cuzzie
04-07-2014, 09:22 AM
Sgt Pepper et al, just in case you weren't aware, the GDT (Global Dairy Trade) auction site has auctions from multiple suppliers. And the suppliers, e.g Fonterra, are generally NOT putting all their supply through GDT.

From memory, Fonterra has many long term supply contracts that account for the bulk of their production. Can't remember how much goes thru GDT, but if memory serves, its way less than 50%.

Consequently, and my apologies for not making this clear, in NZ we have some time before the prices on GDT affect the long term supply agreements. And of course, when these longer term supply contracts come up for renewal, the GDT auction prices might have gone back to record levels -possible but unlikely IMO.

Conversely, when the long term supply agreements are renegotiated, the suppliers may get forced into long term agreements below where near term prices are "likely" to go.

So ... prices are very likely to come down but its effect won't be as immediate as I might have led some to believe. Time frame, as indicated, is still 3-5 years before a new "equilibrium" between supply and demand is established. (Of course, further devaluation of the USD may look like in nominal terms prices haven't changed. ;) )belg, you are going to love this - And within that 3-5 years time frame this will happen ................................................

Over the next five years meat and wool exports could rise by 22 per cent, with a large demand from Asia and high prices because of a globally constrained supply of beef and lamb. Well, well, well what do you know - looks like meat & wool exports are about to implode. What will our dear Labour negative geared bloggers on this site say? I hear them say - wool has chemicals and animal rights for sheep & cattle from them maybe. Or John Key is just exploiting animals. I wait with baited breath.

Looks like Tim Groser & Murray McCully have been doing some very sound groundwork and will both be in the headlines for all the right reasons.

Our negative geared friends are going to love this ... not: Export returns from the primary sector were estimated to have hit $37.7 billion in 2013/14 but were forecast to fall to $35.8 billion in 2014/15, rising steadily over the next three years to hit $40.8 billion in 2017/18.

Oh yeah, they will hate this stat even more: In 2012, 36 per cent of the red meat and wool workforce had a formal qualification and by 2025 that was expected to increase to 55 per cent. The industry was likely to need to find an additional 32,700 trained workers to replace the natural attribution of workers. I can hear them fuming that National is creating even more jobs. What will they have left to say.

News source: Bay of Plenty Times - Heading - (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/bay-of-plenty-times/rural/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503348&objectid=11286330)Demand drives export rise. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/bay-of-plenty-times/rural/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503348&objectid=11286330)


It's just another beautiful day in paradise isn't it!!!:cool:

Cuzzie
04-07-2014, 10:07 AM
Just too funny Cuz.

Did you read the source document from the MPI before commenting? ... What! No? No surprises there.

http://www.mpi.govt.nz/news-resources/publications.aspx?title=Situation+and+Outlook+for+ Primary+Industries&keywords=SOPI&2012

And your mathes!

The industry was likely to need to find an additional 32,700 trained workers to replace the natural attribution of workers. I can hear them fuming that National is creating even more jobs. What will they have left to say.

What is left to say indeed :) ... Perhaps that "replace" means no net gain.

Honestly Cuz. Have you heard the expression "it is better to keep ones mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"?

Are all National supporters like Cuz? ... If so, our education system needs a massive overhaul! ... Alas, won't happen under National tho as the selfish, aging, dwindling, middle class that elects National are only interested in themselves. Shame on them! Blinkers on again belg - no surprises there, read my link and quote from that - not what you would like me to be quoting from. Slimy belg but no fooling anyone. My link includes the MPI publication I am quoting & that's where you need to quote from too. Easy as unless you are negitive geared like you.

Cuzzie
04-07-2014, 10:10 AM
Hey EZ, about the only thing you and I agree on is Dairy pollution of our waterways. Have a read of this but be warned it is even more great news for dairying and will help the clean green image improve. - ReGen (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11287134)

I'm gone for the rest of the day so will leave you this to ponder too: Labour pains - Why it's failing (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11287241) Enjoy that one belg.

What a beautiful day is is today. I know I'm smiling.:)

westerly
04-07-2014, 10:25 AM
What a beautiful day is is today. I know I'm smiling.:)

Heard on the news the Auckland Council estimates there are 15000 sleeping on the streets of Auckland.
Keep smiling

westerly

craic
04-07-2014, 10:45 AM
Thats because other councils clean up their mess. All over Brisbane there are little Signs "Please do not feed the wild birds and animals" With the explanation that it only encourages them and interferes with their normal life systems. If Auckland closed down the handout stations and hordes of kind people and required their street people to undergo counselling and training before they got their cabbage soup and bread. And maybe they could ignore the tribes of youngsters who stay out all night on the streets and then go home during the day for a feed and a shower.

craic
04-07-2014, 12:18 PM
I would consider that an offensive post that should be removed by the moderator

[said post removed: STMOD]

Sgt Pepper
04-07-2014, 01:12 PM
And if removed, I will leave sharetrader for good. Why? Because it has become a political tool. I will not however, go quietly, I will contact the owners and ensure they are aware of a site that perpetuates unquestioned silliness and bigotry. Note: This thread has been saved in the event STMOD removes ANYTHING!

Craic, If you are offended with me associating all National Party supporters with the likes of Cuzzie and his ilk, then I suggest you come out and start correcting Cuzzie's idiocy.

Why not start by quoting National Policy and their performance?

To complain, indirectly, that you are offended, is just cowardly and pathetic.

Smile and Wave, Boys. Smile and Wave. #TeamKey

Belg
Don't go, I have always found your posts balanced and thought provoking. You seem to have good analytical skills

craic
04-07-2014, 01:58 PM
It is neither. I am not offended by anything after thirty years as a probation officer. I am concerned that you are allowed to go down to a level of abuse of others that, in any reasonable societry would attract censure.
And if removed, I will leave sharetrader for good. Why? Because it has become a political tool. I will not however, go quietly, I will contact the owners and ensure they are aware of a site that perpetuates unquestioned silliness and bigotry. Note: This thread has been saved in the event STMOD removes ANYTHING!

Craic, If you are offended with me associating all National Party supporters with the likes of Cuzzie and his ilk, then I suggest you come out and start correcting Cuzzie's idiocy.

Why not start by quoting National Policy and their performance?

To complain, indirectly, that you are offended, is just cowardly and pathetic.

Smile and Wave, Boys. Smile and Wave. #TeamKey

fungus pudding
04-07-2014, 05:12 PM
Thanks Sargent. I've also been told, many times, I have a low tolerance for fools that gets me into trouble. Such is life. :)


Well you must have an extremely low tolerance for the leader of your favourite party then. The one who is sorry he's a man. He would have been better to keep pushing their Moa policy.

Beagle
04-07-2014, 06:29 PM
Well you must have an extremely low tolerance for the leader of your favourite party then. The one who is sorry he's a man. He would have been better to keep pushing their Moa policy.

David Cunliff made an absolute fool of himself today. He's offended a lot of men and many others think he's some sort of pathetic wimp who'll say anything to buy votes.
Labour can't win without strong leadership, not that I care as I think Johnny's doing a good job. Election is virtually a foregone conclusion in my opinion.

Cuzzie
04-07-2014, 07:27 PM
Looks like I missed all the action. Never mind, no need to know what belg said, I can well imagine. Look, I would be frustrated too if I was a Labour blogger, nothing is going right for them, Cunliffe is a total disaster, they are polling as good as the last election and when they try to compete with National bloggers they end up trying to put out fire with gasoline. They follow their leaders lead and oppose everything as their first step rule and clearly they end up making themselves look stupid. Total Disaster on steroids right there. All I'm trying to say to the loonie left is smarten up, think for yourselves, disagree with what you believe is not the case by all means, but don't disagree just for the sake of it. National does not make 100% mistakes every time, but that is the case with our Labour bloggers on Share Trader. Now belg is making threats to Sharetrader too(Good luck with that belg) which is not called for. Toss your toys out the cot all you like, belg it's not a good look - Man Up.


Speaking of which - moving onto David Cunliffe. Who said you were a man in the first place. To be a man you need to earn that title and part of that is being totally respectful to the fairer sex, not treat them like fools in the hope of gaining a few votes. You have to be a good upstanding person and have very high standards and not tell pork pies. A man would not be a pedifile, a rapist, commit family violence or be a wife beater - you can't be called a man if you do that. What you are is a male criminal but not a man. They need to man up too, but still won't earn the title of being a man. David is just after votes from somebody weak enough to embrace his apology for being a man. David Cunliffe you are an embarrassment to all the men out there and will just think of you as just a male from now on, just to help you out with your apology for being one.

Is he for real, really - is Cunliffe for real. He seems hell bent on National getting more votes. Maybe he has been planted by National, it sure seems that way.

Been a great day today hasn't it!!! Let me share one of my favorite songs with you. U2 ... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXrJdOD5syo) turn your speakers up. :cool:

fungus pudding
04-07-2014, 08:10 PM
[FONT=arial]

Is he for real, really - is Cunliffe for real. He seems hell bent on National getting more votes. Maybe he has been planted by National, it sure seems that way.



Of course he's real - here's the video clip of him - living proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSQzTKcUda0

Cuzzie
04-07-2014, 08:21 PM
Of course he's real - here's the video clip of him - living proof.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSQzTKcUda0
Thanks for ruining my night f.p after such a beautiful day too. Every time my wife sees Cunliffe on T.V, she says he gives her the creeps. She can see straight through him too.

Sgt Pepper
04-07-2014, 08:30 PM
Looks like I missed all the action. Never mind, no need to know what belg said, I can well imagine. Look, I would be frustrated too if I was a Labour blogger, nothing is going right for them, Cunliffe is a total disaster, they are polling as good as the last election and when they try to compete with National bloggers they end up trying to put out fire with gasoline. They follow their leaders lead and oppose everything as their first step rule and clearly they end up making themselves look stupid. Total Disaster on steroids right there. All I'm trying to say to the loonie left is smarten up, think for yourselves, disagree with what you believe is not the case by all means, but don't disagree just for the sake of it. National does not make 100% mistakes every time, but that is the case with our Labour bloggers on Share Trader. Now belg is making threats to Sharetrader too(Good luck with that belg) which is not called for. Toss your toys out the cot all you like, belg it's not a good look - Man Up.


Speaking of which - moving onto David Cunliffe. Who said you were a man in the first place. To be a man you need to earn that title and part of that is being totally respectful to the fairer sex, not treat them like fools in the hope of gaining a few votes. You have to be a good upstanding person and have very high standards and not tell pork pies. A man would not be a pedifile, a rapist, commit family violence or be a wife beater - you can't be called a man if you do that. What you are is a male criminal but not a man. They need to man up too, but still won't earn the title of being a man. David is just after votes from somebody weak enough to embrace his apology for being a man. David Cunliffe you are an embarrassment to all the men out there and will just think of you as just a male from now on, just to help you out with your apology for being one.

Is he for real, really - is Cunliffe for real. He seems hell bent on National getting more votes. Maybe he has been planted by National, it sure seems that way.

Been a great day today hasn't it!!! Let me share one of my favorite songs with you. U2 ... (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXrJdOD5syo) turn your speakers up. :cool:

Hey Cuzzie
Im a bit surprised you like U2, Bono is a British LABOUR PARTY supporter and addressed one of their conferences

Cheers
SP

Cuzzie
05-07-2014, 07:23 AM
Hey Cuzzie
Im a bit surprised you like U2, Bono is a British LABOUR PARTY supporter and addressed one of their conferences

Cheers
SP Bono has the right to support anybody he likes & I have the right to listen to whatever music I like. The Key word being "right". So do you only listen to music from people who have certain political leanings? I don't and U2 are one of my favorite bands. Nice I've got that freedom of choice aye?

Why does D.C remind me of this feller all of a sudden. I'm a man. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6Veqg8ZcqI)

fungus pudding
05-07-2014, 08:23 AM
Cunliffe made the apology at a Women's Refuge symposium today, where he also pledged to invest an extra $60 million into family violence services.

He spoke of the "bull****, deep-seated sexism" still prevalent in New Zealand.

"It needs to stop," he said.

"I don't often say it - I'm sorry for being a man," Cunliffe said, "because family and sexual violence is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men."
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10232457/David-Cunliffe-I-m-sorry-for-being-a-man

Seems a completely reasonable thing to say in the context.



It's a ridiculous thing to say in any context. Defend him as much as you like, but the man's a clown. Labour stalwarts know it and he'll be gone at the first opportunity, which unfortunately for Labour will not be until after the election. The only winner out of his dismal performance will be the Green mob. And that's a double blow for Labour - they're already seen as inseparable in the event of a win, and that one thing alone will go against them for a decade or so. By then school leavers, who will have turned into voters will make the Green party stronger than Labour. The current school generation can only mumble 3 things after their years of brainwashing - sustainable, recycle and agw.

fungus pudding
05-07-2014, 10:03 AM
Please do explain why you think so? The female point of view would be much appreciated.

Well ask a woman if that's what you want.

Sgt Pepper
05-07-2014, 10:35 AM
The following is a humorous satirical construct which has no basis in fact, either implied or real, no offence is intended

A late but urgent call from JK to Crosby Textor


Sydney Office: " Mark, JKs on the phone, can you talk now?"

Mark Textor " Again! oh no, yeah put him through"

JK: "Hi Mark, thanks for talking I know your busy"

MT" yeah just working on how to stop A2 milk from increasing its market share in OZ,hope you don't have any shares JK?"

JK " no don't have any,...OH my mistake,... I have no idea where any of my investments are as they are in a blind trust"

As JK prattles on MT thinks two things

1. This guy is an idiot

2. In the 1990s you obviously only needed average intelligence to make $50
million.

Anyway after telling MT for the umptenth time that he was brought up in a state house, he manages to bring JK back to task as he wants to go home.

JK" sorry Mark, I get a wee bit side tracked sometimes, anyway you know DC at that silly family violence conference said about he was ashamed of being a man, what should I say in response'?

MT: "Just concentrate on the Man thing, ignore all else"

JK: " thanks mate, I must admit it was great timing as I was really getting worried about that Malaysian Diplomat issue"

MT: "Ditto that, hey we must talk about strategies for 2017 election, I know its seems premature, but...."

JK : " Mark not interested in 2017, shall we say Ive got other plans, now THATS something we need to talk about and plan for. If you could prepare a report for me, title it "diplomatic appointments for prime ministers when they are sick of the their job"
and don't put any big words in it, because I will have to get Bill English to read it for me and then the cats out of the bag."

MT " I promise"

JK "Good night"


MT "night"

Vaygor1
05-07-2014, 10:59 AM
"I don't often say it - I'm sorry for being a man," Cunliffe said, "because family and sexual violence is overwhelmingly perpetrated by men."

Seems a completely reasonable thing to say in the context.


It's a ridiculous thing to say in any context.

I wouldn't go so far to say it is completely reasonable, or ridiculous either but in my view it was a stunt, and in it Cunliffe's message was lost. The press jumping on it and all the resulting comments from newsreaders and forum posters are facts. I note Belgarion that you are even compelled to restate Cunliffe's message up the top of your post and highlight it in bold, and I for one don't blame you.

Taken a step further and given all the indiscretions that both sexes are capable of being guilty of in life, one could apologise for being a human being… but not as a party leader on the podium with an election looming.

Snapper
05-07-2014, 10:59 AM
The thing that gets me about David Cunliffe is his faux sincerity. I don't think he gives a rat's arse about anything apart from his ambition to be PM. When you look at him delivering that speech on family violence, the little hesitation, the fake emotion in his voice, "I don't say this very often.." (What?? you mean you've said it before??).

Belg, re the female perspective, my wife (as the mother of two boys) was horrified that he could say something like that. She doesn't want them growing up ashamed to be men.

If he just talked about policy he might gain some traction but every time he opens his mouth he says something stupid.

He showed his ruthless side when he white-anted David Shearer then he intimated that any who were looking to oppose him due to the Liu letter were scabs. The man is National's best asset leading up to the election, they must be laughing their heads off.

fungus pudding
05-07-2014, 11:20 AM
Okay then. From a males point of view then - Please do explain why you think so?

It's a bluddy insult to most males for a start. The public backlash should tell you that. It is also so false that it makes me want to puke. It's typical Cunliffe, the human chameleon, playing to the audience, calling workmen 'mate', adopting accents and talking styles when he felt necessary, e.g. the well publicised market rave. He just seems unable to be the real genuine David Cunliffe.

artemis
05-07-2014, 11:23 AM
Very little is being said about family violence perpetrated by women. Although most is committed by men, 16% of family violence arrests are women, and 40% of child homicides are committed by women.

Then there is family violence against men - from Wikipedia. "For the United States, a study by the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) in 2000, surveying sixteen thousand Americans, showed 7.4% of men reported being physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or girlfriend, or date in their lifetime."

fungus pudding
05-07-2014, 11:29 AM
Okay then. From a males point of view then - Please do explain why you think so?


It's a bluddy insult to most males for a start. The public backlash should tell you that. It is also so false that it makes me want to puke. It's typical Cunliffe, the human chameleon, playing to the audience, calling workmen 'mate', adopting accents and talking styles when he felt necessary, e.g. the well publicised market rave. He just seems unable to be the real genuine David Cunliffe.

Sgt Pepper
05-07-2014, 11:55 AM
It's a bluddy insult to most males for a start. The public backlash should tell you that. It is also so false that it makes me want to puke. It's typical Cunliffe, the human chameleon, playing to the audience, calling workmen 'mate', adopting accents and talking styles when he felt necessary, e.g. the well publicised market rave. He just seems unable to be the real genuine David Cunliffe.

Yeah, like John Keys " I was brought up in a state house" .....yes John... we know!

fungus pudding
05-07-2014, 12:16 PM
Can't say I was insulted at all. The public backlash suggests that Kiwi's have an issue confronting facts.



You really should devote a little time to learning what apostrophes mean, why they are necessary, and how to use them.

fungus pudding
05-07-2014, 03:27 PM
Sorry. I guess the meaning is completely lost? Was this why you've no sensible reply?

There is nothing to reply to except to say policies matter less than the personality to a lot of voters as you say. That is why Cunliffe is bad for Labour - but you know all that.

craic
05-07-2014, 03:47 PM
Another broken Labour promise?
[QUOTE=belgarion;490242]And if removed, I will leave sharetrader for good. Why? Because it has become a political tool. I will not however, go quietly, I will contact the owners and ensure they are aware of a site that perpetuates unquestioned silliness and bigotry. Note: This thread has been saved in the event STMOD removes ANYTHING!

fungus pudding
06-07-2014, 08:07 AM
Rodney Hide opens this piece with the following statement:

The true donations scandal in New Zealand politics was reported this week without comment. It's the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union's $60,000 donation to Labour.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11288302

I can't say that I find his logic all that compelling. What do others think?

It's simply a statement of the facts. Logic hardly comes into it.

craic
06-07-2014, 08:44 AM
Unions have always assumed that their members are devout Labour supporters and that they can then take their members subscriptions and hand a large part to Labour to further support the cause. Simple statistics, the vote, proves them wrong. This is one of the principal reasons for the loss of power by the unions - they simply lose the support of their membership. But the bottom line is, the public see this sort of thing and is likely to have a negative affect on the Labour vote. Travelling to town yesterday with a lady passenger whom I know to be a long-term faithful Labour supporter when I was surprised by an outburst "I will never vote Labour while they in with the Greens, The idea of a labour/Greens government turns me right off" I may not have used her exact words, which were probably a bit stronger her sentiments were clear.

Vaygor1
06-07-2014, 08:55 AM
Rodney Hide opens this piece with the following statement:

The true donations scandal in New Zealand politics was reported this week without comment. It's the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union's $60,000 donation to Labour.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11288302

I can't say that I find his logic all that compelling. What do others think?

I guess the part of the statement that needs a bit of logical analysis is whether or not this is a scandal.

I don't think it is a scandal. It's too out in the open for that but I also don't think it is right.

Same goes for the business roundtable setup with National, the insidious relationship between doctors and drug companies, the natural conflict of interest inherent in a stockbroker giving advise… etc etc

fungus pudding
06-07-2014, 09:00 AM
http://tvnz.co.nz/business-news/john-key-stands-skycity-job-figures-5549786

1000 during the construction and 800 once running supposedly.

That is the number of jobs; not'the amount'.

craic
06-07-2014, 09:21 AM
Confused - read the article and went looking for Heffners post - couldn't find it in the last three pages?
That is the number of jobs; not'the amount'.

Vaygor1
06-07-2014, 09:30 AM
You really should devote a little time to learning what apostrophes mean, why they are necessary, and how to use them.


That is the number of jobs; not'the amount'.

What matters the most is if the message/response is understood. Technically you are right in the above FP but I had no trouble understanding Belgarion's and Heffner's responses. Whether I agree with the content or not is an entirely different matter but the above examples do detract from all the good posts and points you make.

Capital letters are important too… there is a big difference between 'helping your uncle Jack off a horse' and 'helping your uncle jack off a horse'… although I doubt even this could be misinterpreted… unless it came from Rolf Harris.

Vaygor1
06-07-2014, 02:02 PM
Confused - read the article and went looking for Heffners post - couldn't find it in the last three pages?

It was from here Craic, 140 pages back.
http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?8606-If-National-wins&p=455719&viewfull=1#post455719

fungus pudding
06-07-2014, 02:27 PM
Confused - read the article and went looking for Heffners post - couldn't find it in the last three pages?

That's because it took me a while to respond. However if you clicked on the blue arrow to the right of Heffner you would have got there.

elZorro
06-07-2014, 06:37 PM
I know you have all been waiting to hear Labour's Leader today, here is the speech he gave to Congress.

http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/07/06/david-cunliffes-address-to-congress-2014/

I think most people would find it hard to disagree with anything he had to say here. These ideas are good, the direction is good, I think the policies will work, especially for middle NZ.

But I have seen the voting stats for poorer decile areas. They just don't vote very reliably, a poor voter turnout. Maybe only 20% vote, that's how low. No wonder National can get away with doing nothing but the status quo for years on end.

craic
06-07-2014, 07:16 PM
Lots of great promises about teachers, class sizes, technology etc. Now can someone tell me why they did not recognise this "priority" during their last term and deliver then? People vote on the world they live in, not on what it might be. Currently the general public are fairly with their lot and this is reflected in the polls. I have no doubt that David Cunliffe will show a significant jump in the ratings because of the huge amount of publicity he has enjoyed this weekend.

Cuzzie
07-07-2014, 07:24 AM
Labour's plan to reduce class sizes is not going to fix better education standards period. Reducing a class size by 4 to 6 students is not going to increase the teachers ability to teach to a higher standard. Furthermore, add 2500 to 3000 teachers into the system that can't get a teaching job because of lack of experience or poor results is just going to dummify students more which is what Labour wants. Easier to control when they are adults.

There are good teaches and bad teaches, Labours plan is going to increase bad teaches and reduce quality teaching to private schools only. Further more to that, an average size school will need to increase their classrooms by about ten per school. Before you do the logistics on that, many schools are already at a capacity size (BUILDINGS). That means 260 existing students on average from a school that is at capacity will have to will have to be moved on. Explain how to go about that?

Schools like Auckland Grammar pump out our best achievers not by mistake. They have the best quality teaching staff available. John Key is right over this, quality over quantity will get the best results every time. This is a no brainer and another poorly thought out policy by Labour who is hell bent on promising everybody everything. We saw this kind of bribery from Clark too.

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 08:18 AM
And what is right or wrong ... is seldom a "simple statement of the facts"?

So where do you stand? Or do you not?

Or can you simply come out and say, with full disclosure, that National has made you "rich" and you care not a fig about anyone else?

You should support Liala Harre and her mate Pam Corkery - they dislike success too. I do know quite a few financially successful people and they overwhelmingly support charities with their time and financially, as I do, but I am not interested in defending myself against baseless, judgmental accusations. I will say though that I made enough to become financially independent in my 20s under a Labour govt. I have always been grateful to Bill Rowling for his dopey spec tax. it made heaps of people very wealthy, not that I am wealthy. It is always easier to make money when Labour are in. Always.

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 08:24 AM
Labour's plan to reduce class sizes is not going to fix better education standards period. Reducing a class size by 4 to 6 students is not going to increase the teachers ability to teach to a higher standard. Furthermore, add 2500 to 3000 teachers into the system that can't get a teaching job because of lack of experience or poor results is just going to dummify students more which is what Labour wants. Easier to control when they are adults.

There are good teaches and bad teaches, Labours plan is going to increase bad teaches and reduce quality teaching to private schools only. Further more to that, an average size school will need to increase their classrooms by about ten per school. Before you do the logistics on that, many schools are already at a capacity size (BUILDINGS). That means 260 existing students on average from a school that is at capacity will have to will have to be moved on. Explain how to go about that?

Schools like Auckland Grammar pump out our best achievers not by mistake. They have the best quality teaching staff available. John Key is right over this, quality over quantity will get the best results every time. This is a no brainer and another poorly thought out policy by Labour who is hell bent on promising everybody everything. We saw this kind of bribery from Clark too.



I'm curious about where Labour gets its figures. 2000 extra classes means 150 to 200 schools possibly. That's a lot of building (a billion at least) plus r and m plus ancillary staff. I doubt that 359 million per annum would look at it. Who costed this one? Parker? I hope not.

Major von Tempsky
07-07-2014, 08:32 AM
There was some research came out overseas about a year and a half ago showing that varying the pupils per teacher didn't actually have an impact. Labour and the Teachers Union have been very determinedly ignoring this.

But for my money, when the historians, media analysts, political scientists look back on the campaign, the defining moment in Labour's loss will be David Cunliffe's wimpish and clumsy announcement that he is apologizing for being a man! I'm still laughing all the way to the polling booth....

craic
07-07-2014, 08:36 AM
My grandson at nine is working through his schooling in London, the best and the worst place on earth to be educated. Fortunately his parents found a home near Barnes Primary and his mother worked tirelessly for the school in various voluntary roles. At nine years of age he was already a top pupil and his parents entered him for consideration by St Pauls, Hammersmith and Hampton. Of 200 applicants, about 15 are selected for the 11+ or whatever it is now and about 8 of those get through. It costs about $200 each, just to sit the exams. He was accepted by both and is frustrated because he has another year-and-a-half at primary before he can gother, probably to St Pauls. His older sister has already moved up to secondary and can't wait to get to school each day. If you want to see a list of teaching staff at the top of the profession in the Western World, Google St Pauls, London. This boys father had to survive some of the most inept teachers this land had to offer. Teacher are only tools used by parents - if the tool is blunt, sharpen it. If it won't take an edge, throw it away and buy a better one.

artemis
07-07-2014, 09:09 AM
There's a Stuff poll on class size impact on student achievement - on their Politics page. Not that many voters yet, but so far 70% say minimal or no impact. 18% say it will have a major impact. Hard to see how that could be the case, actually, so maybe they are mainly teachers or Labour supporters.

As a parent, I would prefer better teachers than 4 to 6 fewer kids in a classroom. If it has to be one or the other.

Good point from Cuzzie re all the extra classrooms needed, but it may be costed in. Has anyone seen the cost breakdown for this new policy?

Sgt Pepper
07-07-2014, 09:52 AM
I'm curious about where Labour gets its figures. 2000 extra classes means 150 to 200 schools possibly. That's a lot of building (a billion at least) plus r and m plus ancillary staff. I doubt that 359 million per annum would look at it. Who costed this one? Parker? I hope not.

FP
You may be surprised but I am. I confess, rather cool on the idea of funding IPADS for all and sundry. Sometimes I wonder if the mantra that we must continually spend more and more on education may be not be the case if we put this under scrutiny. A significant amount of schools budgets are already, apparently, spent on IT. I wonder if we have reached the stage, from a taxpayers point of view, of diminishing returns from education. Samsung and Apple make enough money without my taxes going to them. Anyway just my thought.

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 10:06 AM
FP
You may be surprised but I am. I confess, rather cool on the idea of funding IPADS for all and sundry. Sometimes I wonder if the mantra that we must continually spend more and more on education may be not be the case if we put this under scrutiny. A significant amount of schools budgets are already, apparently, spent on IT. I wonder if we have reached the stage, from a taxpayers point of view, of diminishing returns from education. Samsung and Apple make enough money without my taxes going to them. Anyway just my thought.


I'm not sure why I should be surprised. I think a lot of people would be concerned with schools handing out computer devices willy-nilly, particularly when they will have unlimited full time internet access, as promised.

craic
07-07-2014, 10:10 AM
And what happened to the hungry kids who have to be fed when they get to school or given footwear or a raincoat? And what about the teachers who feel obliged to buy paper and pencils for the children who can't afford them? How many will disappear onto the market place in exchange for a fix of some sort? I have to confess that in my day I actually used a slate and a slate pencil, not in school but at home for maths and the like. It didn't improve my handwriting, which even I can't read but the numerical skills are good - My latest formula turned $100 into $240 on the TAB machine at the club on Saturday.

artemis
07-07-2014, 10:59 AM
I'm not sure why I should be surprised. I think a lot of people would be concerned with schools handing out computer devices willy-nilly, particularly when they will have unlimited full time internet access, as promised.


There was an item on Stuff a couple of days ago - link below - indicating among other things that teachers believed 30% of parents did not know enough about internet safety. Parents used to be warned to have the computer in a family area, and set parental locks but life has changed since them with smart phones, tablets etc. If parents and schools don't educate and monitor internet use, our kids could be looking at anything and talking to anyone. Dishing out a flood of tablets to all kids, especially to those new to the technology, comes with risks that will need to be managed. Though I would contend that ship has already sailed.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/60132877/who-should-teach-kids-internet-safety

winner69
07-07-2014, 11:08 AM
Graphic below on interest.co.nz on Friday tracks how NZ has become a high inequality country

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/70776/fridays-top-10-matthew-bartlett-imf-backing-inequality-unashamed-economic-defenders-in

First glance I took the shaded areas to be when Labour / Nats were in control

But no its decades but no doubt easy to see which government has driven this inequality

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 11:10 AM
There was an item on Stuff a couple of days ago - link below - indicating among other things that teachers believed 30% of parents did not know enough about internet safety. Parents used to be warned to have the computer in a family area, and set parental locks but life has changed since them with smart phones, tablets etc. If parents and schools don't educate and monitor internet use, our kids could be looking at anything and talking to anyone. Dishing out a flood of tablets to all kids, especially to those new to the technology, comes with risks that will need to be managed. Though I would contend that ship has already sailed.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/60132877/who-should-teach-kids-internet-safety


I think the hardware is more of a problem. With losses, thefts, damage etc. I can't imagine the average life being anymore than about a year. I hope that if lost or smashed it will not be up to the school to replace them. I'd like to see the results from schools or countries where this has been trialled.

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 11:13 AM
Graphic below on interest.co.nz on Friday tracks how NZ has become a high inequality country

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/70776/fridays-top-10-matthew-bartlett-imf-backing-inequality-unashamed-economic-defenders-in

First glance I took the shaded areas to be when Labour / Nats were in control

But no its decades but no doubt easy to see which government has driven this inequality

It's hard to make everyone equally well off, but very easy to make them equally poor.

winner69
07-07-2014, 11:15 AM
It's hard to make everyone equally well off, but very easy to make them equally poor.

Just screw the poor bastards a bit at a time eh

Harvey Specter
07-07-2014, 11:33 AM
Graphic below on interest.co.nz on Friday tracks how NZ has become a high inequality country

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/70776/fridays-top-10-matthew-bartlett-imf-backing-inequality-unashamed-economic-defenders-in

First glance I took the shaded areas to be when Labour / Nats were in control

But no its decades but no doubt easy to see which government has driven this inequalityI dont think it is decades (since it doesn't align to decades), it relates to political parties.

There was a spike under national but it would be interesting to know why this was and why it reversed so quickly (you would say it was the tax changes they made but if so, why did it reverse). I also note it was going up at the end of Labours reign, which National reversed after about a year. It would be interesting to see where it was in 2013.

artemis
07-07-2014, 11:46 AM
I think the hardware is more of a problem. With losses, thefts, damage etc. I can't imagine the average life being anymore than about a year. I hope that if lost or smashed it will not be up to the school to replace them. I'd like to see the results from schools or countries where this has been trialled.

Maybe the funding will pay for insurance, perhaps self funded insurance, ie another initial hundy funded by the government and parents start again with the weekly payments. We had a laptop smashed at high school by a feral kid and the contents insurance paid out. Take your point though. Plenty of kids don't look after things well at the best of times, more so maybe if there is little or no cost to them. Still if they find their device valuable in and out of school, they may take more care.

elZorro
07-07-2014, 11:48 AM
I dont think it is decades (since it doesn't align to decades), it relates to political parties.

There was a spike under national but it would be interesting to know why this was and why it reversed so quickly (you would say it was the tax changes they made but if so, why did it reverse). I also note it was going up at the end of Labours reign, which National reversed after about a year. It would be interesting to see where it was in 2013.

Harvey Specter, thanks for clearing that up about the shading. History buffs will note that the start of the neoliberal experiment on NZ is what caused the sharp change for the worse, back in 1984-1986. This was Treasury policy, pinched from Chicago economists. Helen Clark's Labour govt pulled back on some of the excesses of this policy, which was well entrenched by then, and so the GINI index trended down. It has been more erratic since, and I understand that there should be a new data point added soon. Up until now, they've (National) been able to say that there is no conclusive trend for the last few years. Capital gains are not included in this statistic. It's a very clear snapshot of what happens to a small country that embraces neoliberal theory/globalisation, when their markets are far away. The trickle down theory attached to these policies doesn't work, either. The outcomes are obvious.

iceman
07-07-2014, 12:41 PM
FP
You may be surprised but I am. I confess, rather cool on the idea of funding IPADS for all and sundry. Sometimes I wonder if the mantra that we must continually spend more and more on education may be not be the case if we put this under scrutiny. A significant amount of schools budgets are already, apparently, spent on IT. I wonder if we have reached the stage, from a taxpayers point of view, of diminishing returns from education. Samsung and Apple make enough money without my taxes going to them. Anyway just my thought.

The so far largely overlooked thing though is that Labour is NOT promising to GIVE laptops/tablets to all students. They will donate one hundred tax payer dollars towards it and rest will be paid by parents. Tell that to the low income parents with 3 kids to feed, clothe and school, especially when they realise these gadgets will have a lifetime of 12-24 months. It is simply nuts and will seriously PUNISH the low income working families. But, we shouldn't be surprised. Labour abandoned them a long time ago.

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 01:20 PM
The so far largely overlooked thing though is that Labour is NOT promising to GIVE laptops/tablets to all students. They will donate one hundred tax payer dollars towards it and rest will be paid by parents. Tell that to the low income parents with 3 kids to feed, clothe and school, especially when they realise these gadgets will have a lifetime of 12-24 months. It is simply nuts and will seriously PUNISH the low income working families. But, we shouldn't be surprised. Labour abandoned them a long time ago.

What Cunliffe did promise is access to the internet at all times. Who's the lucky service provider?

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 01:20 PM
The so far largely overlooked thing though is that Labour is NOT promising to GIVE laptops/tablets to all students. They will donate one hundred tax payer dollars towards it and rest will be paid by parents. Tell that to the low income parents with 3 kids to feed, clothe and school, especially when they realise these gadgets will have a lifetime of 12-24 months. It is simply nuts and will seriously PUNISH the low income working families. But, we shouldn't be surprised. Labour abandoned them a long time ago.

What Cunliffe did promise is access to the internet at all times. Who's the lucky service provider?

iceman
07-07-2014, 02:52 PM
http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/newzealand

What a useless bit oof information. How much of that debt growth is Government debt belg ? More importantly, is that net debt or does it completely ignore asset appreciation, so being completely irrelevant like most of the things you, EZ and the desperate friendless lefties are pushing these days
Interestingly the bottom half of the page shows there is NO growth in national debt as % of GDP !!!

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 03:06 PM
http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/newzealand

Best reason I've seen yet to keep Labour away from the cheque book.

Harvey Specter
07-07-2014, 03:48 PM
What Cunliffe did promise is access to the internet at all times. Who's the lucky service provider?Lack of details on this policy. Schools already have this but how do you roll it out to the home. There is a good pilot project out in South Auckland but that was expensive (using Wifi repeaters I think) and funded by corporates.

fungus pudding
07-07-2014, 04:01 PM
Lack of details on this policy. Schools already have this but how do you roll it out to the home. There is a good pilot project out in South Auckland but that was expensive (using Wifi repeaters I think) and funded by corporates.

This would have to be mobile data on 3G or 4G network by the sound of the policy, and if that's what they think ....God help us! I'm sure it won't be though - so what are they talking about?

elZorro
07-07-2014, 05:31 PM
What a useless bit oof information. How much of that debt growth is Government debt belg ? More importantly, is that net debt or does it completely ignore asset appreciation, so being completely irrelevant like most of the things you, EZ and the desperate friendless lefties are pushing these days
Interestingly the bottom half of the page shows there is NO growth in national debt as % of GDP !!!

At least 7/8th of it is govt debt (mostly new, since 2008), and the fact is that over $4 billion of interest has to be spent every year, just to hold it there. That's about 6% of every tax/govt income dollar.

I think it's relevant, good on yer Belgarion.

elZorro
08-07-2014, 06:29 AM
David Cunliffe was just on TV One. Here's another new fact about National's borrowing in the last two terms: it's more borrowing, as a percentage of GDP, than NZ used to get through WWII. Incredible. We were not in that bad a state, and this was by and large, led by internal issues, made worse by a big drop in the top tax rate.

And now, we are told NZ's rock star economy (which is resting just below a budget surplus with ongoing borrowing and crippling interest) has seen record new car sales. The leading 'car' being sold? A Hilux Ute.

On TV this morning all sorts of domestic and light business uses for utes were put forward. Forget about that, many of these utes will end up on dairy farms and agribusinesses throughout the country. They've had a good year, they don't generally have high employment costs relative to capital, this is the time to defray some taxes. It's a simple enough rule.

fungus pudding
08-07-2014, 06:45 AM
David Cunliffe was just on TV One. Here's another new fact about National's borrowing in the last two terms: it's more borrowing, as a percentage of GDP, than NZ used to get through WWII. Incredible. We were not in that bad a state, and this was by and large, led by internal issues, made worse by a big drop in the top tax rate.

And now, we are told NZ's rock star economy (which is resting just below a budget surplus with ongoing borrowing and crippling interest) has seen record new car sales. The leading 'car' being sold? A Hilux Ute.

On TV this morning all sorts of domestic and light business uses for utes were put forward. Forget about that, many of these utes will end up on dairy farms and agribusinesses throughout the country. They've had a good year, they don't generally have high employment costs relative to capital, this is the time to defray some taxes. It's a simple enough rule.

Quite shocking. Cunlifffe should immediately announce a policy to ban new vehicle sales. The Greens will agree. This will deflate those who attempt to avoid his higher taxes. It's just disgusting how some people want to spend their own money.

elZorro
08-07-2014, 06:50 AM
Quite shocking. Cunlifffe should immediately announce a policy to ban new vehicle sales. The Greens will agree. This will deflate those who attempt to avoid his higher taxes. It's just disgusting how some people want to spend their own money.

They are of course entitled to spend money on whatever they like. But certain sectors are always moaning about something going wrong, and yet when they get the chance, they don't always invest in the best longer-term assets or infrastructure. They buy fast-depreciating but non-essential capital items, primarily because it reduces the tax they would otherwise pay.

And now from National's Leader.


Colin James's Otago Daily Times column for 8 July 2014


The toughest issue for the next term


Two senior cabinet figures talked international affairs last Wednesday, one all crisp intellect, one a conversational amble. No prize for guessing which was Tim Groser and which John Key.


Both made the optimists' trade case, Groser with a wide span at a conference on China where some weighty foreign academics spoke. Some of those experts were treated to Key's later perambulation at the Institute for International Affairs (NZIIA).


Peter Kennedy, the ex-diplomat who runs the NZIIA, was quintessentially diplomatic in referring to Key's reliance on only one page of notes. That was a measure of how seriously Key took his audience.


Others at other conferences have remarked on such offhandedness, asides and, for agricultural types, a swear-word or two.


Key's focus was trade, including tourism, as if "foreign affairs is trade", as Sir Robert Muldoon infamously said. Asked about the wider relationship with China, he talked about moving up the value chain. Asked about tension in the South China sea, he began: "I just sort of hope...". He forgot, till prompted, to mention Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit this week.


His only reference to climate change, a major international matter, was in the context of forums where he talks to big leaders on the sidelines. In his reference to the Pacific forum he talked up New Zealand's renewable energy project there, then added that those small states "say to bigger countries that we (the small island states) don't have a big footprint in climate change but we take it seriously and you (the big countries) should take it seriously too".


Does big-in-the-Pacific New Zealand, with a rising footprint, broken emissions trading scheme and few complementary measures, take it seriously?


The Greens, Labour, probably Internet-Mana and forest-growing iwi say not. Even Winston Peters, who wants sectoral strategies to cut "fossil fuel carbon", which excludes farmers' methane and nitrous oxide, with costs shared across the economy, condemns the ETS in its current form. He identified the risk of doing too little as an international market reaction -- what others call risk to the clean-green brand.


National's difficulty with climate change policy is that it sees action as a cost and therefore a brake on its dominant project, to speed up GDP growth.


If anything, parts of the local private sector are now edging ahead of ministers. International examples: more than 100 multinationals now say they account for stocks and use of six capitals, including natural capital; some others now price pricing carbon into their accounts for internal purposes. Here Business New Zealand's Sustainable Business Council section has begun to meet the public sector natural resources sector chief executives who have been conferring for several years and who at the last election presented a combined natural resources briefing to relevant incoming ministers.


Even the Treasury has begun to take a bit more notice and will part-fund next year's natural resources conference the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) drives. And that sector's thinking, including on climate change, is to feature in the pan-public service briefing to the whole government chief executives will assemble in early September. MfE is still not a "central agency" but it has more weight now.


There is movement in the cabinet. Last Thursday's freshwater national objectives discussion paper, though scoffed at by Labour and Greens, is a significant step. Sources say that is because Bill English took the matter in hand.


There is also progress on waste management, a focus at National's conference.


Environment Minister Amy Adams has often seemed more a minister for the economy than for the environment -- witness her proposal to refocus the Resource Management Act to upweight economic factors. She and Key now blame Labour for blocking the RMA processing improvements also in the proposal, though Labour broadly backs them. Key also disingenuously said last week the bill reducing housing land development contributions didn't have the numbers, even though Labour backs it.


Natural resources, particularly water but by definition butting on to climate change, will be a major focus if National gets a third term. It needs to be if English and Co are to maintain business confidence to invest as they go towards the 2017 election. Then, as now, a change of government would bring a major regulatory switch if something nearer a consensus isn't developed before then.


And there is a GDP option. Early findings in research at the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development are that environmental constraint rules can and often do prompt innovation which has wider benefits.


In other words, to see environmental action only as cost is myopic. Which no top politician can afford to be.


* An aside in the light of last week's column: More turned out for David Cunliffe's keynote on Sunday and cheered more loudly than for Key's a week earlier. Hmmm.

ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000020/!x-usc:mailto:ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz)


Colin James, Synapsis Ltd, 04-384 7030, 021-438 434, fax 04-384 7195, P O Box 9494, Marion Square, Wellington 6141,
ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000020/!x-usc:mailto:ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz), website www.ColinJames.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000020/!x-usc:http://www.colinjames.co.nz/)

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 07:00 AM
At least 7/8th of it is govt debt (mostly new, since 2008), and the fact is that over $4 billion of interest has to be spent every year, just to hold it there. That's about 6% of every tax/govt income dollar.

I think it's relevant, good on yer Belgarion.Working on your figures alone EZ, that means at least 10 billion or 7/8 of that debt was from Labour, that's something you have previously totally denied. Thanks for finally owning up to the fact Labour left us in debt. Only last week when we debated this you called me a liar, now you confirm Labours debt. Own goal right there - again - & now we know who was indeed the liar.

So lets have a look at that debt- At least 10 billion from Labour, National inherited an expanding public sector at a time when the economy was shrinking. The financial crisis cut government revenue just at the time when its spending was rising pretty sharply. Earthquakes don't come cheaply these days and has add to the debt greatly ($18 billion and counting the last time I heard) & the economic recovery had taken longer than expected. National has had to to deal with its ageing population too. Add in the costly programmes put in place by Labour, including KiwiSaver, Working for Families and interest free student loans.

Due to all the above factors our national debt increases by million and millions of dollars per day with interest alone and that's all before National can go to work to try and stop this train wreck inherited by the last Government. $27 million interest per day due to the above. Wow.

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 07:01 AM
Schools could get as many as 21 extra teachers under Labour's election-year policy, according to new calculations. That's per School - are these guys idiots, where are these teaches going to teach, in the toilets? That's 21 new classrooms per school, how much is that going to cost? Where are they going to put 21 new classrooms per school, on the footy fields. Do these guys actually think before they speak? Many question without answers.

elZorro
08-07-2014, 07:06 AM
Cuzzie, you may not realise that there are spare classrooms spread about the place, especially in the provinces. We either pull down classrooms or use them, I'd prefer the latter.

Now about your figures on Labour's debt. Do you really believe what you wrote there? I won't quote it so you can go back, check your figures and delete the post. Otherwise you will look a bit foolish. Or, show us this data you quoted, give us a link to it. You won't be able to find it, because it is completely without basis in fact.

Labour paid off nearly all of the Crown core debt over the last three terms they were in office. That's a fact.

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 07:21 AM
Cuzzie, you may not realise that there are spare classrooms spread about the place, especially in the provinces. We either pull down classrooms or use them, I'd prefer the latter.

Now about your figures on Labour's debt. Do you really believe what you wrote there? I won't quote it so you can go back, check your figures and delete the post. Otherwise you will look a bit foolish. Or, show us this data you quoted, give us a link to it. You won't be able to find it, because it is completely without basis in fact.

Labour paid off nearly all of the Crown core debt over the last three terms they were in office. That's a fact.On the contrary, all facts are quoted from media sources. I'm busy for the day so unless you back up on what you just said, you'll look even more foolish than what you already are. I look forward to reading that later on. You are two one eyed for your own good EZ.

elZorro
08-07-2014, 07:41 AM
On the contrary, all facts are quoted from media sources. I'm busy for the day so unless you back up on what you just said, you'll look even more foolish than what you already are. I look forward to reading that later on. You are two one eyed for your own good EZ.

No, you mean too one-eyed.

slimwin
08-07-2014, 08:14 AM
No spare capacity at either of my two local primary schools. So are we going to bus kids to the country EZ?

fungus pudding
08-07-2014, 09:07 AM
No spare capacity at either of my two local primary schools. So are we going to bus kids to the country EZ?


This is Labour party policy. No matter how impractical, unworkable or dopey it is, eZ will be there to defend it with his blinkers gleaming in the sunlight.

craic
08-07-2014, 09:08 AM
All this dog-eat-dog argument about who did what to whom and who milked the cow and who spilled the milk is about as valuable as tits on a bull. the vast majority of voters accept what their leaders say and go on to vote as they have done and their fathers have done for the same party for generations. Sometimes the electorate becomes a bit uneasy about the incumbents and either stays home or casts a vote for some silly outfit. And the government changes for a term or two. The electorate is not uneasy about the current lot but they are uneasy about the alternatives or some of them. Forget about the mickey mouse economics - it may make you feel better about your side but the public can't understand it because we have been on the edge of ruin for decades according to which ever side is in opposition but it never happens. John Key is Mister Easy in the public eye and he will win. Still open to further wagers.

fungus pudding
08-07-2014, 09:38 AM
All this dog-eat-dog argument about who did what to whom and who milked the cow and who spilled the milk is about as valuable as tits on a bull. the vast majority of voters accept what their leaders say and go on to vote as they have done and their fathers have done for the same party for generations. Sometimes the electorate becomes a bit uneasy about the incumbents and either stays home or casts a vote for some silly outfit. And the government changes for a term or two. The electorate is not uneasy about the current lot but they are uneasy about the alternatives or some of them. Forget about the mickey mouse economics - it may make you feel better about your side but the public can't understand it because we have been on the edge of ruin for decades according to which ever side is in opposition but it never happens. John Key is Mister Easy in the public eye and he will win. Still open to further wagers.

Unless the polling changes substantially before the election, and I doubt that it will, Winston First will decide the winner. Just add the numbers. If I am right that will mean National will remain in power because Winston would be unlikely to go with Labour/Greens and be 3rd on the list. Far better baubles to be extracted fronm National, not that I am suggesting Winston would be swayed by baubles.

Harvey Specter
08-07-2014, 09:49 AM
Unless the polling changes substantially before the election, and I doubt that it will, Winston First will decide the winner. That is if he gets 5% which is debatable/marginal depending on which poll you prefer. He normally does well in the lead up to an election as he visits the rest homes but he is looking tired/sick? this time round so will be interesting to see if he can do it again. Also will the other parties give him the oxygen he needs like Key did last time with the teapot tapes.

If Labour/greens are clever, they will try to keep him out of the media so that his (predominately right wing) votes are wasted.

elZorro
08-07-2014, 09:58 AM
Slimwin, your area might be the exception that proves the rule. Although I hadn't thought about how they'd cover smaller class sizes.

FP, do you realise that if Labour already had an idea that Winston will line up with the left (and all his talking recently implies that he will), then National are in trouble already.

Craic, you should keep that cash ready..

slimwin
08-07-2014, 10:48 AM
I doubt it EZ . The population has been growing.

elZorro
08-07-2014, 12:05 PM
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/10243719/Government-surplus-in-doubt

Oh dear. Things not going plan.

Just smile and wave boys. Smile and wave. #teamkey


ElZ ... re ... At 31 May, total Crown assets were valued at $251b and liabilities were $174.3b. ...Net worth stood at $71.3b. I don't suppose you have a chart handy on that Net Worth figure over the last 15 years or so?

Hasn't National done a great job for NZ! Crown Net worth has climbed steadily to $71.3Bill. This is true, on a short timescale.

However, when Labour left office in 2008, the Crown net worth was over $100Bill, and had risen steadily all through their term.


http://www.treasury.govt.nz/government/financialstatements/yearend/jun13/011.htm

Sgt Pepper
08-07-2014, 12:08 PM
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/10243719/Government-surplus-in-doubt

Oh dear. Things not going plan.


Just smile and wave boys. Smile and wave. #teamkey


ElZ ... re ... At 31 May, total Crown assets were valued at $251b and liabilities were $174.3b. ...Net worth stood at $71.3b. I don't suppose you have a chart handy on that Net Worth figure over the last 15 years or so?

Yes BELG
The economic storm clouds are indeed gathering, gst revenues down, business confidence down, House prices down, interest rates up, dairy prices decreasing, ....John Key in denial.

slimwin
08-07-2014, 12:47 PM
Pre fans. You must be kidding. Hands up if you spent time in pre fans getting educated in the south island. I'd rather be the plus four in a class than freeze. What a lunatic suggestion. You really should think before you rant:-)

slimwin
08-07-2014, 12:48 PM
Pre fabs. Damn smart phone. .

craic
08-07-2014, 01:45 PM
Belg. do you really believe that the more posts you can cram in, the greater chance Labour will have of getting elected? And as to character assasination - who broke all the mirrors in your house?

westerly
08-07-2014, 02:08 PM
Labour's plan to reduce class sizes is not going to fix better education standards period. Reducing a class size by 4 to 6 students is not going to increase the teachers ability to teach to a higher standard. Furthermore, add 2500 to 3000 teachers into the system that can't get a teaching job because of lack of experience or poor results is just going to dummify students more which is what Labour wants. Easier to control when they are adults.

There are good teaches and bad teaches, Labours plan is going to increase bad teaches and reduce quality teaching to private schools only. Further more to that, an average size school will need to increase their classrooms by about ten per school. Before you do the logistics on that, many schools are already at a capacity size (BUILDINGS). That means 260 existing students on average from a school that is at capacity will have to will have to be moved on. Explain how to go about that?

Schools like Auckland Grammar pump out our best achievers not by mistake. They have the best quality teaching staff available. John Key is right over this, quality over quantity will get the best results every time. This is a no brainer and another poorly thought out policy by Labour who is hell bent on promising everybody everything. We saw this kind of bribery from Clark too.


Usual total distortion of facts . 2000 teachers, not 3000 phased in over 4 years. Require the Teachers Council to pre screen all initial entry into teacher education programs and strengthen the requirement for all teachers to attend professional development programs to retain practising certificates.
Class sizes reduced from 29+ to 26 again over 4 years.
Paid for by cancelling Nationals IES policy.
Auckland Grammar is not your usual state secondary school and if Key did say quality over quantity he is relegating large numbers of children to a second class education.
westerly

westerly
08-07-2014, 02:12 PM
Quite shocking. Cunlifffe should immediately announce a policy to ban new vehicle sales. The Greens will agree. This will deflate those who attempt to avoid his higher taxes. It's just disgusting how some people want to spend their own money.

Of course the reason always given for lower tax is to free up money for investment. Maybe in China not NZ We buy things.

westerly

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 04:04 PM
No, you mean too one-eyed.

No, I know what I meant and that was two one-eyed, meaning two eyes merged into one. What gives you the right to tell me what I meant or not. I say what I want to say for me EZ, not you. Very, very arrogant of you.

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 04:15 PM
Cuzzie, you may not realise that there are spare classrooms spread about the place, especially in the provinces. We either pull down classrooms or use them, I'd prefer the latter.

Now about your figures on Labour's debt. Do you really believe what you wrote there? I won't quote it so you can go back, check your figures and delete the post. Otherwise you will look a bit foolish. Or, show us this data you quoted, give us a link to it. You won't be able to find it, because it is completely without basis in fact.

Labour paid off nearly all of the Crown core debt over the last three terms they were in office. That's a fact.OK, still flat out, but as this is the closest I've got to spending time on here I'll give you a quick reply.
Right what do you want to know? Is it some facts or all facts that you disagree with? I will sort out your last paragraph first you said
Labour paid off nearly all of the Crown core debt over the last three terms they were in office. That's a fact. But EZ you also said

At least 7/8th of it is govt debt (mostly new, since 2008), and the fact is that over $4 billion of interest has to be spent every year, just to hold it there. That's about 6% of every tax/govt income dollar.
I think it's relevant, good on yer Belgarion. 1/8 = $10 Billion dollars, you said it now you say you didn't, what part of that are you having a problem understanding that? For once you are correct. That been sorted. As I've been and still are very busy today and did not have time to individually find all the relevant information I quoted in my post this morning, I just used my Google tool and Oh là là, it was mostly all there with in a couple of links and they were/

Public debt climbs by $27m a day (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9380846/Public-debt-climbs-by-27m-a-day)

Labour cops debt blame (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6957341/Labour-cops-debt-blame)

Looks like a was wrong about the 18 billion dollar rebuild figure, sorry about that EZ, this NZ Herald link states that is is actually $40 billion.
Christchurch earthquake bill goes up $10 billion (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10880242)

Now, I have back up everything I said this morning which I understand is not a good look for you considering what you said about me. Let me tell you I'm not in the habit of telling pork pies and only quote from written facts. May I suggest you start doing the same. Appoligy not needed as you will no doubt argue until the cows come home. Just look back at your 7/8th statement which 1/8 equals 10 billion dollars of debt passed on by Labour EZ. You have to be careful when being cagey because when you dodge facts you need to remember what you have said. You said it and forgot in one day.

Anyway, take your time with your next post, think back to your propaganda quotes and be more careful in the future, because I wont let you get away with it. Consider yourself caught.

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 04:44 PM
When National took control of the Beehive in 2008, debt was just over $10b, but Finance Minister Bill English said it inherited an expanding public sector at a time when the economy was shrinking. That was from this link before you start saying there was no debt again.
Labour debt 10 Billion. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9380846/Public-debt-climbs-by-27m-a-day)

Here too in the NZ Herald - (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11255712)Interest costs $3.6 billion a year and we still borrow $75 million a week, THANKS LABOUR. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11255712)

elZorro
08-07-2014, 08:24 PM
When National took control of the Beehive in 2008, debt was just over $10b, but Finance Minister Bill English said it inherited an expanding public sector at a time when the economy was shrinking. That was from this link before you start saying there was no debt again.
Labour debt 10 Billion. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9380846/Public-debt-climbs-by-27m-a-day)

Here too in the NZ Herald -Interest costs $3.6 billion a year and we still borrow $75 million a week, THANKS LABOUR. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11255712)

Cuzzie, here is your post that I took exception to.


Working on your figures alone EZ, that means at least 10 billion or 7/8 of that debt was from Labour, that's something you have previously totally denied. Thanks for finally owning up to the fact Labour left us in debt. Only last week when we debated this you called me a liar, now you confirm Labours debt. Own goal right there - again - & now we know who was indeed the liar.


By the time Labour left office in 2008, the Crown Debt was $10bill, and Crown net worth was over $100bill. Labour had spent a lot of its terms being prudent with a buoyant economy, one which they helped to grow. They had paid back a lot of core debt they'd inherited from previous governments. Like someone paying off a house quickly, they improved the country's net worth a lot.

So now when you see a debt of over $70bill the country has to pay back, and a lower net worth, there is no doubt that National presided over that situation. All these pretend excuses about how Labour left a lot of expensive policies in place - they became more expensive when National chose to have higher unemployment (thereby clamping wages) and to drop the higher tax rates, and company tax.

I didn't ask for that, those that finance the National Party pushed it through. Take out the earthquakes, even the GFC, and it won't explain this slow recovery, and the lower than expected tax take. National policies mean that we're still some way from a budget surplus, even though the dairy payout is at a peak.

In any case, even if Labour did rack up a bill of $10bill (which they didn't), it's still only a small fraction (not even 1/8th) of the latest debt mountain. Have you ever seen National producing graphs of this debt, or the crown net worth over a few years? No, they have it tucked away on the Treasury website.

In any case, this debt should be of concern to the average NZer. But not to the high-fliers, because the new government debt is no concern of theirs. They have plenty of cash to buy whatever they want.

Cuzzie
08-07-2014, 10:03 PM
EZ, they did rack up a $10 Billion bill, you know it & you have just said it earlier, I know it, Cullen knows it as does the whole world. Add the $40 Billion bill for the Christchurch Earthquake and there is 50 Billion before you even blink. The only positive is Labour was voted out and National steered us through the financial crisis. Imagine, just imagine if Labour was in power then.


Going back to the School debacle, somebody mentioned prefabs as new classrooms for the twenty plus new teachers per school. It doesn't matter if it is a flash new classroom block or cheap & nasty prefabs, there are size restrictions for inclosed space for every school and all of those restrictions would have to be lifted. My kids have gone to two different high schools and the same intermediate & primary schools and all but one of those schools could not house one extra building let alone twenty plus. New schools would need to be built and in congested areas like Auckland where land for a new School is simply a no-goer that just can't happen.

elZorro
09-07-2014, 05:58 AM
EZ, they did rack up a $10 Billion bill, you know it & you have just said it earlier, I know it, Cullen knows it as does the whole world. Add the $40 Billion bill for the Christchurch Earthquake and there is 50 Billion before you even blink. The only positive is Labour was voted out and National steered us through the financial crisis. Imagine, just imagine if Labour was in power then.



Here's where you are wrong, yet again Cuzzie. How could Labour possibly run up a $10bill debt when they repaid far more than that. Muldoon left the place in a bit of a mess, but since about 1990 better economic times and some careful work (yes, even sometimes by previous National govts) meant that the govt core debt was reducing. Here's the picture. Labour did an impressive job, just about repaying all that was left. So it is certainly factually incorrect to say that they did 'rack up a bill' in their last three terms.

You say that the earthquakes since then were expensive, but I thought a lot of that was being repaid with insurance, over time. As this article shows (http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/christchurch-quake-cost-rises-10b-40b-bd-139278), you are absolutely correct that $40bill is about the total cost for the ChCh rebuild, but of that, only about $15bill is a net cost to the crown.

So you still have some way to go to figure out why the core crown debt spiralled upwards from about $10bill, to $70bill, under National's current reign. Even though they were selling off state assets whenever they could.

Cuzzie
09-07-2014, 07:27 AM
EZ, did you miss this in the NZ Herald link I gave you where it stated, "National took over the Treasury benches in 2008 when net debt was just $10 billion." Maybe you should contact the Herald (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11255712) and tell them they are wrong and you are right. You can not wipe 10 Billion dollars of Labour debt by just hitting your keyboard. With all the other factors that you aren't complaining about, National was left in very trying times by Labour and the financial crisis and due to those factors, interest alone is calculated at $27 million per day every day. Six years of that or 2190 days times 27 million equals 59 Billion in Interest alone. Take away Labours debt and the reason we are in this mess in the first place and forget about Christchurch and you see just how well National has been doing. I know what your answer will be next - the 27 mil a day in interest is wrong. Get a hold of stuff.co.nz (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9380846/Public-debt-climbs-by-27m-a-day) and tell them they are wrong. Yep in your mind everyone is wrong. That would be right too if your into propaganda as much as you EZ.

fungus pudding
09-07-2014, 08:15 AM
To all/any posters of any political persuasion:

Re ... Debt racked up National's 2 terms.

Could others enter this dispute please?

It is becoming very, very tiresome to have ElZ present government provided facts and for Cuzzie to simply come back with what he believes are facts littered with the constant accusations.

Thanks.


My contribution, for what it's worth, is to suggest you keep a strict eye on your blood pressure. You can buy a fuzzy logic monitor for home use for around $100. Otherwise I'm not sure you'll make it through to the elections.

elZorro
09-07-2014, 08:25 AM
Cuzzie:That would be right too if your into propaganda as much as you EZ.

Cuzzie, you meant to say "you're". FP must have missed this one. And you're still wrong. You quoted some facts and then extrapolated wildly into pub talk.

Labour Good, National Bad.

fungus pudding
09-07-2014, 09:03 AM
A fairly typical and expected response, Fungus. You like Cuzzie posting misinformation don't you? Shame on you.

Just smile and wave boys. Smile and wave. #TeamKey

Au contraire, it is far from typical. I seldom dispense medical advice; so as you expected it I can only assume you are psychic, in which case you already know the outcome of the election and must realise how futile it is to keep posting socialist propaganda in the hope of converting the odd reader.

Harvey Specter
09-07-2014, 09:44 AM
Looking forward to the misogynist, kiwi male chauvinist backlash to this one. [actually not as once again I'll be embarrassed for being a kiwi male]Are you apologising for being a man as well.

How am I meant to prove it? Is she meant to scratch a tick into my back for yes, and a cross for no (actually she doesn't have to prove no consent so does the lack of a scratched in yes seal my fate?)

slimwin
09-07-2014, 09:46 AM
Andrew Littles accusations may open a can of worms. I met the detective that quit the cops when he was asked to re-evaluate the crime statistics in by the last Labour govt. The guy is working for another govt dept now after getting a law and finance degree..

westerly
09-07-2014, 09:48 AM
No, I know what I meant and that was two one-eyed, meaning two eyes merged into one. What gives you the right to tell me what I meant or not. I say what I want to say for me EZ, not you. Very, very arrogant of you.

LOL
westerly

craic
09-07-2014, 09:53 AM
From my experience in the justice system I can give a number of examples of why the system proposed by labour in rape cases is more than dangerous. Some were cases that I was directly involved in. False claims of rape are quite common - most do not identify the offender. In one period of about four months in this area the police had to deal with three cases, widely published. All were proven to be false with no rape and no offender but the cost in man hours was huge. Because the complainants are deemed to be under stress or depressed or whatever, they are seldom charged and often to police would agree to no charge if they agree to "see someone" No one has ever explained to me why any person would go through this process just for some attention. Now to a well known case. A teenager arrives home from school, late and very dishevelled. Finally she admits to her parents that she was raped. She identifies the offender as a weirdo whom she has often seen on the bus. He is arrested, charged, convicted and imprisoned for a lengthy stretch. Months later the girls boyfriend comes forward and admitted that there was no rape. He and the complainant had given in to their passions and rolled around in the scrub and everything was consentual. The 'rapist' was a harmless man of low intelligence with no family structure who lived from hand to mouth in the community. If someone alleges that I assaulted them, or stole their money or enterd their house to steal and there is no evidence to support their allegations, why should I have to prove that I didn't do it?

slimwin
09-07-2014, 10:38 AM
Pocket post. Sorry.

Banksie
09-07-2014, 10:55 AM
....If someone alleges that I assaulted them, or stole their money or enterd their house to steal and there is no evidence to support their allegations, why should I have to prove that I didn't do it?

Little's proposal does not say this, the Crown would still have to prove a sexual encounter happened, the only difference is the defendant would have to prove it was consensual, rather than the plaintiff prove it wasn't.

Isn't it more like you accusing me of stealing something from you and as a defense I claim it is mine, surely the court would require me (as the defendant) to prove it was mine in the first place?

craic
09-07-2014, 11:47 AM
[QUOTE=Banksie;490907]Little's proposal does not say this, the Crown would still have to prove a sexual encounter happened, the only difference is the defendant would have to prove it was consensual, rather than the plaintiff prove it wasn't.
So now I meet Suzie in a bar and take her back to my place and just before the main event I must turn on the recording equipment - which would not be accepted in a NZ court because she didn't consent to its use - or get a signed agreement from her that she consents. Otherwise she can claim rape and I have no proof that it wasn't?
As to the stealing bit, what do I have to prove is mine, the three twenty-dollar notes I have in my wallet - or maybe the diamond ring that I never had in the first place?
The bottom line is that Labour are trolling the bottom trying to salvage a few crabs from the sediment. Bright people in and around the Law have been studying and examining ways to improve the system for years.

Banksie
09-07-2014, 12:17 PM
Otherwise she can claim rape and I have no proof that it wasn't?

by that logic the opposite is happening now. She claims she didn't give consent and you claim she did. How does she prove it? Should every women travel round with a GoPro recording all her activity?

craic
09-07-2014, 12:41 PM
Back to the machine-gun posts Belg.? It may be therapeutic for you but it won't change the reality of a National led government after the next election.

artemis
09-07-2014, 01:15 PM
Back to the machine-gun posts Belg.? It may be therapeutic for you but it won't change the reality of a National led government after the next election.

It is looking increasingly likely it will be Nat led, but I still think it will be down to the wire esp if the Maori Party continues to fade. Not a done deal.

craic
09-07-2014, 02:29 PM
If Labour wins we all emigrate.
Somewhere the government is perpetually business friendly and non socialist.
Austria, Switzerland, Singapore, Bahamas,....any other suggestions?

All that superannuation stuff is BS. If you are competent and saved and invested all your life you shouldn't need the State crutch.
I'd be quite happy to totally lose my 65+ super....


I did just as you say - I invested in New Zealand. Now I have no problem with taking my dividend but I do have a problem when I stand in the queue and see some of the wasters I worked with, waiting for an equal share to take to the pub or the tinnie house on their way to the Sally Annes for their weekly box of food.

craic
09-07-2014, 02:33 PM
Wow! that's eight out of the fourteen possts on this page to you belg. Are you collecting Fly Buys or something.

Harvey Specter
09-07-2014, 02:50 PM
People who were there find it laughable how misquoted Cunliffe was by our wonderful media. The fact that even now, after most people have been corrected, some still misquote him is very sad. HS, suggest you also find out exactly what he said.

As indicated, it works fine in Sweden with very few frivolous cases. I heard the sound bite, and since that is all the media plays, Cunliffe loses. A man who has done nothing wrong, and if fact says he wants to help, yet he is apologising? #Fail.

And most of Europe doesn't have an issue withbing drinking like NZ does. Doesn't make it right but just shows you just cant copies others laws to a different society.

Cuzzie
09-07-2014, 03:50 PM
To all/any posters of any political persuasion:

Re ... Debt racked up National's 2 terms.

Could others enter this dispute please?

It is becoming very, very tiresome to have ElZ present government provided facts and for Cuzzie to simply come back with what he believes are facts littered with the constant accusations.

Thanks.belg, you are up the boohai shooting balloons from one foot away and missing. You are one complicated character belg that is for sure. First you threaten to leave S.T if the Mod removed your post which he promptly did - you stayed - now you want me to stop posting and you promptly spam the board with noisince. If I didn't know you were over fifty I would think you would be an anklebiter the way you carry on. Hey, but don't stop, I feel you are doing all the work for me. Keep talking.

Oh yeah, Team Key all the way. I'm waving with you. Thanks for the gift. I've got one for you too belg ...


Team Cunliffe - Cradle to the grave in less than one year. :cool:

Cuzzie
09-07-2014, 03:53 PM
Cuzzie, you meant to say "you're". FP must have missed this one. And you're still wrong. You quoted some facts and then extrapolated wildly into pub talk.

Labour Good, National Bad.I guess it sunk in EZ, nothing but being the spelling police for you. How the hell did you think you could get away with hiding 10 billion dollars of Labour debt is totally beyond me. You keep trying though, it showcases you beautifully. The facts are backed up & you know it. This is exactly where Labour breaks down. They pass all blame onto National and all positive advancements made by the Government are knocked down by propaganda B.S. So in the theme of belgs funnies, or should I say attempted funny, I have a slogan for you too EZ.


Labour - Controlling your future with pleasure.

slimwin
09-07-2014, 07:37 PM
Whats years were you in Sweden Belg?

elZorro
09-07-2014, 09:00 PM
I guess it sunk in EZ, nothing but being the spelling police for you. How the hell did you think you could get away with hiding 10 billion dollars of Labour debt is totally beyond me. You keep trying though, it showcases you beautifully. The facts are backed up & you know it. This is exactly where Labour breaks down. They pass all blame onto National and all positive advancements made by the Government are knocked down by propaganda B.S.


Cuzzie, I hope you're not trying to run a business, because maths/accounting is not your strong suit. Or, you are pretending it's not. Let's put it another way.

Labour came into office in 1999 and inherited a net core Crown debt of say $25bill. By the end of nine years in office, they had repaid $15billion of that debt, leaving National to pick up the tab for the last 2/5th of the net Crown debt from 1999 ($10bill). They had been net re-payers of that historic debt, and had not added anything to it. TRUE or FALSE Cuzzie? Let's get that one done, for once. A one word answer please, if you can.

National had a look at that record, spotted that with the GFC and later the ChCh earthquakes, they had the perfect excuse to rebuild the crown debt to about 35% of GDP, back where they had it when they left office in 1999. They knew this would give them a really easy ride, and they could reduce taxes for the higher income brackets. They did this, but it meant they had to borrow another $60 billion and rising, as Labour had in the meantime built up NZ's GDP figures. National's policy settings actually reduced GDP per person, which made it easier for them.

This one is a bit more of an argument, but you'll see they have brought both the unemployment levels and the crown debt levels back to the same proportions as they had in 1999. I think this is some sort of a secret coded level that the National Govt will never admit to, but it's part of the neoliberal plan for us all.

I met David Cunliffe tonight, listened to his speech and had a short chat with him afterwards. He is a great speaker, he speaks from the heart, he's really motivating some people around him. Another straight-up person I spoke to, who has a lot of kudos for community work, and has been in the Labour Party for many years, is very happy with him as leader.

I just found these graphs on WIKI, compiled by Treasury/Reserve Bank officials. That should make it clearer too. Note that here, the Crown Debt is not the same as net core Crown debt. It should trend in the same way.

blackcap
09-07-2014, 09:59 PM
And the odds keep changing in Nationals favour. You can now get 7's on Labour over the ditch at Centrebet. On Betfair you can get 10's on Labour. Almost a done deal.

iceman
09-07-2014, 11:55 PM
I met David Cunliffe tonight, listened to his speech and had a short chat with him afterwards. He is a great speaker, he speaks from the heart, he's really motivating some people around him. Another straight-up person I spoke to, who has a lot of kudos for community work, and has been in the Labour Party for many years, is very happy with him as leader.


EZ this is the exact problem David Cunliffe and Labour has. They have moved so far away from mainstream NZ that only yourself, belg and people like the person you describe above, are the ones who like DC and will vote for him. But you are all staunch Labour voters and not the voters DC has to get onboard if he wants to form a Government.
Most of NZ completely disagrees with Labour as shown by one opinion poll after another but you continue banging your head against the wall with all this negative stuff. It won't get you anywhere.

p.s. during your conversation with DC, did he mention anything about his RUMOURED intention of heading off to a Marae before the election to apologise for being European ? Just curious if its true :confused:

elZorro
10-07-2014, 06:28 AM
Blackcap and Iceman, we all know the voting tightens up closer to the election day. I note that you have not made direct comment on those graphs I posted. Like - that's very interesting that National is still spending more than they get in taxes and other revenue, nearly six years later, while Labour was able to post a surplus for nine years straight.

This major difference between fiscal situations impacts on many further down the chain. It will be the job of Labour supporters to mention these figures, and also to point out the many very good policies Labour has ready. We know we can make a difference to the picture. So I'm not negative about that, but I would be disappointed if National's PR spin and money see them back for another three years, so they can continue working over the lower paid and jobless.

All the while, many of the richest people in NZ have hired good accountants so that no matter what the highest tax rate is, they don't have any income showing on that band. Without a CGT, this is very easy to do. Simply buy more property, no matter how poor an investment it is at the time, and use the interest cost to defray taxes due. Perhaps National voters can tell us all, how this assists NZ towards having a stronger economy.

Cuzzie
10-07-2014, 06:41 AM
Cuzzie, I hope you're not trying to run a business, because maths/accounting is not your strong suit. Or, you are pretending it's not. Let's put it another way.

Labour came into office in 1999 and inherited a net core Crown debt of say $25bill. By the end of nine years in office, they had repaid $15billion of that debt, leaving National to pick up the tab for the last 2/5th of the net Crown debt from 1999 ($10bill). They had been net re-payers of that historic debt, and had not added anything to it. TRUE or FALSE Cuzzie? Let's get that one done, for once. A one word answer please, if you can.

National had a look at that record, spotted that with the GFC and later the ChCh earthquakes, they had the perfect excuse to rebuild the crown debt to about 35% of GDP, back where they had it when they left office in 1999. They knew this would give them a really easy ride, and they could reduce taxes for the higher income brackets. They did this, but it meant they had to borrow another $60 billion and rising, as Labour had in the meantime built up NZ's GDP figures. National's policy settings actually reduced GDP per person, which made it easier for them.

This one is a bit more of an argument, but you'll see they have brought both the unemployment levels and the crown debt levels back to the same proportions as they had in 1999. I think this is some sort of a secret coded level that the National Govt will never admit to, but it's part of the neoliberal plan for us all.

I met David Cunliffe tonight, listened to his speech and had a short chat with him afterwards. He is a great speaker, he speaks from the heart, he's really motivating some people around him. Another straight-up person I spoke to, who has a lot of kudos for community work, and has been in the Labour Party for many years, is very happy with him as leader.

I just found these graphs on WIKI, compiled by Treasury/Reserve Bank officials. That should make it clearer too. Note that here, the Crown Debt is not the same as net core Crown debt. It should trend in the same way.So once more you have admitted Labour left behind a $10 billion debt, that is twice now after you called me a liar. I think with two admissions now, we can establish the fact that Labour has left National a $10 Billion dollar debt - correct? Well even after you have admitted to it twice now EZ, going on your past record this may be denied again by you. So Key's Government had 10 Bill. of debt passed on by the Clark Govt. - DONE & DUSTED.

Now you have said, "I hope you're not trying to run a business, because maths/accounting is not your strong suit". Were do you get off EZ? I guess being a two one eyed Labour fanboy, you need to reinvent the facts all the time. Lets look at my math:

$27 million per day interest rates X Six years of that or 2190 days = 59 Billion in Interest alone. Media link. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9380846/Public-debt-climbs-by-27m-a-day) That's how Debt Clocks for Countries work and why you see them ticking over so fast, it is a very easy calculation. belg is happy to show the debt clock but you aren't happy for the reason why (interest rates) - funny that. 27 mill. per day every day.
Get your calculator out and show me where I have gone wrong. Check before you cry wolf otherwise you will soon earn a name you may not like. Nothing wrong with my maths/accounting, but once again EZ is found wanting. DONE & DUSTED.

EZ?:confused:

elZorro
10-07-2014, 06:49 AM
All I asked for was ONE word Cuzzie. Another maths issue.

Cuzzie
10-07-2014, 07:04 AM
All I asked for was ONE word Cuzzie. Another maths issue.For somebody that has called me a liar on more than one occasion and now has been proved wrong about my math & accounting abilities I think you have no right to ask me anything. Do you B.S just for the sake of it?

What I will say is Labour left National a $10 Billion debt as said by my good self and now EZ(twice).:)



Thank You EZ for finally admitting that Labour left National a $10,000,000,000 debt.

elZorro
10-07-2014, 07:48 AM
For somebody that has called me a liar on more than one occasion and now has been proved wrong about my math & accounting abilities I think you have no right to ask me anything. Do you B.S just for the sake of it?

What I will say is Labour left National a $10 Billion debt as said by my good self and now EZ(twice).:)



Thank You EZ for finally admitting that Labour left National a $10,000,000,000 debt.


Cuzzie will parrot B.S. from Crosby-Textor and the National Party ad nauseum - TRUE
Cuzzie will never admit that Labour paid off 3/5th of an inherited core crown debt - TRUE
Cuzzie cannot admit that Labour always makes the smart decisions that sees the whole of NZ better off - TRUE

slimwin
10-07-2014, 08:10 AM
My ex wife was swedish Belg. I spent a lot of time there between 1999 and 2009.

craic
10-07-2014, 10:55 AM
Back to the personal abuse,eh! Belg. Don't you ever learn?
ElZ, might I suggest you stop engaging with Cuzzie's b.s. as he's clearly wrong. The election will of course be fought on multiple issues so moving on would probably be a good thing. Any sensible person with an I.Q. above that of gnat will read the exchanges about the debt National has racked up, wonder why National supporters are ignoring this issue, and will also wonder if they really want to be associated with National supporters like our mate The Cuz. National supporters like most posting here are not called "Nasties" for nothing. ;)

Sgt Pepper
10-07-2014, 01:17 PM
EZ this is the exact problem David Cunliffe and Labour has. They have moved so far away from mainstream NZ that only yourself, belg and people like the person you describe above, are the ones who like DC and will vote for him. But you are all staunch Labour voters and not the voters DC has to get onboard if he wants to form a Government.
Most of NZ completely disagrees with Labour as shown by one opinion poll after another but you continue banging your head against the wall with all this negative stuff. It won't get you anywhere.

p.s. during your conversation with DC, did he mention anything about his RUMOURED intention of heading off to a Marae before the election to apologise for being European ? Just curious if its true :confused:

Iceman

What I am curious about is how long Murray McCully is going to last, me thinks NOT LONG. The only other leader who has gone through more cabinet ministers was probably Saddam Hussein

craic
10-07-2014, 01:52 PM
Belg, if you look back a post or two you will find the comment about "tits on a bull" in relation to the financial analysis that you and others of several persuasions seem to think is going to influence any voter. The election will be won by Key bacause of his image which is closer to the ideal that voters aspire to and a mile ahead of the stumbling opposition leader and the bunch of peculiars that hope to follow him into power. I have just this hour traded up a grand or close to it and it is there for the taking if you have the confidence in the creed that you preach. How about it?

elZorro
10-07-2014, 03:34 PM
Cripes, I hope you have deep pockets Craic! :)