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

westerly
26-03-2015, 10:58 AM
LOL - didn't you conveniently forget to mention the reason for the increased debt levels? Not saying that they did a particular good job, but still propose you compare the NZ debt "blow out" with what happened in basically every other country in this world during that time. US; UK, Greece, Spain, Argentina, Russia, Ireland, Iceland, ... You might find that, relative to nearly everybody else, the NZ government of the day did a quite good job in confining their debts.

Hey Daytr - maybe you should consider giving these green / pink glasses back to EZ (or Belg ...) Hard to see the reality when wearing them.

Those countries were heavily indebted before the GFC NZ was not.

Maybe you should take off those neo right blinkers ?

westerly

iceman
26-03-2015, 11:58 AM
Not so sure about that westerly but numbers can be easily manipulated to suit one's argument, like we so often see on here.

Here are some numbers that came up in quick search on PUBLIC DEBT for 2007 and 2012 as a percentage of GDP:
UK 44% 89%
US 36% 92%
Spain 36% 84%
Australia 15% 32%
NZ 21% 38%
Greece 90% 157%
Iceland 28% 132%
Ireland 25% 118%
Canada 64% 82%

Hard to find a country that has come better out of the GFC than NZ, based on these numbers. But of course there are many other metrics/numbers to take into account. I think NZ and New Zealanders have come out of it better than most though !





Those countries were heavily indebted before the GFC NZ was not.

Maybe you should take off those neo right blinkers ?

westerly

westerly
26-03-2015, 06:29 PM
Not so sure about that westerly but numbers can be easily manipulated to suit one's argument, like we so often see on here.

Here are some numbers that came up in quick search on PUBLIC DEBT for 2007 and 2012 as a percentage of GDP:
UK 44% 89%
US 36% 92%
Spain 36% 84%
Australia 15% 32%
NZ 21% 38%
Greece 90% 157%
Iceland 28% 132%
Ireland 25% 118%
Canada 64% 82%

Hard to find a country that has come better out of the GFC than NZ, based on these numbers. But of course there are many other metrics/numbers to take into account. I think NZ and New Zealanders have come out of it better than most though !

I agree; on those figures NZ came through the gfc better than most. Some countries bailed out their banks which NZ did not have to do. As you say there are various interpretations of the different statistics available

westerly

elZorro
26-03-2015, 07:36 PM
Iceman, the figures in this link are more like:

Australia 15%, 29%
NZ 26%, 51%

Australia also improved its position in gross debt % amongst the OECD, where NZ went higher up the table. Both countries are in the bottom quartile, sure.

https://www.gfmag.com/global-data/economic-data/public-debt-percentage-gdp

A new article from Werewolf about Mr Fixit, Steven Joyce. Very interesting, I'll remember this next time he's in the news.

http://werewolf.co.nz/2015/03/the-myth-of-steven-joyce/

elZorro
27-03-2015, 06:16 AM
A second poll reinforces the one earlier this week. National are going to lose up north.

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/337359/commanding-lead-peters-poll

Here are the actual polling results.

http://www.colmarbrunton.co.nz/index.php/polls-and-surveys/political-polls/one-news-colmar-brunton-poll

Mathew Hooton, NBR today.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/sabin-clock-keeps-ticking-key

Sgt Pepper
27-03-2015, 12:19 PM
A second poll reinforces the one earlier this week. National are going to lose up north.

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/337359/commanding-lead-peters-poll

Here are the actual polling results.

http://www.colmarbrunton.co.nz/index.php/polls-and-surveys/political-polls/one-news-colmar-brunton-poll

Mathew Hooton, NBR today.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/sabin-clock-keeps-ticking-key

EZ

I can imagine the following email

To: Crosby Textor

From: John Key

Subject: Northland By (Buy!) election.I want a substantial refund.

jonu
27-03-2015, 12:27 PM
If Winnie wins, do we still get our bridges Mr Bridges?

artemis
27-03-2015, 03:41 PM
If Winnie wins, do we still get our bridges Mr Bridges?

Mr Key said yes. And that has to be so as 2017 is not that far away. But the projects might not be on the super fast track.

elZorro
27-03-2015, 04:33 PM
EZ

I can imagine the following email

To: Crosby Textor

From: John Key

Subject: Northland By (Buy!) election.I want a substantial refund.

Yes, I guess that could be true. But maybe they didn't use Crosby-Textor until it was too late. I still think Winston saw the opportunity early on, was just pretending he was thinking about it, until he had all the gear and the slogans ready. A great flying start, integrity in communication, that worked, and so it gives hope to all the other parties for 2017, particularly Labour (if they can just get organised).

ipredict puts the boot in as well, today.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1503/S00331/peters-triumphant-key-weakens-shaw-emerges.htm

Daytr
27-03-2015, 07:27 PM
Black Peter, do you even believe the stuff you right? Blaming Labour for National's incurred debt after they have been in power 7 years! Give me break. Yes we had the GFC and yes the tax take was down but that doesn't explain $40Bln ! In fact it doesn't even explain $10Bln! Since then thanks to China we have had the biggest export boom this country has ever seen in dairy and debt is still growing and it has every year under National. Yes NZ as did Australia get through the GFC relatively unscathed but that had very little to with either country's government and far more to do with China than anything else. So all we are seeing is an explosion of government debt that there is no plan to start paying down. If we carry on borrowing like we have we are heading in the same place Japan, Europe & the US is with governments that have mass debt burdens with no way to pay off. We are long way from that yet, but that's the direction under National. I am not pro Labour, but they cannot be blamed for debt being incurred 7 years after they left office. Open the other eye!

Daytr
27-03-2015, 07:41 PM
Hey so Craic, has gone pretty quiet. Do you know where he lives El Zorro so you can collect your $500? I must admit I thought you were crazy to take that bet at straight odds, but looks like its going to pay!
I just had a beer in one of the locals & Mark Osbourne was there with his team looking pretty somber. I feel sorry for the bloke as I think he handled himself reasonably well for a first timer, but just got sold a lemon.

craic
27-03-2015, 09:29 PM
Daytr - even if you are right, I am $500 in the black in my bets with el Z or don't you remember the bet of $,1000 on the last election? Anyway, the reason for my silence is that I am waiting for The Fat Lady to sing - and that doesn't happen "till tomorrow or Sunday and if its a close call against WP then court cases could go for months. Meanwhile I have a lot of wood to split but first, I must go to the TAB and pick my winners for tomorrow. And, I regret to say, they will not include the Black Caps.

Daytr
27-03-2015, 09:56 PM
So you will lose two bets this weekend ? The look on Mark Osborne's face in the pub was not one of a winner.
I think it was close until Labour asked their supporters to vote for Peters.
But you are right, fat lady and all that, but my pick is Peters will win by around 3k votes or more.

iceman
28-03-2015, 09:25 AM
EZ I think we should be careful posting about the Northland by-election today. We dont want to be in breach of the Electoral Act. Some people were done after the General Election for what they thought were innocent comments. Just a friendly reminder !

elZorro
28-03-2015, 09:34 AM
EZ I think we should be careful posting about the Northland by-election today. We dont want to be in breach of the Electoral Act. Some people were done after the General Election for what they thought were innocent comments. Just a friendly reminder !

Quite right Iceman, I had forgotten that. I deleted the post, and I'll put something similar up tomorrow.

BlackPeter
28-03-2015, 09:40 AM
Black Peter, do you even believe the stuff you right? Blaming Labour for National's incurred debt after they have been in power 7 years! Give me break. Yes we had the GFC and yes the tax take was down but that doesn't explain $40Bln ! In fact it doesn't even explain $10Bln! Since then thanks to China we have had the biggest export boom this country has ever seen in dairy and debt is still growing and it has every year under National. Yes NZ as did Australia get through the GFC relatively unscathed but that had very little to with either country's government and far more to do with China than anything else. So all we are seeing is an explosion of government debt that there is no plan to start paying down. If we carry on borrowing like we have we are heading in the same place Japan, Europe & the US is with governments that have mass debt burdens with no way to pay off. We are long way from that yet, but that's the direction under National. I am not pro Labour, but they cannot be blamed for debt being incurred 7 years after they left office. Open the other eye!

Hi daytr,

Yes "I do believe the stuff I right". Lol. I even believe the stuff I write. Must be one of these Freudian slips - deep in your unconscious you know that I am right, but you don't want to admit it. See - I think that you are a reasonable intelligent gal / guy, but unfortunately somewhat ideological blind folded.

O.K. - lets look at the numbers. If we believe the numbers from treasury (http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/2011/execsumm/11.htm), than Working for families (one of Helens more expensive bribes) does cost the New Zealand tax payer roughly 2.75 billion per year since 2009. Multiply that with 6 years - and here you've got already 16.5 Billion we otherwise wouldn't have had to take debts on.

Now, lets look at the interest free student loans: according to interest.co.nz (http://www.interest.co.nz/personal-finance/54098/heres-how-over-250000-students-are-using-and-abusing-over-nz21-billion-intere) did this one of Helens election bribes cost the NZ tax payer already roughly 1.6 billion dollars in 2011 - tendency: rising. So lets assume that these 1.6 billion annually are the median from 2009 to 2014, than we add another 10 billion dollars to the state debt caused by labour's election bribes.

Makes already 26.5 billion dollars.

Add the cost for the Christchurch Earthquake - and we are pretty much covered.

Question: Given that these numbers probably disagree with the teachings of your left/green religion: How do your political priests explain the rise of the national debt? Haven't yet heard a good explanation (or any) coming from your side.

elZorro
28-03-2015, 10:45 AM
I'm posting a link.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11424231

Sgt Pepper
28-03-2015, 12:45 PM
I'm posting a link.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11424231

EZ
I was looking at I- Predict today. I noted that the probability of "John Key departing as leader of National in 2017 "has had a sharp increase at 14%, now costs 53 cents. When I made this prediction some time ago, it was flicked off by the likes of MVT etc as wishful thinking. Personally I think he will go before the next election for a variety of reasons , both political and personal.

Daytr
28-03-2015, 02:08 PM
I'm not sure where you went to school, however a system that already costs $1Bln and then cost $2.75Bln over 7 years of National equates to circa $11Bln increase, so you are only out by a mere $15Bln. National have been in power for 7 years & they have had the numbers to change policy if they wanted, yet they have chosen not to, so they have accepted the policy & it is now their policy. So I'm sorry you can blame Labor all you like but the fact that haven't changed it suggests they agree or even like the policy. I'm not saying its a good policy or not, but I don't accept you can blame a previous government that hasn't been in office for over two terms! Where has the money from the asset sales gone? We still have $20Bln unaccounted for and I'm sure that's spent on whatever as well. My main point is National is getting this country into hock & its no one else's fault but theirs.
You mistakenly think I am some sort of lefty, haha, another bad assumption. If it was Labor doing similarly bad things, I'd be sticking it to them also.


Hi daytr,

Yes "I do believe the stuff I right". Lol. I even believe the stuff I write. Must be one of these Freudian slips - deep in your unconscious you know that I am right, but you don't want to admit it. See - I think that you are a reasonable intelligent gal / guy, but unfortunately somewhat ideological blind folded.

O.K. - lets look at the numbers. If we believe the numbers from treasury (http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/2011/execsumm/11.htm), than Working for families (one of Helens more expensive bribes) does cost the New Zealand tax payer roughly 2.75 billion per year since 2009. Multiply that with 6 years - and here you've got already 16.5 Billion we otherwise wouldn't have had to take debts on.

Now, lets look at the interest free student loans: according to interest.co.nz (http://www.interest.co.nz/personal-finance/54098/heres-how-over-250000-students-are-using-and-abusing-over-nz21-billion-intere) did this one of Helens election bribes cost the NZ tax payer already roughly 1.6 billion dollars in 2011 - tendency: rising. So lets assume that these 1.6 billion annually are the median from 2009 to 2014, than we add another 10 billion dollars to the state debt caused by labour's election bribes.

Makes already 26.5 billion dollars.

Add the cost for the Christchurch Earthquake - and we are pretty much covered.

Question: Given that these numbers probably disagree with the teachings of your left/green religion: How do your political priests explain the rise of the national debt? Haven't yet heard a good explanation (or any) coming from your side.

elZorro
28-03-2015, 02:37 PM
Hi daytr,

Yes "I do believe the stuff I right". Lol. I even believe the stuff I write. Must be one of these Freudian slips - deep in your unconscious you know that I am right, but you don't want to admit it. See - I think that you are a reasonable intelligent gal / guy, but unfortunately somewhat ideological blind folded.

O.K. - lets look at the numbers. If we believe the numbers from treasury (http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/2011/execsumm/11.htm), than Working for families (one of Helens more expensive bribes) does cost the New Zealand tax payer roughly 2.75 billion per year since 2009. Multiply that with 6 years - and here you've got already 16.5 Billion we otherwise wouldn't have had to take debts on.

Now, lets look at the interest free student loans: according to interest.co.nz (http://www.interest.co.nz/personal-finance/54098/heres-how-over-250000-students-are-using-and-abusing-over-nz21-billion-intere) did this one of Helens election bribes cost the NZ tax payer already roughly 1.6 billion dollars in 2011 - tendency: rising. So lets assume that these 1.6 billion annually are the median from 2009 to 2014, than we add another 10 billion dollars to the state debt caused by labour's election bribes.

Makes already 26.5 billion dollars.

Add the cost for the Christchurch Earthquake - and we are pretty much covered.

Question: Given that these numbers probably disagree with the teachings of your left/green religion: How do your political priests explain the rise of the national debt? Haven't yet heard a good explanation (or any) coming from your side.

Blackpeter: fascinating facts there, but you missed out on some other ones. Labour posted a very healthy surplus every year they were in office, which means that whatever "bribes" you think they used to get into office, they obviously were balanced out by a good tax take, so they'd grown the economy.

National upped the GST to 15%, what did that bring in? Labour brought out WFF in 2004 to balance higher costs for families. It wasn't a bribe, it was meant to be a rebalance. National has increased the WFF rates twice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_for_Families

Similarly, the state paid for almost all of my tertiary education. Now students pay about 40% of the costs. At least they should have an interest free loan in the meantime. Govt borrowing costs are minimal after all.

The problem for the budget surplus, as I see it, is that National has trouble growing the economy. Labour were actually very good at it.

There was high advance voting in Northland, which means there should be a great turnout. Voting closes at 7pm, preliminary results should be known by 10.30 pm.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/67536916/northland-votes-in-byelection

winner69
28-03-2015, 06:36 PM
with 26% counted its all Winnie

Handy lesd over the Nat guy with 52.6% of vote

winner69
28-03-2015, 06:53 PM
with 55% polling booth counted and Winnie leading my 2,232

Now has 53.0% of vote

Hope this is the bginning of Keys downfall

elZorro
28-03-2015, 07:01 PM
with 55% polling booth counted and Winnie leading by 2,232

Now has 53.0% of vote

Hope this is the beginning of Keys downfall

Thanks for the update W69, I should crack open another beer!

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:11 PM
Thanks for the update W69, I should crack open another beer!

More than 3,000 in front now EZ

Nearly 54% of the votes

Polls right again

And iPredict as usual right on the button from a while ago

Daytr
28-03-2015, 07:11 PM
Wow looks like a trouncing. Winnie all the way! Woohoo !

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:19 PM
looks like pretty strong turnout , esp for a by-electiom

Winnie now 3,400 in front

The populous have spoken ..... they are pissed off with current leadership

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:22 PM
90 0f 98 booths

Winnie know 3,626 in front - just under 54% of votes

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:24 PM
somebody posted here if Winnie wins with a huge margin Key will call an early election

Doubt it but hope so

elZorro
28-03-2015, 07:28 PM
More than 3,000 in front now EZ

Nearly 54% of the votes

Polls right again

And iPredict as usual right on the button from a while ago

Yes, who would have guessed that? Mind you, the pro-National bets on ipredict did start disappearing below the 50% mark fairly quickly. They were just bluffing it out, even then. I'm going to repost what I wrote earlier, the by-election has closed.

So the day is here at last, when we see that National is likely to be ousted in 2017, rather than go on to hold power for four terms. A win for "Not National" in Northland will really boost the confidence of the other parties, in the belief that the normal "three-terms in, three terms out" cycle will prevail. Based on the data left behind so far, theLabour Coalition has a very proud legacy from their nine years in office, National not so good, from over six years.

Yes, National had the GFC and the Earthquakes to contend with, but where is the detailed policy that has been worked on since, to ensure NZ moves up the OECD rankings, not down? Why is it so hard to balance the govt budget, long after the GFC? Why are our exports mostly commodity-based still? Where would we be if we couldn't borrow heavily from offshore to shore up our overspending ways, on assets that are usually not truly productive?

Any time I see an expensive new car on the road, a house being purchased as a rental, a farm being idly used as a safe deposit and capital gain vehicle, I think of the smart businesses that didn't get started and sustained with that capital. Businesses that employ people, pay taxes along the way, export niche value-added goods offshore. If the government of the day doesn't actively promote those ideas, they have to go.

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:31 PM
Nearly all over and Peters will win by more than 4.000

Daytr
28-03-2015, 07:42 PM
I very much doubt it as hasn't even been a year since the last one so it would backfire if he did.


somebody posted here if Winnie wins with a huge margin Key will call an early election

Doubt it but hope so

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:42 PM
EZ - you be very happy tonight eh

Think Nat Gvt need to be in a law banning over 70 year olds to stand in elections.

Hope somebody else packs sad or ha been naughty so we can another by-election. They good fun at the moment. Nats would lose wherever it would be

winner69
28-03-2015, 07:52 PM
My apologies to Mr Peters ....he is a few weeks off 70

Still a great effort by the old bugger

elZorro
28-03-2015, 08:41 PM
My apologies to Mr Peters ....he is a few weeks off 70

Still a great effort by the old bugger

An impressive result all right.

slimwin
28-03-2015, 09:41 PM
Possibly this is good for national. Winston will now prove over the next few years if that change was good for NZ. How's that worked with Winston historically? Goldcard good, the rest???

iceman
28-03-2015, 10:24 PM
So it is clear Winston First (only) won this by-election. But I think Labour are the real losers alongside National. Winston wil now become the real Leader of the Opposition and silly Andrew Little is a goner. Dunne ,ACT,Maori Party are up., Labour down the gurgler.

I reckon Key should put the hard word on Dunne on the RMA and a couple of other bills or simply call a general election and let people decide

Daytr
29-03-2015, 08:45 AM
Slimwin, how on earth can you spin this positively for National. There is nothing, absolutely no positive in this for National. A hell of a lot of people were voting against National not voting for Peters & says it all. Agree re Labour, although difficult to say with them backing Peters. In the GE Prime reduced the margin & she would have substantially here if Peters hadn't stood, but very unlikely she would have won it. Early days for Little & so far I think he has done an ok job and is gathering an increasing amount if respect. However he has inherited a party that has been in disarray for some time, so its not going to happen overnight. Basically the jury is still out on Little.

Daytr
29-03-2015, 08:48 AM
Sorry Iceman, no the biggest loser is by far National. Take the blinkers off.
Many people up here were openly apologizing for not voting Labour as they wanted to vote strategically to get rid of National.
Prime was a very popular candidate.

BlackPeter
29-03-2015, 08:56 AM
Congratulations to Ria Bond, the likely new Southland list MP of NZ First. She is the next on the NZ First list with Winston having now his own electorate (though we don't know yet, whether she will accept the new job)! If she does, I am sure she will be highly committed to the people of Northland who brought her into office.

Actually, I am wondering whether the people currently rejoicing with this election result will really turn out to be the ultimate winners of this election?

So lets see:

The people of Northland get the candidate they voted for. Did they win though? Actually, I don't know, but I can't remember Winston doing a lot for his previous constituencies (Tauranga), so why should it be different this time? On the other hand - never before this election heard of the National candidate, and at the end it probably doesn't really matter whether Osborne from Northland or Bond from Southland (Invercargill) are now drawing a MP's salary (remember - nothing changes for Peters, he is already a sitting MP, just slipping from List-MP to directly elected).

The people of New Zealand - actually, I do see some winners here. National stopped to listen to the people (same as Helen in her third term). This election might act as a warning shot in front of their bow - and who knows, maybe the current government starts to consider again the wishes of the people (ever the optimist ...).

The Green / Left: They are rejoicing the most ... and I am not quite sure whether they really won. Winston is clearly neither Green nor Left - and the past shows that he is very happy to work with the people offering him the bigger baubles ...

National: Will be interesting to see how they are playing it, but this event very well might be a healing shock for a party which slowly stopped to listen to the people. If they get the message (Thanks Winston) than this might be the key event helping them to get their act again together, restart to listen and continue their reign come 2017. Two and a half years should be plenty to regroup and improve.

I guess time will tell - but nothing better than a lost election to keep politicians on their toes.

slimwin
29-03-2015, 08:59 AM
It's a wake up call along way out from an election Daytr. The ball is in their court to be better now. This can be that call, or the start of the rot. I still don't see who can govern NZ better at the moment and the polls for ALL of NZ reflect the same. It's not all about Northland, as much as Northlanders wish it could be.

iceman
29-03-2015, 09:13 AM
No blinkers daytr. National lost like I said but there is no win here for Labour. It will be very difficult for Winston to keep this conservative seat at the general election if voters up there think that will assist in forming a Labour lead Government ! But for now he will be busy getting the promised rail link and the promised new port ��

elZorro
29-03-2015, 09:49 AM
Craic, I have a link here for donations to Maungatautari, the local ecological reserve. I had a visit there before Christmas, still looks like a worthy cause to me.

http://www.maungatrust.org/Donate_Online.cfm

slimwin
29-03-2015, 10:01 AM
Nice touch ez.

Daytr
29-03-2015, 10:49 AM
Slimwin, sure agree, whether Key takes any notice is another thing & I agree its far more reaching than Northland, although I think the majority of the swing can be put down to people thinking locally first, nationally second. There is perhaps a slight win for Labour in regards such a large swing against National but that's probably a bit tenuous. But there is no comparison what this means to National vs what it means for Labour. One got knocked out on the first round & one retired before the fight. Yeah the next election will be interesting, however I would suggest a lot of people voted for him because they are sick of being taken for granted & I would suggest they wont be in future, so mission accomplished.

IAK
29-03-2015, 11:17 AM
Great result for the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party candidate getting more votes (85) than the ACT party candidate (66 votes). Both parties about as relevant as each other.

westerly
29-03-2015, 11:19 AM
"A governing party, polling in the high 40s, should not have to pull out all the campaigning stops to hold the ground it took more-or-less effortlessly at the preceding seven elections. When fleets of ministerial cars are forced to cruise the backroads of a safe National seat, disgorging dripping barrels of reeking political pork at every stop, just to beat back a man on the cusp of turning 70, then something’s gone very seriously wrong."

Chris Trotter sums it up. Even Whale oil has picked himself up from the floor and is criticizing the National Party.

westerly

Daytr
29-03-2015, 12:56 PM
David vs Goliath that's for sure & history repeated

Daytr
29-03-2015, 12:58 PM
I saw the ACT guy at one of the candidate meetings & he was out of his depth.

Great result for the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party candidate getting more votes (85) than the ACT party candidate (66 votes). Both parties about as relevant as each other.

craic
29-03-2015, 01:21 PM
ElZ if you want me to forward the money to that trust, I will do so or if you email me some numbers, I will send it direct to you. Ironically, I have just opened a letter from Link with details of a dividend of $921 for Contact shares that I thought I had sold before the record date but it must been after the record date. So "The Lord Giveth and the Lord taketh away" but I am not so sure that that will work for Northland.
PS I was once a fully paid up member of WP's party.







ironically

elZorro
29-03-2015, 01:36 PM
ElZ if you want me to forward the money to that trust, I will do so or if you email me some numbers, I will send it direct to you. Ironically, I have just opened a letter from Link with details of a dividend of $921 for Contact shares that I thought I had sold before the record date but it must been after the record date. So "The Lord Giveth and the Lord taketh away" but I am not so sure that that will work for Northland.
PS I was once a fully paid up member of WP's party.


ironically

Hello Craic, very good, just send direct to MEIT as though it's from you, they are always needing funds, it'll help feed the Kakas.

I thought my bet was safe when Winston turned up with a big signwritten bus, a slogan and a sound track. They were all inspired. Couple that with some newfound understanding from regional voters, and National were history up North.

Daytr
29-03-2015, 02:07 PM
Nice one Craic. Its a bit hard to take away what you have never received. That was a lot of people's comment. Well we can't be any worse off!

Daytr
29-03-2015, 02:18 PM
You are so one eyed, you should become a pirate. Tauranga is booming and Peters has to be given some credit for that, like him or not.
Northland now has Winston Peters as its MP not someone from Southland, so we now have a high profile MP rather than a novice that no one had heard of representing a party that abandoned Northland long ago. We had nothing to lose. And something does change which you fail to recognize through your one eye & its fundamental. Winston Peters represents Northland & he is the leader of his party. Northland is actually on the map purely because he stood. We used to get one day of publicity a year, Waitangi day, now that will change to & we will start getting a fair share of funding & attention.


Congratulations to Ria Bond, the likely new Southland list MP of NZ First. She is the next on the NZ First list with Winston having now his own electorate (though we don't know yet, whether she will accept the new job)! If she does, I am sure she will be highly committed to the people of Northland who brought her into office.

Actually, I am wondering whether the people currently rejoicing with this election result will really turn out to be the ultimate winners of this election?

So lets see:

The people of Northland get the candidate they voted for. Did they win though? Actually, I don't know, but I can't remember Winston doing a lot for his previous constituencies (Tauranga), so why should it be different this time? On the other hand - never before this election heard of the National candidate, and at the end it probably doesn't really matter whether Osborne from Northland or Bond from Southland (Invercargill) are now drawing a MP's salary (remember - nothing changes for Peters, he is already a sitting MP, just slipping from List-MP to directly elected).

The people of New Zealand - actually, I do see some winners here. National stopped to listen to the people (same as Helen in her third term). This election might act as a warning shot in front of their bow - and who knows, maybe the current government starts to consider again the wishes of the people (ever the optimist ...).

The Green / Left: They are rejoicing the most ... and I am not quite sure whether they really won. Winston is clearly neither Green nor Left - and the past shows that he is very happy to work with the people offering him the bigger baubles ...

National: Will be interesting to see how they are playing it, but this event very well might be a healing shock for a party which slowly stopped to listen to the people. If they get the message (Thanks Winston) than this might be the key event helping them to get their act again together, restart to listen and continue their reign come 2017. Two and a half years should be plenty to regroup and improve.

I guess time will tell - but nothing better than a lost election to keep politicians on their toes.

elZorro
29-03-2015, 03:07 PM
I just updated a chart of employee and enterprise numbers. You can see the brisk rate of improvement under Labour, the drop back and slow recovery under National. So now, we're back to where we were in 2008. Except there's been a population increase meanwhile.

winner69
29-03-2015, 03:22 PM
Nats got more votes at some booths

http://northland-byelection.newsapps.nz/#/

Interesting too look back at last 2 elections

BlackPeter
29-03-2015, 06:52 PM
You are so one eyed, you should become a pirate. Tauranga is booming and Peters has to be given some credit for that, like him or not.
Northland now has Winston Peters as its MP not someone from Southland, so we now have a high profile MP rather than a novice that no one had heard of representing a party that abandoned Northland long ago. We had nothing to lose. And something does change which you fail to recognize through your one eye & its fundamental. Winston Peters represents Northland & he is the leader of his party. Northland is actually on the map purely because he stood. We used to get one day of publicity a year, Waitangi day, now that will change to & we will start getting a fair share of funding & attention.

Daytr, I wish you well. I remember that Winston used to compare himself some days ago with Konrad Adenauer (first chancellor of West Germany after WWII). I give him that he is now reaching the age when Adenauer first took his post as chancellor (well, still 4 years to go - Adenauer started with age 73), but I sincerely wish for Northland that Winston will as well reach Adenauer's political format. Still somewhat lacking at current, I'd say. But than - with people like you as his constituents, nobody will notice anyway. You seem to be easy to please :p. I hope you enjoy every day of Winston being your personal MP. If you want to do the rest of NZ a favour - please keep him!

Daytr
29-03-2015, 09:42 PM
Black Peter, words fail me, the lunacy of some of your posts. Complete waste of time.

Daytr
30-03-2015, 08:38 AM
Just a quick note on soaring government debt under National. There is a misconception that Government income via tax etc plummeted during the GFC.
They did level off & dip slightly for a couple of years but since then have soared & yet government debt continues to grow & they have also sold billions of dollars of assets. Anyone can borrow money to fund a program, the test is can you re-pay it & and this point there is no indication from National that this is even close to be the case.

NZ Government income since 2000 to 2014.



Year
Tax receipts


2000
36,001


2001
38,002


2002
41,199


2003
44,040


2004
48,015


2005
52,626


2006
55,198


2007
59,323


2008
57,673


2009
55,388


2010
56,397


2011
58,327


2012
62,217


2013
66,347


2014
70,609

Major von Tempsky
30-03-2015, 09:17 AM
Northland - I'd be worried if I was Labour.

Labour - Willow-Jean Prime 1,315. One of their better candidates.

If someone wants to protest they will now vote NZ First. Not only will Labour drop 1% in polls because of Northland lots of other Labour voters will switch to NZ First in polls.

Little turned chicken, Chicken Little.

And now Winston says he may not replace the NZ First list place which means the National majority stays the same and Little gave away the Labour votes for nothing.
And Winston has no power to implement any of his $400 million of promises. Heh heh heh. New port? New railway? New fast train?

Daytr
30-03-2015, 09:50 AM
MVT, I think you & BlackPeter should form a comedy duo. Your posts are obviously satirical right? They have little bearing on reality so I can only assume that is the case. ;-) Only one eyed National supporters could spin this result that its worse for Labour than National. It was a massive black eye for Key & National, there is no other way of putting it. Labour in the end openly endorsed Peters & that is why the victory was so big & it would have been a close run thing without that endorsement. It was only after that endorsement that the polls for Peters surged to a 20 point lead from a small lead prior. But according to some here, people say one thing & vote another. Well that didn't happen. And when there is a massive reduction in National support of over 5k votes from memory, somehow its worse for Labour than National. Don't get me wrong this result was no endorsement for Labour, but it was a vote of no confidence in National.

In regards the parliamentary numbers actually it makes no difference having the additional member in regards who National would need to support a bill, otherwise I assure you Peters wouldn't be considering not bringing in the extra MP. Its consistent with their policy of a smaller parliament. Personally I think they should bring in the additional MP as you never know what can happen between now & the next election.

Major von Tempsky
30-03-2015, 10:02 AM
Jeez, what's happened to EZ? He and Daytr really must be the same person.....

Sgt Pepper
30-03-2015, 10:53 AM
Jeez, what's happened to EZ? He and Daytr really must be the same person.....

Major
As usual you never fail to make the best of a bad political outcome for National.
NATIONAL WAS DEFEATED. I recall your hero John Key proclaiming that Winston " had absolutely no chance" in Northland.

I don't resile from my longstanding predictions in these posts.

1) John Key is in the " legacy mode" of his career. He will not contest the 2017 General election if he has any perception that his government will be defeated.

2. John Key very much wants to be the next High Commissioner to London / or ambassador in Washington.

3. Michael Woodhouse or Paula Bennett are plotting already to push him out.

4.The expensive $26 million flag referendum farce will be spectacular defeat for John Key.

5. Major Von Tempsky will disagree with all of the above

BlackPeter
30-03-2015, 11:12 AM
Jeez, what's happened to EZ? He and Daytr really must be the same person.....

Not sure, whether this assumption is fair to EZ. EZ is normally polite and comes across as honest. I even have seen him admitting mistakes.

Not sure I made so far the same observations with daytr (hey, just try to be honest as well ...), so they clearly behave differently but who knows - maybe they are a Jekyll - Hyde personality? And maybe Daytr is just going through a difficult phase in life ... ?

elZorro
30-03-2015, 11:14 AM
Jeez, what's happened to EZ? He and Daytr really must be the same person.....

MVT, I'm busy at work. It's near the end of the financial year. And I'm quietly banking my win on ipredict.

Daytr
30-03-2015, 01:02 PM
MVT & Black Peter, in their own little imaginary world. Write a novel perhaps, unless what we have seen to date is the start of that ?
BlackPeter, your post implies that I have been dishonest.
Any evidence of this? Of course not, because its just a nasty little snipe without foundation.

How about continuing your honesty & admit your justification for National getting this country into hock was
1) an elementary mistake in math to the tune of circa $15Bln!
2) that you cannot blame Labour a party that hasn't been in government for seven years for the debt that National is racking up.

But no I suspect you are happy to live in your little world and no matter what happens its someone else's fault.
Anyone but National or John Key's fault anyway.
I suppose that makes sense as John Key sets the example by taking no responsibility for his actions.
From your almighty leaders own mouth. Get some guts !

Daytr
30-03-2015, 01:59 PM
Sgt Pepper, If your No3, proved correct pity help National if Paula Bennett became leader. She was Winston's best campaigner in the by-election! LOL

3. Michael Woodhouse or Paula Bennett are plotting already to push him out.

BlackPeter
30-03-2015, 02:02 PM
BlackPeter, your post implies that I have been dishonest.
Any evidence of this?

Incorrect - I just made some complimentary comments about some other poster who has been compared to you.
I finished with stating that I haven't yet noticed the same positive attributes in your posts (and maybe I should confine this to this thread).

On the other hand - I must admit, that the way you occasionally tend to express yourself in your posts (and in some cases the apparent lack of reflection before you post whatever you do) is quite unique for a self-claimed "professional".

Daytr
30-03-2015, 02:40 PM
BlackPeter, you object to people that have a different view to yourself. I have seen this over and over again on the stock threads when I have shorted stocks & it obviously gets up your nose. I don't proclaim to be anything, another figment of a very fertile imagination.
So no comment in regards the National debt & your argument to justify it that was picked apart in about 30 seconds or your ludicrous attempts to blame Labour for the hock that National & John Key is getting this country in.
Perhaps reflect on that.
You need to lift your game, as you are looking very desperate in your attempt to smear people, just because they make your very light weight arguments look quite silly.
Another thing picked up from your leader perhaps?

BlackPeter
30-03-2015, 04:02 PM
BlackPeter, you object to people that have a different view to yourself. I have seen this over and over again on the stock threads when I have shorted stocks & it obviously gets up your nose. I don't proclaim to be anything, another figment of a very fertile imagination.
So no comment in regards the National debt & your argument to justify it that was picked apart in about 30 seconds or your ludicrous attempts to blame Labour for the hock that National & John Key is getting this country in.
Perhaps reflect on that.
You need to lift your game, as you are looking very desperate in your attempt to smear people, just because they make your very light weight arguments look quite silly.
Another thing picked up from your leader perhaps?

Look Daytr, are you sure you are not mixing things up?

Yes, we might have in some areas different political views, but I don't think this is an excuse for you to harass other posters. I experience your posts not just as as rude and offensive - you make as well things up. Propose you start focussing on playing the ball and not the player ...

Daytr
30-03-2015, 04:22 PM
Really. For not the first time you make accusations or snide remarks without anything to back them up, whilst accusing me of getting personal.
You can't see the irony in you own posts?
To suggests someone's argument is ludicrous or silly maybe difficult to hear, I get that.
Best remedy, don't post the silly argument in the first place.
Cheers Daytr.

neopoleII
30-03-2015, 07:27 PM
so i have been reading this thread and it seemed like i was reading this thread from a year ago and then.....
daytr gets banned....... is it because of what he said or who he is?
belg comes to mind...... and if so...... the post count from 2 handles are really up there.
its seems some folks have too much time on their hands.

anyway..... interesting times ahead with winston winning.....
look forward to the next couple of years.
as some others have said..... winston winning now could be a very timely wake up call for national.
im sure all NZers will be looking at this result and asking a few questions and watching more closely
what national does from now till the next election.
and for that matter...... what the other parties do from now till then.
IMHO national got a punch in the face and a standing 3 count.
the voters got a full view of weakness and are now paying attention.
national is still the favourite..... but the game is far more interesting now.
and where is mr little?
winston is taking the fight to national on his own ..... full well knowing he cant be prime minister.
maybe depute prime minister....... under ??
winston is known for being the kingmaker.......
who shall he choose?
key or little
key tried too hard to whoo the northland vote and failed.....
little encouraged his support voters to betray their party.......
what will winston do?

elZorro
30-03-2015, 09:26 PM
Winston should look to a party that is keen on small business and in developing the regions, along with urban areas. A party that has demonstrated they know how to grow the pie for everyone, not just pretend that they are doing something. This party will also have some ideas for bringing along those with the least resources, because we all know that jobs and opportunities are empowering. That would really be sending National a message.

iceman
30-03-2015, 09:30 PM
Thanks napoleoll. Like you, I don't doubt for one minute that daytr is belgarion returned in disguise but apparently he has moved to Northland and become an ex know it all. I feel sorry for him and EZ ,the gullible supporter !!!

elZorro
30-03-2015, 09:56 PM
Thanks napoleoll. Like you, I don't doubt for one minute that daytr is belgarion returned in disguise but apparently he has moved to Northland and become an ex know it all. I feel sorry for him and EZ ,the gullible supporter !!!

?? I am an informed supporter, I have the stats behind me, Iceman.

I don't think Daytr is Belgarian, although they both have occasional spelling/typo issues. Belgarian had a lot more of the facts taken on board already. Why you guys think there could only be a couple of lefties in all of NZ, is beyond me. Think grey, not black and white :)

iceman
31-03-2015, 06:42 AM
You are indeed mate. Just tongue in cheek and apologies if you took it the wrong way.


?? I am an informed supporter, I have the stats behind me, Iceman.

)

Major von Tempsky
31-03-2015, 06:49 AM
Here is an extract from a BBC report on the French elections where the Socialists are getting a very big beating from the right wing UMP.

"The French left, like the left everywhere, has always been prone to subdivision.

Now the rebellious faction of the Socialists is joining with the radical Left Front of Jean-Luc Melenchon to call for an end to Mr Hollande's mildly pro-market reforms.

We lost because we stopped being true to our left-wing selves, is the argument. "

This a very illogical reaction from left wings everywhere. They don't lose because they aren't left wing enough, they lose because they are too left wing. If they react by becoming more left wing then they are going to lose by even more next time.
Morons.

Sgt Pepper
31-03-2015, 11:35 AM
Here is an extract from a BBC report on the French elections where the Socialists are getting a very big beating from the right wing UMP.

"The French left, like the left everywhere, has always been prone to subdivision.

Now the rebellious faction of the Socialists is joining with the radical Left Front of Jean-Luc Melenchon to call for an end to Mr Hollande's mildly pro-market reforms.

We lost because we stopped being true to our left-wing selves, is the argument. "

This a very illogical reaction from left wings everywhere. They don't lose because they aren't left wing enough, they lose because they are too left wing. If they react by becoming more left wing then they are going to lose by even more next time.
Morons.

Major

There is always a deafening silence from you regarding Social Democrat governments. I can understand this as socially and economically successful left of centre governments I guess pose a bit of an ideological dilemma for you. I know it must be difficult reconciling how such economic basket cases, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway Sweden and Finland who consistently elect social democrat administrations can develop such advanced multinational companies. I work in the health sector, Novo Nordisk is the largest insulin producer, profit last year : 25 billion One of many examples. Those social democrat lefties must be doing something right!!

Major von Tempsky
31-03-2015, 05:25 PM
Yes, they are doing several things right....

(a) they allow democracy
(b) they allow the rule of law
(c) they allow a free Press and media
(d) they allow free enterprise and no longer nationalize firms but in fact have been privatizing them
(e) they allow themselves to be replaced as the government by free enterprise governments from time to time.

In fact it was my impression that in recent years this had been happening more and more, in fact I clearly remember when it happened in Sweden....

slimwin
31-03-2015, 07:08 PM
Sweden has only just gone back to a left wing govt. And the the foreign minister has just picked a fight with one of their biggest paymasters.


http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9481542/swedens-feminist-foreign-minister-has-dared-to-tell-the-truth-about-saudi-arabia-what-happens-now-concerns-us-all/

slimwin
31-03-2015, 07:11 PM
Finland have done very well on basically one company. How's that for diversification.

http://www.economist.com/node/21560867

slimwin
31-03-2015, 07:12 PM
And Norway has the oil of course.

Without looking into too much, last I heard was Netherlands politics are a basket case and the economy not so flash either.

elZorro
31-03-2015, 08:09 PM
Forget all that - I need some general advice. My daughter has recently forsaken Labour and joined the Green Party. What should I do? :eek2:

slimwin
31-03-2015, 08:16 PM
Blame yourself. :)

slimwin
31-03-2015, 08:18 PM
She may grow out of it. I was a fully paid up and active member of greenpeace once. I consider it a terrorist organisation now.

elZorro
31-03-2015, 09:04 PM
She may grow out of it. I was a fully paid up and active member of greenpeace once. I consider it a terrorist organisation now. Oh yeah, thanks Slimwin, I'll tell her that, it should work?

There were quite a few Labour people around here who were thinking of joining the Greens, after having to work too hard trying to tow the party line. With the Greens, you just need a ukulele I think.

BTW I'm not really anti-greens, but I'm starting to get more focussed about it after my daughter's change of heart. At least they're on the leftie side.

slimwin
01-04-2015, 06:15 AM
My eldest brother and his son have done the same. I would have thought they were more puritanical.

elZorro
01-04-2015, 06:39 AM
My eldest brother and his son have done the same. I would have thought they were more puritanical.

I don't know about the Greens, but there are quite a few greying Christians in the Labour party, if that's what you mean :). Maybe I'm one?

Bill English getting cagey about the surplus again. The low milk payout is not going to help, that's for sure. It's not taxes from farmers that will be missed, that's usually sorted out by a range of methods. But it's their external expenditure, of which some ends up as taxes, that will be reduced a lot in the quarters ahead.

http://www.interest.co.nz/bonds/74787/english-warns-oil-royalties-down-nz100-mln-and-withholding-tax-bank-deposits-down-says-w?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+1 +April+2015

Major von Tempsky
01-04-2015, 06:51 AM
You should point out to her that Communism has been tried and failed, that the Berlin Wall fell.

One of my daughters voted for Colin Craig's Conservatives. Yecchhh! I hope she recovers her enquiring mind soon.

craic
01-04-2015, 08:04 AM
Once upon a time when I was contemplating the impossible,a friendly barber urged me on. "I wouldn't get a contractor in NZ to carry it out" was met with "garth Mc Vicar - he'll do it" Now, twenty years later, I"m sitting in a house on the top of a hill up an almost impassable driveway writing this from the house that Garth Mc Vicar moved.My wife and I voted for him this election. I had quite a lot of dealings with him in and around the Napier Court.

slimwin
01-04-2015, 08:40 AM
Mc vicar is a fundamentalist and will only ever be popular for a brief time. Same as Craig and the left equivalents.

craic
01-04-2015, 09:05 AM
I've known the man for twenty or more years and he is an achiever. He is well respected by many and while I could not visualise him as a politician your "brief time" will be a lot longer than most politicians.
Mc vicar is a fundamentalist and will only ever be popular for a brief time. Same as Craig and the left equivalents.

fungus pudding
01-04-2015, 09:20 AM
Oh yeah, thanks Slimwin, I'll tell her that, it should work?

There were quite a few Labour people around here who were thinking of joining the Greens, after having to work too hard trying to tow the party line. With the Greens, you just need a ukulele I think.

BTW I'm not really anti-greens, but I'm starting to get more focussed about it after my daughter's change of heart. At least they're on the leftie side.

Where would they tow it to?

craic
01-04-2015, 10:09 AM
Well, Winston Peters is looking more like a Socialist leader than anyone else on the block at the moment. Maybe if he painted his bus red and got a few tattoos?
Where would they tow it to?

couta1
01-04-2015, 10:18 AM
Mc vicar is a fundamentalist and will only ever be popular for a brief time. Same as Craig and the left equivalents.
Untold kiwi families have a lot to thank Mr McVicar for in bringing a whole lot more justice to these shores where ALL the politicians failed by only paying lip service to dealing with the scum and vermin who think its their right to kill,rape and injure ordinary citizens.

elZorro
01-04-2015, 10:26 AM
Where would they tow it to?

Quite right FP, I meant 'toe the party line'. In the Energy newsletter today, someone commented it's a good thing that Winston got in, now the hawkish side of the National Party won't be able to make fundamental, possibly poorly planned and short-term changes to the RMA. Developers will still have to do the right thing, correct?

BlackPeter
01-04-2015, 11:34 AM
Forget all that - I need some general advice. My daughter has recently forsaken Labour and joined the Green Party. What should I do? :eek2:

Good question - the cynics in me would say that she didn't change her political views at all - all the same, but if we ignore the cynics in me for a moment: Children tend to have a phase where they grow up and try to be just different from their parents. You could join the Greens as well, maybe this would cure her? But I guess the more important question is what do you want to achieve? If it is a healthy family life and a good relationship to your daughter, than maybe you should do nothing - and look forward to more interesting political discussions in the circle of your family.

Look at it from the bright side - what would you do if she would have joined The Conservatives, ACT or National instead?

BlackPeter
01-04-2015, 11:52 AM
Untold kiwi families have a lot to thank Mr McVicar for in bringing a whole lot more justice to these shores where ALL the politicians failed by only paying lip service to dealing with the scum and vermin who think its their right to kill,rape and injure ordinary citizens.

Not sure, whether it is so easy ... Yes, there are some really bad people out there who better belong for long times behind bars.

Unfortunately its not always easy to distinguish between the real bad ones and the ones who have just been at the wrong time at the wrong place - and to distinguish these from the ones who have just been framed by a sometimes corrupt and / or out of their depth police force and justice system.

Did you notice that the punishment tends to get harsher if the system is not really sure, whether the convicted person was really at fault?

As well - McVicar and some of the supportive lynch mob don't seem to accept that people can change over time. Admittedly not everybody, but some do.

Yes - it is terrible to be the innocent victim of a crime. It is however as well terrible to be innocently locked up (and this is something which takes much longer to suffer - can you imagine how you would feel to be without guilt for decades behind bars)?

Personally I think New Zealand would be a better (and more humane) place without McVicar and this self-righteous mob.

elZorro
01-04-2015, 12:44 PM
Good question - the cynics in me would say that she didn't change her political views at all - all the same, but if we ignore the cynics in me for a moment: Children tend to have a phase where they grow up and try to be just different from their parents. You could join the Greens as well, maybe this would cure her? But I guess the more important question is what do you want to achieve? If it is a healthy family life and a good relationship to your daughter, than maybe you should do nothing - and look forward to more interesting political discussions in the circle of your family.

Look at it from the bright side - what would you do if she would have joined The Conservatives, ACT or National instead?

Thanks for the advice BlackPeter. I'm pleased she's showing some independent thought, and if I didn't back Labour, the Greens would be next for me. I think the people involved will be more in her tribe than Labour's. Yes, I'd be mortified if she voted National, ACT or Conservative, but there's not much chance of that, she's done her research :)

Craic, great to hear about your donation to Maungatautari. It's a place well worth a visit if you're travelling through the lower Waikato sometime.

Major von Tempsky
01-04-2015, 02:00 PM
"With the Greens, you just need a ukulele I think."

Love it! Love it!

How very apt and accurate.

elZorro
01-04-2015, 08:30 PM
"With the Greens, you just need a ukulele I think."

Love it! Love it!

How very apt and accurate.

I have a lot of time for Metiria Turei, she seems to be full of fun, and she's smart too.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11301085

More on ukuleles and other things.

http://www.metromag.co.nz/current-affairs/steve-braunias-campaign-diary-day-3/

Daytr
02-04-2015, 07:46 PM
Who is Belg? Imaginations run wild on this thread.
The sun is shining in Winnie country. ;-)

Daytr
03-04-2015, 07:58 AM
El Zorro, I would suggest there is a lot of disillusionment within youth in regards what is being done to protect the environment & also in regards the greed we have seen generated out of the likes of Wall St. In the 60s & 70s we had the peace & love generation who were written off as drug smoking hippies & maybe they were, but they also had a point in regards Vietnam etc. What I am seeing is a real backlash from the 20 somethings against the baby boomer generation in regards what have they done in what was considered boom times to look after future generalizations & even fund their own retirements. There are sweeping generalizations, but I think they are there. There are some that have the view, that if we don't get it right in regards climate change, virtually all else doesn't really matter, such will be the impact. Gareth Morgan I think raises a very good point that the environment should not be a left issue, as it impacts us all & it should be addressed by both sides of the political spectrum. Unfortunately however its really just the Green party that has a strong environmental agenda, however with the Greens you get a lot of other policy that many can't stomach, so the environment doesn't win. Morgan would like to see a Blue/Green party. Personally I would like to see a centrist/Green party, however I wouldn't quibble too much as long as environmental issues are being addressed in a much more effective & progressive manner.

elZorro
03-04-2015, 08:51 AM
El Zorro, I would suggest there is a lot of disillusionment within youth in regards what is being done to protect the environment & also in regards the greed we have seen generated out of the likes of Wall St. In the 60s & 70s we had the peace & love generation who were written off as drug smoking hippies & maybe they were, but they also had a point in regards Vietnam etc. What I am seeing is a real backlash from the 20 somethings against the baby boomer generation in regards what have they done in what was considered boom times to look after future generalizations & even fund their own retirements. There are sweeping generalizations, but I think they are there. There are some that have the view, that if we don't get it right in regards climate change, virtually all else doesn't really matter, such will be the impact. Gareth Morgan I think raises a very good point that the environment should not be a left issue, as it impacts us all & it should be addressed by both sides of the political spectrum. Unfortunately however its really just the Green party that has a strong environmental agenda, however with the Greens you get a lot of other policy that many can't stomach, so the environment doesn't win. Morgan would like to see a Blue/Green party. Personally I would like to see a centrist/Green party, however I wouldn't quibble too much as long as environmental issues are being addressed in a much more effective & progressive manner.

I quite agree, Daytr, a Centrist Green party would appeal, and maybe Labour is trying for that space too. Anyone looking into climate change will see that there are drastic moves required, and maybe some Greens have the notion that to bring about any change, their policies will need to be quite left of centre. But as Helen Clark (and John Key, unfortunately) showed, small incremental changes can add up to bigger moves for a party in office.

craic
03-04-2015, 11:12 AM
The other night I watched a programme called, I think, In the path/footsteps of Alexander (The Great) The person doing the journey pointed out the route taken by boats through seas and waterways that no longer exist. All this is academic but he was talking of dozens of metres of water that covered the area in that civilisation and even the worst climate change predictions could not match the situation then. And please don't say that that was just in North Africa or the East or whatever - water finds its own level - if the sea rises 20 metres in the Atlantic it will rise the same amount here and everywhere else. It has been going up and down since the beginning of time. Like the Labour Party?

winner69
03-04-2015, 11:45 AM
EZ, its a long weekend so here's something to read
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2015/03/30/why-are-we-sacrificing-greece-for-the-insiders

The gist. It's not about left or right. It's about the self interests (preservation) of those with influence.

To whet your appetite a little bit

Now that is all conveniently forgotten, and the entire European mainstream is lining up to destroy Syriza and say to their own electorates: “Look, if you vote for non-conventional parties, see what will happen to you.”

Because we are now in an electoral cycle, the conventional parties need to crush Syriza to crush the other nonconformist parties and show their own electorates what voting in a nonconformist way leads to.

Daytr
03-04-2015, 01:41 PM
Your point is climate change happens naturally & I don't think anyone would argue that. However I think its very hard to say that man's activity of deforestation, carbon emissions & ocean depletion, to name a few, is adding constantly to any natural change & what man made climate change adds to the equation is a constant increase in one direction, where as in nature you have fluctuations. Sea levels have been much higher in the past, however we didn't have 7Bln plus people to feed or massive coastal cities that would have been underwater if they existed in those times. Its the constant accumulative effect of human activity that's the problem.


The other night I watched a programme called, I think, In the path/footsteps of Alexander (The Great) The person doing the journey pointed out the route taken by boats through seas and waterways that no longer exist. All this is academic but he was talking of dozens of metres of water that covered the area in that civilisation and even the worst climate change predictions could not match the situation then. And please don't say that that was just in North Africa or the East or whatever - water finds its own level - if the sea rises 20 metres in the Atlantic it will rise the same amount here and everywhere else. It has been going up and down since the beginning of time. Like the Labour Party?

craic
03-04-2015, 03:05 PM
If humans get it wrong then nature corrects by by getting rid of humans or most of them. Now I know that this is heresy to those who see humans as a special form, beyond all the other forms. This is nonsense or at least arrogance. Think about it this way - sometime in the next few days there will be a bang, so sudden that none will hear it and all life forms on this planet will be instantly destroyed - would this bother you? I think it would be a great idea - nothing to worry about for anyone, forever.

Daytr
03-04-2015, 05:48 PM
Well no, but put it another way Craic. If you knew it was coming and there were things that could be done to avoid the catastrophe then you would, wouldn't you. What you describe is that ignorance is bliss. I agree we are just another animal or life form, but the main difference being we are the dominant species & our devastating activity is impacting all other life on the planet in a very rapid way. If you look at the time that humankind has been around compared to how long it has taken life to evolve to this point, we are destroy what has taken 100s of millions of years if not billions in the blink of an eye. Sure it may recover again, but it will take far longer to recover than I has to destroy & probably multiples & multiples thereof. Personally I would rather just try & adapt to protect it.

craic
03-04-2015, 10:03 PM
Protect what - another bunch of Lundys and Bains? This is composed with a fair quantity of Bourbon on the rocks - not a drop of coke anywhere. And my biggest decision is how much to bet on Noel Harris Tomorrow in the big race, the final race of his illustrious career as a jockey. I might go mad on this one if the odds are reasonable.

craic
04-04-2015, 01:36 PM
Well, sober as a judge so only $10 each way on No 10, Pondarosa Miss in the 8th at 4.25pm but a backstop of $10 each way on Atacama in the same race. Also $10 each way on chop Chop in the eight race at Hastings.So I stand to lose $60 on the day.

BlackPeter
04-04-2015, 02:12 PM
Actually - there is a separate thread on climate change ... might make sense to move the relevant bits of the discussion over there: http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?6726-quot-Global-Warming-quot

Not sure about Craic's horse races, though - I guess the people coming to the races (and using vehicles with combustion engines to get there) would contribute to global warming - wouldn't they?:p

craic
04-04-2015, 04:06 PM
Not nearly as much pollution as the folks who drive to motor racing. Money back on one horse and down the tubes on the other two - never mind - still Lotto to go.
Actually - there is a separate thread on climate change ... might make sense to move the relevant bits of the discussion over there: http://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showthread.php?6726-quot-Global-Warming-quot

Not sure about Craig's horse races, though - I guess the people coming to the races (and using vehicles with combustion engines to get there) would contribute to global warming - wouldn't they?:p

Daytr
05-04-2015, 08:22 AM
Loved Winston Peters first word in parliament post the by-election. "Boo" ! LOL
National went on the attack blaming everyone else for their shellacking at the polls.
Seems they learnt nothing from the result.
If this carries on, the Northland by-election will be remembered as the start of John Key's demise.
I will be very happy to know I played a very small part in that.

craic
05-04-2015, 09:14 AM
If Labour throw in the towel in a few more electorates, they might get National out - but then they will have to cope with the Greens to form a government. And after a few more years of mismanagement, National will return and sort out the mess - it's a cycle that is repeated - just like climste change.

Daytr
05-04-2015, 11:07 AM
Maybe, or Labor under Little get their act together & start being a credible opposition, which at the moment they aren't.
Not sure what mess you are referring to but what will Key's legacy be if he gets turfed out at the next election?
An Auckland property bubble that at some stage will burst & create havoc & triple the government debt we had before he came to office.
Who is going to sort out that mess?
The NZ economy is about to plunge on the back of the dairy prices. Tax take will dive meaning National will just borrow more.

elZorro
05-04-2015, 05:18 PM
EZ, its a long weekend so here's something to read
http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2015/03/30/why-are-we-sacrificing-greece-for-the-insiders

The gist. It's not about left or right. It's about the self interests (preservation) of those with influence.

To whet your appetite a little bit

Now that is all conveniently forgotten, and the entire European mainstream is lining up to destroy Syriza and say to their own electorates: “Look, if you vote for non-conventional parties, see what will happen to you.”

Because we are now in an electoral cycle, the conventional parties need to crush Syriza to crush the other nonconformist parties and show their own electorates what voting in a nonconformist way leads to.

W69, I don't think NZFirst's direction is that far different from Labour's, on paper. Hopefully none of the top five or six parties have anything too radical for NZ to do any damage.

Labour does need to do a lot of work to show that it does represent small business, families and workers in NZ.

I agree with Daytr too, in the last few years it has been National who have presided over making a mess of the country's books. We have the data there in the stats, it'll make a great set of graphs, and soon we'll see the provisional tax payments (listed as spreadsheet data) coming through, but weaker than expected. You can't concentrate on big business in the cities and neglect pretty much everything else for six years, and hope that the regions will bring it through. Instead, manufacturers in the regions have closed down. Then jobs, then retailers have been affected. The lower dairy cheque might be here to stay for another year or more, that will really start to have a big negative effect.

craic
06-04-2015, 08:17 AM
I suggest that you read the article in todays Herald about Australians who have moved here to live and their reasons and then tell me why the NZ dollar is worth 99 Australian cents at the moment. The great Labour story is as much of a myth as the tale of Cinderella but not as entertaining and certainly not suitable for children. You don't know how lucky you are.

Daytr
06-04-2015, 11:37 AM
Craic, as someone who lived in Australia for 15 years I have a bit of an idea. They have a fool for a prime minister which certainly isn't helping, a commodity boom that busted & an over heated property market. See any similarities ? Take a look at Aussie now & its exactly where we are heading in the coming 12 months. How many dairy farmers do you think are appreciating that high NZD you mentioned? One of the reasons the Aussie economy fell in a heap was their currency remained stubbornly high even though commodities & other currencies were tumbling. See another similarity ? The RBNZ cannot drop interest rates because the government is unwilling to reign in the Auckland property bubble & in fact just threw fuel on the fire last week with their ridiculous first home buyers grant which is a policy borrowed from John Howard & used to flog state housing. Completely irresponsible behavior by Key.

Major von Tempsky
06-04-2015, 03:52 PM
The more mistaken Daytr is the more overbearing he becomes and the more the hubris flows from him totally out of control. Just the right conditions for a big fall in Daytr.

The RBNZ (which incidentally is totally independent of the Government) can't drop interest rates because they are already historically very low and the lower they get the less effect any further lowering of them actually has as the Japanese, Americans and others have found. John Key is actually a very intelligent guy, have a look at his record. A fool who calls an intelligent man a fool risks further enlarging his own reputation as a fool.

Major von Tempsky
06-04-2015, 04:09 PM
Because Daytr, and no doubt EZ and 1 or 2 others, refuse to read the aforesaid Weekend Australian article, here are a few extracts from it....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11428259

"Australians are admitting that New Zealand is now the place to be as its residents cross the Tasman to find a home here.

The increase in Australians shifting to New Zealand permanently, as well as a rise in expat Kiwis returning home, is reversing the one-way tide of migration of the past 20 years.

And according to a report in the Weekend Australian Magazine, New Zealand's growing economy and superior work-life culture are attracting thousands of Australians put off by their own unstable Government and falling economic fortunes.

"What has happened is that somewhere, somehow, perhaps in the dead of night when no one was looking, Australia and New Zealand have swapped sides," the magazine said.

"Cocky, confident Australia is now home to dysfunctional politics, yawning budget deficits, rising unemployment and an electorate unwilling to accept tough reforms."



Australian winemaker Anna Flowerday moved to Marlborough in 2003 with her husband, Jason, because of the more "vibrant" viticulture industry. "It's definitely home now," the mother of four told the Herald. "I love the culture of the place, I love that it's a safe little place at the end of the world ... where your kids can still walk to school and you can go down the street and you don't have to lock your house.

"It's all that kind of stuff. The ship's on a pretty good course whether you're family-oriented or business-oriented, and both of those are a consideration for us."

In contrast with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, the magazine said, New Zealand's John Key was running the most successful and stable centre-right Government in the world.

"Key presides over a country that is no longer a dead-end backwater but one that enjoys plentiful jobs, strong economic growth and is on the cusp of a budget surplus."

New Zealand is leading Australia in GDP growth and unemployment figures and the Kiwi dollar is nearing parity with the Australian dollar - a record 99.42c at present.

"Forget rugby. New Zealand is winning a bigger game," the magazine said.

elZorro
06-04-2015, 05:37 PM
Because Daytr, and no doubt EZ and 1 or 2 others, refuse to read the aforesaid Weekend Australian article, here are a few extracts from it....

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11428259

"Australians are admitting that New Zealand is now the place to be as its residents cross the Tasman to find a home here.

The increase in Australians shifting to New Zealand permanently, as well as a rise in expat Kiwis returning home, is reversing the one-way tide of migration of the past 20 years.

And according to a report in the Weekend Australian Magazine, New Zealand's growing economy and superior work-life culture are attracting thousands of Australians put off by their own unstable Government and falling economic fortunes.

"What has happened is that somewhere, somehow, perhaps in the dead of night when no one was looking, Australia and New Zealand have swapped sides," the magazine said.

"Cocky, confident Australia is now home to dysfunctional politics, yawning budget deficits, rising unemployment and an electorate unwilling to accept tough reforms."



Australian winemaker Anna Flowerday moved to Marlborough in 2003 with her husband, Jason, because of the more "vibrant" viticulture industry. "It's definitely home now," the mother of four told the Herald. "I love the culture of the place, I love that it's a safe little place at the end of the world ... where your kids can still walk to school and you can go down the street and you don't have to lock your house.

"It's all that kind of stuff. The ship's on a pretty good course whether you're family-oriented or business-oriented, and both of those are a consideration for us."

In contrast with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, the magazine said, New Zealand's John Key was running the most successful and stable centre-right Government in the world.

"Key presides over a country that is no longer a dead-end backwater but one that enjoys plentiful jobs, strong economic growth and is on the cusp of a budget surplus."

New Zealand is leading Australia in GDP growth and unemployment figures and the Kiwi dollar is nearing parity with the Australian dollar - a record 99.42c at present.

"Forget rugby. New Zealand is winning a bigger game," the magazine said.

There are a few points to take from that article. We'd hope that not many people really believe it and move here, because we are short of jobs and houses for too many more. We don't have a fabulous suburban rail system to cope with commutes to work from too far outside the cities, and so our main city highways are often just as clogged as you'd expect to see overseas.

Maybe the National government is doing better than other centre-right governments around the world, but that is surely arguable. And they had a most excellent start in 2008. That was not their doing, it was a Labour government that set it up, over nine stellar years. National is now "on the cusp" of a budget surplus! Hoorah! They have also presided over record budget deficits.

If this is as good as it gets, then I suggest the bar has been set very low.

Daytr
06-04-2015, 05:51 PM
Another bad assumption MVT, I had already read the article and it was hardly ground breaking. If you didn't know those things already you would have to have been living in a cave. Perhaps if you read what I actually wrote, I never called Key a fool, I said his policy was irresponsible & I stand by that. So perhaps a fool, is someone who hasn't read something thoroughly before responding?
Keys is very smart as he is playing a populist game as Howard did & as long as property prices are going up, the populace won't complain. They are all sucking on the teat of the housing bubble that one day will burst. There were a lot of smart people on Wall St, however very few of them were thinking long term or for the greater good.
The RBNZ may be independent but it reacts to the financial environment including government policy. Rates might be historically low but they are the highest in the Western world & that is why the ccy is artificially high, yield. But that too will come crashing down just like the Aussie did once the dairy recession hits.

fungus pudding
06-04-2015, 07:18 PM
I suggest that you read the article in todays Herald about Australians who have moved here to live and their reasons and then tell me why the NZ dollar is worth 99 Australian cents at the moment. The great Labour story is as much of a myth as the tale of Cinderella but not as entertaining and certainly not suitable for children. You don't know how lucky you are.


Australia's stuffed. Many of their problems can be put down to government. They need to sort out their tax system before they can possibly get anywhere - starting with their pathetic inefficient and complex GST system. Surely they'll sort it out in the next few years.

slimwin
06-04-2015, 07:33 PM
And sort their unions out. They've nearly killed Qantas.

gv1
06-04-2015, 07:37 PM
Aussie unions are holding their economy to ransom. Badly needs reform in this area.
High kiwi dollar will also lead NZ to same situation as US and Aussie. Auckland needs more freeing of land ASAP. I have been speaking to alot of Retail business...situation is very dire. Get ready for folding economy soon.

Daytr
06-04-2015, 07:59 PM
Ha ha blame the unions! I don't think the collapse in iron ore, coal, copper, oil, gold and virtually every other commodity Australia produces has anything to do with unions and far more to do with the stupidity of BHP, RIO & the like as well as Federal & State Government allowing a ridiculous supply war to eventuate. There are plenty of other macro reasons as well, but none of them involve unions. I'm not saying there isn't a union issue in Australia, but its hardly the leading cause of what has recently happened to their economy.
Interesting comment re retail, what do they say is the main issue? Just lack of consumer demand or other factors?

gv1
06-04-2015, 08:46 PM
Unions are responsible from high production costs to poor productions/outputs to increased costs to finished product. Increased govt dept costs, low productivity, hence money to be spent somewhere else are spent propping govt employees wages... also inefficiencies because dead ducks sitting in positions which can't be kicked out and hence can't compete with other co's or countries. Efficient labor laws can make a country prosper and not hinder its growth. you can say the high aussie $ was also the reason in collapse but if products are producted efficiently, high $ shouldn't be the deterent.

As to retail... high cost of doing business and people not spending.Very weak sales.

Daytr
07-04-2015, 06:14 AM
Well those same people are also employed & spend those higher wages. It seems like unions are responsible for all ills in Australia and yet the Australian economy boomed for 20 years despite those same unionized conditions. As I said I'm not saying there doesn't need to be some balancing particularly in some industries, but its hardly been a major driver, otherwise how was Aussie the 'Goldilocks' economy for so long. We have the opposite issue here where wages are too low & there is too much use of foreign labour keeping wages suppressed. If people earned more the multiplier effect would be a massive boost for the economy as people on low wages spend the majority of their earnings. I worked in a large retail bank in Australia & there was the same situation as you describe, however unions had nothing to do with it.

elZorro
07-04-2015, 07:20 AM
I agree, the unions in Aussie didn't cause any issues when commodity prices were high. They kept wages high, in turn attracting skilled NZers while everything was going well.

We had our opportunity too, the National government certainly seemed content to let the dairy industry do most of the heavy lifting in the export drive. In 2014, it worked. Exports hit $50bill for the first time. But as a share of GDP, we didn't hit the targets. In 2015, we certainly won't be, either. But that is not a problem, National can simply drop the bar.

http://www.interest.co.nz/currencies/74844/wake-dairy-price-slump-economic-development-minister-says-govt-may-reduce-target-li?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Tuesday+7+A pril+2015

fungus pudding
07-04-2015, 07:44 AM
I agree, the unions in Aussie didn't cause any issues when commodity prices were high. They kept wages high, in turn attracting skilled NZers while everything was going well.


And making sure that as many jobs as possible are lost to Asia. Take a wander around aussie for a few months. All you will see is countless mobs sitting in or outside cafes - eating and drinking coffee. If they stopped feeding each other the country would collapse. Perhaps the unions should drive the minimum wage to $100 per hour so they can all be better off. Life in Australia is no bed of roses.

Sgt Pepper
07-04-2015, 10:34 AM
And making sure that as many jobs as possible are lost to Asia. Take a wander around aussie for a few months. All you will see is countless mobs sitting in or outside cafes - eating and drinking coffee. If they stopped feeding each other the country would collapse. Perhaps the unions should drive the minimum wage to $100 per hour so they can all be better off. Life in Australia is no bed of roses.

FP

I have no idea of what you do or have done, but I think you would be a great (and controversial) columnist!

Major von Tempsky
07-04-2015, 02:40 PM
Daytr is very firm (overfirm as usual) that the Australian economic problem is not due to unions (see also corruption in Australian unions and disproportionate union influence in the Labour Party and Labour Party selection) but to the fall in iron ore prices.

May I offer the revolutionary idea that it is due to BOTH!
And if you assume 50% each then you don't have to argue which one is bigger but you then have to address both instead of just one.

I suggest a lower Australian dollar combined with some Maggie Thatcher union legislation.....

Daytr
07-04-2015, 03:47 PM
MVT, perhaps you can do us all a favour & read my posts before responding to them.
2nd time in a row you have completely got what I have written completely wrong.
However I do find it amazing that the Australian economy which was probably the standout economy in the world for the 20 years prior to 2013 didn't falter in all that time despite the unionization of Australia for all those years. A dose of reality I find usually helps perspective.
There has been a lot of discussion in media today around the NZD approaching parity. Most have said its more about economic weakness in Aussie than necessarily & obviously comparative strength of NZs. Many reasons have been given for Aussie's decline, but not one mention of unions. Perhaps all the amateur economists on here no better.

Major von Tempsky
07-04-2015, 05:13 PM
Actually old fruit, I am a professional economist. And if you read something like The Economist you'd find that sorting the unions out has been. and is, an important part of many economies recovery plans including those run by the IMF.

And unless you contradict yourself within your posts (c'est possible?) then taking issue with a part of your post hardly implies not reading all of your post....

cheers,
MvT

Daytr
07-04-2015, 07:26 PM
Well old man, I used to correct our economists publications before they were released mainly because they were typically devoid of the reality that was right in front of them. They got better as time went on. So now we have compared ....
If you read my posts, you would see I said that unions were a problem & there needed to be some balance particularly in some industries.
But to suggest that unions are a driving reason for Australia's recent economic woes as some have is quite ridiculous.
I would love to see you publish an article suggesting that the unions are even a significant reason for what has just happened in Australia. Stake your reputation on it would you ?
I do read the Economist when I get a chance, no reference to Australia in that article you mention I assume?

elZorro
07-04-2015, 07:28 PM
Actually old fruit, I am a professional economist. And if you read something like The Economist you'd find that sorting the unions out has been. and is, an important part of many economies recovery plans including those run by the IMF.

And unless you contradict yourself within your posts (c'est possible?) then taking issue with a part of your post hardly implies not reading all of your post....

cheers,
MvT

Where's Belgarion when I need a searing riposte? I am not a professional in such matters (and, I suspect, neither is MVT), but I know that offering lower wages and conditions than my peers is not going to help a NZ business progress in this New World economy. We need to focus our efforts in specialised areas, areas where the low wage economies won't be working - and there are plenty of these projects, but they all require investment. These are not the domain of people who would open yet another café, rent out a few houses to others, or run a business more like a tax dodge than a real business with potential to employ many. Has this National government encouraged more people to think along a progressive investment line, or have they reinforced the more passive investments?

slimwin
07-04-2015, 07:39 PM
The unions comment was an "and" comment. But lets not let semantics get in the way of someones neurotic rant...

Daytr
07-04-2015, 08:18 PM
Slimwin, yours might have been the first comment, but it wasn't the only one. In regards Qantas, you are quite right, although Joyce has done plenty of damage himself trying to smash them. How many customers do you think he pissed off by grounding the planes that time? Amazing he kept his job. Meanwhile he continues to be being paid ludicrous amounts of money. No mention of ridiculous CEO pay I see in the posts. CEOs with massive golden parachutes no matter their performance. Etc. If they led from the top I think they would get a lot more respect. I'm generalizing of course, as some CEOs are worth their salt, but I would suggest its a minority.

slimwin
07-04-2015, 08:36 PM
They were bleeding to death financially. I'm an aircraft engineer and we're paid fairly here. I know what my friends are on there and why maintenance is moving off-shore. Sooner or later the customer has to pay the cost and if it's too high, the competitor gets the business. I believe they've killed the car industry as well. Commodities have been hammered globally, but if you have to pay your truck drivers a 100k then your the first to go out of business. Unions need to accept theres bad times as well as good times and not be the parasite that kills the host. Thats not to say that they dont have their place.

I agree re CEO's. Who was that Scottish head of Telecom again?

Daytr
08-04-2015, 06:17 AM
Don't disagree Slimwin, re Qantas & car industry, although the government has been as much to blame as anyone else as neither Labour or Liberals are willing to tackle them as the plants are in marginal seats & the just keep on paying massive subsidies to the car companies. I read somewhere a while back that each job in the car assembly plants costs the tax payer $150K! Re truck drivers, if you are referring to miners. If they expect people to live in the middle of no where in 50 degree heat, they do need to pay a substantial amount for that & that has nothing to do with unions but supply & demand.

Major von Tempsky
08-04-2015, 06:55 PM
Makes u feel good to be a NZer :-)

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/67639828/Aussies-jealous-as-NZ-dollar-approaches-parity

elZorro
08-04-2015, 09:12 PM
Makes u feel good to be a NZer :-)

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/67639828/Aussies-jealous-as-NZ-dollar-approaches-parity

Aussies are still getting paid 30% more than NZers for the same jobs, on average. And a lot of their consumer goods are cheaper than ours. I suspect they are not generally looking our way. One thing they do have better over there for sure, is R&D tax incentives.

Labour is looking to improve its offer before 2017.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/labour-vows-return-tax-credits-rd-spending-slips-bd-171121

slimwin
08-04-2015, 09:40 PM
Cheaper consumer goods is hardly a surprise with the economies of scale.

fungus pudding
08-04-2015, 11:13 PM
Aussies are still getting paid 30% more than NZers for the same jobs, on average. And a lot of their consumer goods are cheaper than ours.


And a hell of a lot are dearer, with a huge difference in cost for services. Try calling a plumber or mechanic Have a look at lawyers' or accountants' charges. If we doubled all wages and salaries tomorrow we would be getting more than them - but we'd be no better off. Don't be deluded with b/s about Aussie wages. Some consumer goods are cheaper (not for much longer) partly because they have about the lowest consumer taxes in the world. But their tax system is hopeless with extremely high income tax rates - A very large percentage of population pay marginal rate of 47%. They are due for a massive overhaul.

Daytr
09-04-2015, 05:45 AM
There tax rates are only high on those earning a huge salary. I was on a substantial salary and my tax averaged around 33% due to the first 18k being tax free & the steps where tax brackets cut in being about higher than here. I'm trying to remember but I don't think the top tax bracket kickers in until 150k. So its not nearly bad as you paint FP. Net I would suggest you are still better off in Australia, but that probably depends what you earn.

fungus pudding
09-04-2015, 07:05 AM
There tax rates are only high on those earning a huge salary. I was on a substantial salary and my tax averaged around 33% due to the first 18k being tax free & the steps where tax brackets cut in being about higher than here. I'm trying to remember but I don't think the top tax bracket kickers in until 150k. So its not nearly bad as you paint FP. Net I would suggest you are still better off in Australia, but that probably depends what you earn.

37% plus 2% medicare over 80k, and 80k is not high in Oz. 47% over 150 and I wouldn't want to live over there under 150k - certainly not in the big cities. (I parked in a Brisbane park last week for approx. 5 minutes - minimum charge applied - $16.50) I don't think Aussies are better off at all.

P.S. Even on $5 million a year your tax will not average 33% here

craic
09-04-2015, 08:04 AM
This is a chicken-and-egg argument that you can't win. I spend time in Oz most years and its close enough to home for us to feel happy and comfortable there without having to make too many comparisons. It's probably much easier to live here on the pension than it is there as the NZ Super is generous by any standards but then if you are stupid enough to try and live in Auckland on the pension you won't agree. Buy a heat-and-eat meal in an Oz supermarket and you get a meal - buy it here and you get an entree. The bottom line is not how much you can earn but where you are and what you can do with it.

slimwin
09-04-2015, 08:20 AM
The beer is expensive in OZ. How could anybody live like that.

fungus pudding
09-04-2015, 08:56 AM
The beer is expensive in OZ. How could anybody live like that.

It works better though.

BlackPeter
09-04-2015, 09:17 AM
Just came across this politically absolutely incorrect article: http://www.smh.com.au/business/motley-fool/motley-fool-three-kiwi-worldbeaters-20150408-1mgjvq.html Shudder - just imagine an Aussie telling other Aussies that economy is doing well in New Zealand and hey, he even mentions some clever NZ companies which did well over the last couple of government terms.

Impossible.

Could maybe somebody of the resident opposition supporters tell them off and correct their unjustified pink NZ picture?

Major von Tempsky
09-04-2015, 10:17 AM
Hmmm, one of EZ's 2 big hangups....there was an article in the Sydney Morning Herald saying the Australian R & D tax incentives are very little used and are not of much use....

elZorro
09-04-2015, 05:44 PM
Just came across this politically absolutely incorrect article: http://www.smh.com.au/business/motley-fool/motley-fool-three-kiwi-worldbeaters-20150408-1mgjvq.html Shudder - just imagine an Aussie telling other Aussies that economy is doing well in New Zealand and hey, he even mentions some clever NZ companies which did well over the last couple of government terms.

Impossible.

Could maybe somebody of the resident opposition supporters tell them off and correct their unjustified pink NZ picture?

I could have a go. XRO has had many millions invested over recent years, is still to turn a profit, is growing spectacularly for NZ but has a huge established competitor in USA, Quicken. WYN's shareprice looks a bit ill too, with a low NTA.

They are all clever firms, but you can't say that every investor in these shares has made a good return yet. NZ's biggest firm, Fonterra, is at the moment not really making a profit for its shareholders either. They are in a holding pattern. The government's settings don't allow for a surplus in operation yet, they are still borrowing for annual needs, and borrowing to repay interest.

In answer to MVT, at least Aussie has R&D tax credits available, and maybe better R&D incentives elsewhere, I'm not sure.

Daytr
10-04-2015, 07:39 AM
With all the talk about the possibility of the Rio owned aluminum smelter possibly closing in 2017 it has been revealed that NZ has the 2nd highest electricity prices in the OECD! If it closes it will create a surplus of electricity generation lowering prices for the rest of NZ. If this plant can't stay open without Government funding then it should close. NZ having such high electricity prices works has a tax on the poor & instead of flogging them off National should have looked into why an industry that produces such high profits has underfunded infrastructure & instead of making double digit returns should have looked at lowering prices to consumers. Obviously this would be tough on Southland & there would need to be planning & transition funding for the region.

iceman
10-04-2015, 09:03 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if this gazing into the crystal ball is not too far from eventual reality :)
http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/opinion/67626638/A-chilling-look-into-the-future

craic
10-04-2015, 09:09 AM
Once again, our power prices reflect costs per unit per household and comparisons with other OECD countries seldom tell you anything. We do not have nuclear power. We have a very small population, one fifteenth that of Britain. We have a country slightly larger than Britain with mountain ranges, Cook Strait, earthquakes etc. that they do not have. And there is plenty of room for individuals to reduce their reliance on the grid. You can even sell surplus power back to the company. My power bill is lower in winter because I have wood powered heating including water heating. One character I know never uses power to heat water. He lights a fire two or so days a week to heat his water for the week, even in summer.

fungus pudding
10-04-2015, 09:49 AM
Once again, our power prices reflect costs per unit per household and comparisons with other OECD countries seldom tell you anything. We do not have nuclear power. We have a very small population, one fifteenth that of Britain. We have a country slightly larger than Britain with mountain ranges, Cook Strait, earthquakes etc. that they do not have. And there is plenty of room for individuals to reduce their reliance on the grid. You can even sell surplus power back to the company. My power bill is lower in winter because I have wood powered heating including water heating. One character I know never uses power to heat water. He lights a fire two or so days a week to heat his water for the week, even in summer.

Which is an extremely costly way to heat water, or anything else, unless you have a cheap source of supply.

craic
10-04-2015, 11:01 AM
Yes, I have dozens of ancient pines and a few dozen 20-year-old coppice gums. A son who lives in Onehunga seems to get all his firewood free from sites around the area where people cut down trees and don't want the bother of disposing of the wood.I sell quite a lot of wood at cost to friends. This project is simply my Geriatric Exer-Cycle and is very cost effective.
Which is an extremely costly way to heat water, or anything else, unless you have a cheap source of supply.

Sgt Pepper
10-04-2015, 02:58 PM
Once again, our power prices reflect costs per unit per household and comparisons with other OECD countries seldom tell you anything. We do not have nuclear power. We have a very small population, one fifteenth that of Britain. We have a country slightly larger than Britain with mountain ranges, Cook Strait, earthquakes etc. that they do not have. And there is plenty of room for individuals to reduce their reliance on the grid. You can even sell surplus power back to the company. My power bill is lower in winter because I have wood powered heating including water heating. One character I know never uses power to heat water. He lights a fire two or so days a week to heat his water for the week, even in summer.

Craic

We live in a wonderful but very expensive country. I work in the health sector, people who come to work here are stunned at the inexplicably high prices of virtually everything. Yes I know larger economies have the benefit of economies of scale and competition. However the price of basics in New Zealand seems completely out of kilter. The sooner we get another large supermarket operator here the better ( and lots of IKEA stores as well).

elZorro
10-04-2015, 03:15 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if this gazing into the crystal ball is not too far from eventual reality :)
http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/opinion/67626638/A-chilling-look-into-the-future

Yeah, well, Liam Hehir looks like a poster boy for the Young Nats, so he would write like that, wouldn't he? Farrar and Slater think he's onto it, so in that case I'm looking harder for the real facts.

National can always hope that's what Winston does, maybe that's their only chance of getting back in for a fourth term. But there's going to be a lot of water under the bridge by 2017.

Newsflash, there could be a further worsening economy. Auckland house prices could dive. Sanfords could sack 230 workers from a mussel plant because they were too disorganised to arrange ongoing spat, or is that just the excuse? Rangipo prison could close, Waikeria prison could downsize. Privatisation by stealth could be the new deal.

All these happenings are more likely than Winston siding with National up North.

iceman
10-04-2015, 03:28 PM
EZ I think you need to do more research on the reasons for Sanford closing down the factory in Christchurch, before you make such unfounded claims. Here may be a good start http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11426515

They are struggling with natural supply of spat due to unusually dry and warm weather conditions for some time and have committed $13M (out of $26M) into research that may well revolutionize the mussel farming industry in the very near future ! Isn't that the sort of thing you are always championing on here, spend on R&D !!

As for Winston, I said after he won that it would neautralize Andrew Little and make his job more difficult. I still believe it will and Little will regret handing the seat to Winston and thereby signing his own death warrant as Opposition Leader. Winston is astute enough politically to know that he is unlikely to win Northland again in 2017 if the overwhelmingly conservative people up there think that would lead to a Left wing Government of Labour, NZ First and the Greens !


Yeah, well, Liam Hehir looks like a poster boy for the Young Nats, so he would write like that, wouldn't he? Farrar and Slater think he's onto it, so in that case I'm looking harder for the real facts.

National can always hope that's what Winston does, maybe that's their only chance of getting back in for a fourth term. But there's going to be a lot of water under the bridge by 2017.

Newsflash, there could be a further worsening economy. Auckland house prices could dive. Sanfords could sack 230 workers from a mussel plant because they were too disorganised to arrange ongoing spat, or is that just the excuse? Rangipo prison could close, Waikeria prison could downsize. Privatisation by stealth could be the new deal.

All these happenings are more likely than Winston siding with National up North.

craic
10-04-2015, 03:36 PM
My son and his family come to my place from London regularly. The Warehouse takes a hammering for childrens clothes And dragging the adults out of the HB wineries is another difficulty. I also go there for lengthy periods and having paid for meals in restaurants both here and there, I know which is the cheaper - and its not London. My favourite was going to the Barnes fish and chip shop for a takeaway. Four bits of fish, two scoops and a couple of sausages cost me the equivalent of $72 NZ.There are bargains to be had in that neck of the woods but we couldnt live there on our current income.
Craic

We live in a wonderful but very expensive country. I work in the health sector, people who come to work here are stunned at the inexplicably high prices of virtually everything. Yes I know larger economies have the benefit of economies of scale and competition. However the price of basics in New Zealand seems completely out of kilter. The sooner we get another large supermarket operator here the better ( and lots of IKEA stores as well).

elZorro
10-04-2015, 06:09 PM
EZ I think you need to do more research on the reasons for Sanford closing down the factory in Christchurch, before you make such unfounded claims. Here may be a good start http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11426515

They are struggling with natural supply of spat due to unusually dry and warm weather conditions for some time and have committed $13M (out of $26M) into research that may well revolutionize the mussel farming industry in the very near future ! Isn't that the sort of thing you are always championing on here, spend on R&D !!

As for Winston, I said after he won that it would neautralize Andrew Little and make his job more difficult. I still believe it will and Little will regret handing the seat to Winston and thereby signing his own death warrant as Opposition Leader. Winston is astute enough politically to know that he is unlikely to win Northland again in 2017 if the overwhelmingly conservative people up there think that would lead to a Left wing Government of Labour, NZ First and the Greens !

Sanford are to be commended on this investment of course, but the payback seems to be very quick, it's 50% funded by taxpayers, this is not blue-sky research. It's almost a no-brainer that it should have been done a few years ago. The mussel factory in Christchurch would have chewed through $10mill or more in wages a year if they were fulltime jobs. So Sanford have come to the party a bit late. Freshwater prawns have been bred at Wairakei for decades, it doesn't look to be that different a process.

I see Bill English is saying that it might be hard to make a budget surplus this year. But that's OK, the good news is that the deficits are getting smaller each year. Brilliant! We have conveniently forgotten what it's like to make record government surpluses - that perhaps didn't happen -this is the new normal.

winner69
10-04-2015, 06:30 PM
My son and his family come to my place from London regularly. The Warehouse takes a hammering for childrens clothes And dragging the adults out of the HB wineries is another difficulty. I also go there for lengthy periods and having paid for meals in restaurants both here and there, I know which is the cheaper - and its not London. My favourite was going to the Barnes fish and chip shop for a takeaway. Four bits of fish, two scoops and a couple of sausages cost me the equivalent of $72 NZ.There are bargains to be had in that neck of the woods but we couldnt live there on our current income.

Love your fish and chip story craic

Mine is in Grimsby of all places. Always go to the fishy with the longest queue. We did and got 2 packs of fish and chips. By the time we got across the road the paper had disintegrated. Even the sea gulls turned their noses up.

elZorro
10-04-2015, 07:02 PM
I think all of us on this thread are very patriotic, some of us, perhaps, are following the wrong political party, but never mind.

I was pointed to this video presentation by the late Sir Paul Callaghan. Maybe I've posted it before, but it bears watching again. Inspiring, even if some of the companies have folded or changed hands.

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

Now have a think about which political party is likely to help enable some of Sir Paul's ideas? We've gone backwards since this video was made.

Daytr
10-04-2015, 08:34 PM
Craic, we have all the issues you mentioned, but we don't have to buy fuel to generate like most countries. If the government ensured that people producing surplus electricity were paid a better rate for putting it back in the grid it would encourage more solar & locally generated electricity where the demand is i.e upper north island. This would mean less money required for capex to increase transmission from the south island. Instead the government protects the big power companies, rather than encouraging more locally generated solar.


Once again, our power prices reflect costs per unit per household and comparisons with other OECD countries seldom tell you anything. We do not have nuclear power. We have a very small population, one fifteenth that of Britain. We have a country slightly larger than Britain with mountain ranges, Cook Strait, earthquakes etc. that they do not have. And there is plenty of room for individuals to reduce their reliance on the grid. You can even sell surplus power back to the company. My power bill is lower in winter because I have wood powered heating including water heating. One character I know never uses power to heat water. He lights a fire two or so days a week to heat his water for the week, even in summer.

iceman
10-04-2015, 10:09 PM
Well it was so " Blue Sky" EZ that no other mussel farmer in NZ believed in it or put a cent in. I am amazed that you can not even give unqualified credit where credit is due, even when companies are doing exactly what you constantly bleat on about , companies not doing enough R&D. And again you are not being honest saying it is 50% "funded" by taxpayers. A research institute is a 50% shareholder in this project which is very different to the grants you want Government to hand out to all and sundry with no return. You obviously have a grudge against Sanford as you have made similarly ill informed comments before on this thread, about Sanford's main shareholders the Goodfellow family. Back then you half heartedly apologised for your inaccurate comments.


Sanford are to be commended on this investment of course, but the payback seems to be very quick, it's 50% funded by taxpayers, this is not blue-sky research. It's almost a no-brainer that it should have been done a few years ago. The mussel factory in Christchurch would have chewed through $10mill or more in wages a year if they were fulltime jobs. So Sanford have come to the party a bit late. Freshwater prawns have been bred at Wairakei for decades, it doesn't look to be that different a process.

I see Bill English is saying that it might be hard to make a budget surplus this year. But that's OK, the good news is that the deficits are getting smaller each year. Brilliant! We have conveniently forgotten what it's like to make record government surpluses - that perhaps didn't happen -this is the new normal.

elZorro
11-04-2015, 07:46 AM
Well it was so " Blue Sky" EZ that no other mussel farmer in NZ believed in it or put a cent in. I am amazed that you can not even give unqualified credit where credit is due, even when companies are doing exactly what you constantly bleat on about , companies not doing enough R&D. And again you are not being honest saying it is 50% "funded" by taxpayers. A research institute is a 50% shareholder in this project which is very different to the grants you want Government to hand out to all and sundry with no return. You obviously have a grudge against Sanford as you have made similarly ill informed comments before on this thread, about Sanford's main shareholders the Goodfellow family. Back then you half heartedly apologised for your inaccurate comments.

Iceman, I have no grudge against Sanford, but any business that buys another operation and ultimately shuts it down with the loss of over 200 local jobs, should be scrutinised, just like Huttons was taken away from Frankton in Hamilton and amalgamated into other brands processed elsewhere. The video you posted makes it clear that the new spat will be genetically superior, and that this can open up new markets. At the moment the industry is reliant on wild spat washed up on North Island beaches. Or in other words, it's like running pastoral farming but where the only forage used was one grass species, and it was an old ryegrass cultivar.

This research work is long overdue, by the sound of it. MPI is funding half of it, Sanfords half, which may mean they will hold some of the IP, not the rest of the industry. Reason enough to put capital in, and of course there is a tax break on the spending too. I made the point that in view of the wages and presumably income from this industry, the net research cost will not be high, and it'll have a quick payback period. Yes, it's smart spending, but a pity it wasn't done earlier so that 200 workers and their families could continue to have a source of income. There might be further fallout in the mussel industry before it gets over the shortage.

All this adds to the pattern of manufacturing industries reducing in terms of the numbers employed, of fewer, automated and larger, new factories being used to reduce labour costs on average. This process is normal, but we need more smart manufacturing businesses starting up, in the regions and in the cities, to get our exports fully on the move, and for the good of the economy.

Daytr
11-04-2015, 08:18 AM
I assume you are referring to the plant in Kaeo , Northland? That town has been decimated by the plant closure a few years back. Not sure it was 200 jobs lost, I thought it was around 60, but could be wrong.

elZorro
11-04-2015, 10:52 AM
I assume you are referring to the plant in Kaeo , Northland? That town has been decimated by the plant closure a few years back. Not sure it was 200 jobs lost, I thought it was around 60, but could be wrong.

No, Daytr, I didn't know about the oyster factory in Kaeo, the main processing also shut down by Sanford in 2011.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/oyster-herpes-virus-forces-closure-factory-4590601

There are some parallels with the story in Christchurch, it is a manual operation and so won't be as automated as it could be. I would be drawing a long bow, and would be shot down in flames, if I suggested that the owner of these two plants waited for a shortage of product being available, to make a strategic decision final, that had been on the cards anyway. You're saying that the availability of seasonal work in Kaeo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaeo) has been decimated by the closure, it's still noticeable four years later. That's what I mean. Why are not enough new enterprises stepping up to fill these gaps, in our 'rock star' economy?

More about the Christchurch factory's pay rates and redundancy package. You can't accuse the owners of this operation of being overly generous.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/67685267/shucking-exit-pay-at-sanford?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+11 +April+2015

RGR367
11-04-2015, 11:25 AM
I think all of us on this thread are very patriotic, some of us, perhaps, are following the wrong political party, but never mind.

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

Now have a think about which political party is likely to help enable some of Sir Paul's ideas? We've gone backwards since this video was made.

TY eZ for the video and I got nothing against it. By bet is that it looks like I'm always following the "wrong political party" everytime I try to air my views about politics :)

Daytr
11-04-2015, 11:56 AM
Well even 15 permanent jobs in a small town like Kaeo is devastating enough let alone the seasonal work.

BlackPeter
11-04-2015, 12:44 PM
I think all of us on this thread are very patriotic, some of us, perhaps, are following the wrong political party, but never mind.

I was pointed to this video presentation by the late Sir Paul Callaghan. Maybe I've posted it before, but it bears watching again. Inspiring, even if some of the companies have folded or changed hands.

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

Now have a think about which political party is likely to help enable some of Sir Paul's ideas? We've gone backwards since this video was made.

Hi EZ, Thanks for sharing this link. Excellent speech, very worthwhile to watch.

Some of the data might not be quite correct, but I don't think that anybody can really disagree with the message.

We all want a more prosperous New Zealand, most of us (well - I do) want an environment where everybody gets a fair go and with a safety net to support the people who fail without being at fault, most of us (well - I do) want a humane society where all people get a fair go at education and healthcare no matter how much money they or their parents make - and I certainly would prefer a New Zealand without a lynch mob putting innocent people into prison only to have somebody pay for the crime (just in case anybody wonders why we are in the top group of countries which like to lock up their citizens).

How do we get there? Well certainly not by waiting for the next cyclical change in government. Yes, I agree - the current government has a lot to answer for (though they are not responsible for all the things the resident left tends to throw in this thread at them), but so have all the governments before them. Blaming the incumbent government is easy (and, yes, we all love to do it - if its "the other party"), but it never will fix things - it just changes from time to time the snots at the trough, not the quality of government.

I agree with Sir Paul .... what we need in New Zealand (and not just here) is real leadership. Now - obviously we can now all sit down and wait for the (new) messiah to come, but I don't think he (or she) will. It is certainly not Key, but it is certainly not Little either. What it would need is less effort from everybody in running the ideas of the respective opposition down just because they come from Labour or National or Green or ACT or whoever we choose to oppose. We might need as well a bit more critical thinking before we support the ideas of our chosen political party (for the people here who have a favourite).

I believe that as a people we need to become a bit more constructive - change the political fight into a political dialogue. We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.

Obviously - we on share trader can't change the world, but we could change this thread. Why don't we try to discuss in future political ideas based on their merit instead of based on which corner of the spectrum it is coming from? Why don't we stop the blaming game? Why don't we try to get the Left and the Right to work together to improve our lot instead of just having them fight for each of them getting for the next 3 years the best places at the trough?

Are you ready to improve NZ - or do you just want more power for the people who happen to run your chosen party?

Daytr
11-04-2015, 02:48 PM
Good post BP. And I agree the more constructive the better, however & there is always a 'however' ;-), we do have government of the day & they have been in power for some time so I don't think its wrong to criticize the government of the day if deserved, which of course is subjective. What I do find annoying, is that if National being the government of the day, is criticized then its assumed by some on here, that its a lefty rant. Criticism I think is fine as long as the reason is outlined or alternative policy put forward.
In regards leaders I think Key is a leader, but not one I like & I suppose real leadership, well imo is someone who looks well into the future & creates policy for generations, not just the electoral cycle. Little, however I think needs to be given a fair hearing before being written off. I'm not saying he is going to be a great leader or not, but I do like giving people a little bit of time before writing them off, or praising them for that matter.

winner69
11-04-2015, 03:38 PM
Blackpeter, you said 'We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.'


You could be interested in this little piece on much the same subject.
http://www.johnkay.com/2015/04/08/ice-cream-apathy-and-the-paradox-of-two-party-politics

BlackPeter
11-04-2015, 04:28 PM
... And I agree the more constructive the better, however & there is always a 'however' ;-), we do have government of the day & they have been in power for some time so I don't think its wrong to criticize the government of the day if deserved, which of course is subjective. What I do find annoying, is that if National being the government of the day, is criticized then its assumed by some on here, that its a lefty rant. Criticism I think is fine as long as the reason is outlined or alternative policy put forward.

Any fair criticism is great - and if it is constructive, it is even better! Sometimes though on this thread you see some one-eyed criticism along the lines "the evil government of the day is responsible for the inflated Auckland house prices" without recognising that the Auckland house price index did even rise steeper during the previous government (Just an example ... if we could avoid it, than I would prefer to not warm up this specific point again). A better way may be to just discuss what we as a people could do to make sure out children are still able to afford buying some acceptable place (not necessarily house) to live.


In regards leaders I think Key is a leader, but not one I like & I suppose real leadership, well imo is someone who looks well into the future & creates policy for generations, not just the electoral cycle. Little, however I think needs to be given a fair hearing before being written off. I'm not saying he is going to be a great leader or not, but I do like giving people a little bit of time before writing them off, or praising them for that matter.

Agreed - while obviously leading the National party, Key is in my view not really a leader of the Nation ... he comes more across as one of these modern "managers" who could manage (or mismanage) anything. If put under stress, he does not always appear to be open and honest - and in terms of leadership ... yes, he was in my view at election days so far a better alternative than the opposition of the day , but I couldn't really say where he is leading our country towards ... and I doubt that he could say that either.

Re Little - accepted, we have not yet seen him in a big political leadership role, so maybe we need to cut him still a bit slack. However - I remember him from previous times as a union leader, and I must admit that I find it hard to point to any occurrence where he exceeded my expectations in the past. All he said was stuff you would expect a union leader to say, no indication for a real reflection on issues. I must however as well admit, that while my expectation of union leaders are quite low, there are probably not too many contemporary union leaders who managed to exceed these expectations, though there are some. Remember Lech Wałęsa (Poland)? He was a real leader at his time ... he had guts, vision and was able to communicate. Would be great to have somebody like him in NZ ...

BlackPeter
11-04-2015, 04:40 PM
Blackpeter, you said 'We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.'


You could be interested in this little piece on much the same subject.
http://www.johnkay.com/2015/04/08/ice-cream-apathy-and-the-paradox-of-two-party-politics

Yes, interesting article. Not sure, though whether I suggested (or intended to suggest) that both big parties should occupy the space in the middle. I think they should stay where they think is right and serve there clientele. However ... I am saying they should be able to recognise that they have (hopefully) both similar targets (like prosperity, healthcare, education for everybody), even if they propose often quite different ways to get to this target. Grown ups of all colours should be able to rise from their ingrained way of thinking and be able to work together to reach a common goal. Sometimes they might take the left and sometimes the right way ... and who knows - often there might be even a still better way none of them individually has seen to get there?

westerly
11-04-2015, 04:42 PM
Blackpeter, you said 'We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.'


You could be interested in this little piece on much the same subject.
http://www.johnkay.com/2015/04/08/ice-cream-apathy-and-the-paradox-of-two-party-politics

On this forum everybody considers themselves either just right or just left of centre. Any one not in agreement is either a communist or a neo right libertarian. :)

westerly

Daytr
11-04-2015, 05:30 PM
Spot on Westerly ;-) I think I'm a neo libertarian, not that I really know what that is, or if such a thing exists. I just like the sound of it. ;)

winner69
11-04-2015, 08:26 PM
Spot on Westerly ;-) I think I'm a neo libertarian, not at I really know what that is, or if such a thing exists. I just like the sound of it. ;)

Neo-liberalism is just a bunch of powerful people doing things in their own self interest. Doesn't sound like you daytr so you not a neo-liberal

Compassion and empathy are the caring roots of a caring society. Socialism is a negative word with associations to totalitarianism. Socialism is really organised compassion, which everyone can relate to. It's not an ideology - its simply a starting point for a conversation about how we organise society. Thinking in these terms is a a good start to improving society for all. Hence I think you fundamentally really are a socialist daytr - but that's only a word eh.

elZorro
12-04-2015, 10:25 AM
W69 hits on some interesting points. Neo-liberalism is across to the right of the two main parties in NZ. It is a political name for policies that often come out of think-tanks in USA. NZ Treasury had a good look over there before 1984, and wrote up a massive document that became Roger Douglas' mantra, almost by default it became a giant NZ Experiment (Rogernomics), the first of its type worldwide. Not all of the results were good, they needed a lot of correction, and eventually Labour did a fair bit of that, in their three terms from 1999 to 2008.

ACT would be a party that you could call neo-liberal, and Crosby-Textor with their firebrand campaign techniques, are also neo-liberals to the core. Note that the National Party deliberately ensures the survival of one, and pays for advice from the other. Their incremental policies are also along the neo-liberal track.

This week National spouted some general news that they would look into improving tax compliance rules and costs around provisional tax, a draconian system here, by world standards. However, in a probable bid to ensure more prompt tax compliance and at a time when they want to show they could maybe, just maybe, steer the govt budget into surplus for once, they've actually put the interest rate for late payment of taxes, up.

http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/news/2015-04-01-uomi-rates-updated

winner69
12-04-2015, 10:45 AM
EZ, I believe at the core there is fundamentally little difference between Nats and Labour (and ACT if you want to include them)

In spite of stated philosophy / policies I believe Labour don't really want to make any drastic changes to the status quo. Major or drastic changes would only see the rise of more radical parties like what is happening in Europe at the moment. Self interest implies preservation and Labour and National will work together to stop this happening. You sort of agreed with this supposition a few days ago.

So we are stuck for another 5 years at least with what we have now, after a Nat win in next election. And probably the current issues will only fester away and inequalities will only get greater.

elZorro
12-04-2015, 11:31 AM
EZ, I believe at the core there is fundamentally little difference between Nats and Labour (and ACT if you want to include them)

In spite of stated philosophy / policies I believe Labour don't really want to make any drastic changes to the status quo. Major or drastic changes would only see the rise of more radical parties like what is happening in Europe at the moment. Self interest implies preservation and Labour and National will work together to stop this happening. You sort of agreed with this supposition a few days ago.

So we are stuck for another 5 years at least with what we have now, after a Nat win in next election. And probably the current issues will only fester away and inequalities will only get greater.

W69, while I don't see Labour as radical, I do see them as the best chance for good incremental change in NZ. Sure they have centrist leanings, but some in the party wanted to bring in a CGT, a leveller in the tax treatment that everyone who lives here must pay, in some form. GST was brought in by Labour, but increased twice by National. That's not a tax that hits high income earners, or the wealthy, in the same proportion as it does for those who need to spend every dollar that comes in.

Apart from helping the govt balance the books and make it fairer on most of us, a CGT would mark a radical change in the perception of the usefulness of investment in housing, for example. I saw some of the stats on Q&A today, it's like a runaway freight train in Auckland at the moment. While some I know are selling down to encapsulate the gains, many more are jumping in, at or near the top. All this effort, good capital spent on a vain asset that employs just a few during the short construction stage, and a portion of a person for maintenance over its lifetime. A business can provide a far better return over decades, can employ many, can export goods, can improve the economy in bounds. Yet if you go to a bank looking for money to buy a building to trade from, or for funds to get started, you'll only get 50% of the lending for the former, nothing for the latter, no matter what your previous income might have been, unless you have some unencumbered property you can put up as collateral.

For me, any party that has small-business-centric policies will be worth voting for, because this is where the new jobs will come from, the new exports, the investment, the nous. I disagree with you about Labour's chances in 2017 too, they'll have a good chance by then, and I'm sure we'll see a lot more from Andrew Little. I note the sentiment about National vs Labour is already changing, on blogs and comments on the web.

The Labour LECs are getting organised right now, for a leadup into the winnable election in 2017.

artemis
12-04-2015, 01:52 PM
...... GST was brought in by Labour, but increased twice by National. That's not a tax that hits high income earners, or the wealthy, in the same proportion as it does for those who need to spend every dollar that comes in......

True, mainly because low income earners usually pay a bigger proportion of their income in rent or mortgage interest. Neither of which attract GST.

winner69
12-04-2015, 02:29 PM
What about his EZ

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/74945/gareth-morgan-says-nz-should-look-latin-america-welfare-policy-your-view

As it says we have a problem because The New Zealand approach is a legacy from that long ago era when it was believed economies could always provide full employment.

elZorro
12-04-2015, 03:43 PM
What about this EZ

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/74945/gareth-morgan-says-nz-should-look-latin-america-welfare-policy-your-view

As it says we have a problem because The New Zealand approach is a legacy from that long ago era when it was believed economies could always provide full employment.

Yes, interesting W69, but I don't like the sound of flat payments, sure it would be easier to implement. Gareth also said:

Who knows where this belief came from in New Zealand that workers won’t work if they are supported out of poverty. But it’s a pretty sick piece of bigotry that we should ditch quickly.


It has long been an argument that National/ACT voters would trot out, and the message is subtly reinforced by National policy and crackdowns on beneficiaries. My argument is that if work was more readily available, and well paid, there wouldn't be any need for crackdowns, and the taxes coming back would be more than adequate to cover govt costs and services anyway.

So what kind of a job would be situated close to suburbia or regional towns perhaps, would require little training and minimal written or IT skills, would offer flexible daytime hours, a pay rate well above minimum wage rates, and rely more on good hand-eye co-ordination and thoroughness to detail? In a workplace that could scale up to export and take on more staff without extending its footprint much at all? These jobs are in manufacturing, and of course around the outside of these core workers are others who will probably need tertiary level qualifications.

We are, after all, a country with only 4.5 million people in it, far smaller than some of the other major manufacturing countries worldwide. It's not improbable that manufacturing of the right kind of export goods could employ everyone left on the scrapheap in NZ who wants a job, close to where they live, and could also pay them at a good rate. All without needing any major infrastructure to be added.

artemis
13-04-2015, 06:10 AM
..... So what kind of a job would be situated close to suburbia or regional towns perhaps, would require little training and minimal written or IT skills, would offer flexible daytime hours, a pay rate well above minimum wage rates, and rely more on good hand-eye co-ordination and thoroughness to detail? In a workplace that could scale up to export and take on more staff without extending its footprint much at all? These jobs are in manufacturing, and of course around the outside of these core workers are others who will probably need tertiary level qualifications......

You'd think that potential manufacturing buyinesses would be lining up to open factories then. especially since the 'manufacturing crisis' didn't exactly happen. (On the contrary.) Any thoughts on why they are not?

In the meantime, until the manufacturing utopia arrives, we (the government) could reduce the numbers coming in under the seasonal workers scheme and other temporary migrants. To be fair, these jobs may not meet all your requirements - such as location - but the temporary migrants would still be available to fill those jobs. The employers might not be too happy of course.

As an indicative example, even though dates don't line up exactly it gives some idea -

2011 - BOP / Gisborne / Hawkes Bay - 119,700 months worked by temporary migrant workers.

As at March 2014 there were 18,800 unemployed in those same regions not counting 15-17 year olds. Usually around half of unemployed are considered work ready at any point in time.

Daytr
13-04-2015, 06:36 AM
Sure, I was only mucking around & I just think it sounds great, rather than is great. Many terms or words get hijacked over the years & Liberal is one of those imo. In regards jobs in the regions, solar energy & I know I keep harping on about this, but it could create a whole industry if was better supported. Migrant workers are an issue as well as are too frequently the first choice for reasons of price & also availability of labour. If it is tough job, perhaps like dairy in Southland the if they paid a wage that attracted people rather than just having the ability to employ Filipinos off the bat then they might actually attract local talent. There is a place for migrant workers, but it shouldn't be at the expense of locals & university students & the like.


Neo-liberalism is just a bunch of powerful people doing things in their own self interest. Doesn't sound like you daytr so you not a neo-liberal

Compassion and empathy are the caring roots of a caring society. Socialism is a negative word with associations to totalitarianism. Socialism is really organised compassion, which everyone can relate to. It's not an ideology - its simply a starting point for a conversation about how we organise society. Thinking in these terms is a a good start to improving society for all. Hence I think you fundamentally really are a socialist daytr - but that's only a word eh.

elZorro
13-04-2015, 06:52 AM
You'd think that potential manufacturing buyinesses would be lining up to open factories then. especially since the 'manufacturing crisis' didn't exactly happen. (On the contrary.) Any thoughts on why they are not?

In the meantime, until the manufacturing utopia arrives, we (the government) could reduce the numbers coming in under the seasonal workers scheme and other temporary migrants. To be fair, these jobs may not meet all your requirements - such as location - but the temporary migrants would still be available to fill those jobs. The employers might not be too happy of course.

As an indicative example, even though dates don't line up exactly it gives some idea -

2011 - BOP / Gisborne / Hawkes Bay - 119,700 months worked by temporary migrant workers.

As at March 2014 there were 18,800 unemployed in those same regions not counting 15-17 year olds. Usually around half of unemployed are considered work ready at any point in time.

Artemis, I'm not sure what you're meaning here. There is a difference between a permanent fulltime job with annual holidays and sick pay etc, and a temporary contract job picking fruit for X$ a kg. There must be quite a rigmarole taking on part-time seasonal work when you're unemployed, although that is not something I've experienced. On the face of it though, at least half of the unemployed in the BOP region could have been working for part of the year, and maybe they did, but who knows if they earned more than the minimum wage. Overseas workers will come over and work at those low rates and then return home, because they don't have our higher costs of living for the rest of the year. It's not as simple as you think. You could argue that these overseas people are often really hard, uncomplaining workers, but that's not a reason to give up on the manufacturing sector in NZ. Perhaps you could supply some figures on how well the manufacturing sector is going. Real figures please, not feel-good data from a survey.

John Key was just on TV1, being 'rigorously' questioned on why the government won't hit its budget surplus this year. Rawdon didn't seem to notice that John spouted so much BS that I was fuming at the TV. For instance: we're doing well since we used to have a massive deficit, now it's close to balancing, this is good that we're only a few hundred million out in a $200billion economy, and the big whopper "getting to a budget surplus is like landing a Boeing 747 on a pin-head".

Yeah, well, I think I know who the pin-head is, he thinks the rest of us don't have a clue about numbers and figures, and will believe anything he says. Not any more.

The govt operates on $60-$70billion of income, so they are a big part of the economy. But not all of it, and over the past six and now seven years it'll run in the red, borrowing on behalf of the taxpayer to cover the shortfall. Conversely the Labour govt managed record budget surpluses and paid down historic debt while they were in office. These are very fundamental differences between the two parties, and I don't think you can pin it all on the GFC and the Earthquakes. National have always been more content to let the govt books sail close to the wind, Labour have been more careful and business-like.

Daytr
13-04-2015, 07:16 AM
National will set another record for the most consecutive deficits, breaking their own previous record! It sort of flies in the face that National are the money managers & Labour the irresponsible spenders, when on record the opposite is what has actually occurred.
John Key on National Radio this morning referring to the Auckland property market saying it's unsustainable but insisting the only option to cool it was to make more land & housing available. Well its one option of many including taxes to perhaps produce a surplus, obviously not a priority for this government, despite promising it year after year. They could also look at foreign ownership. At some point there will be a scenario that means foreign ownership is mot attractive & we will see a reversal with sales rather than buys & that will create a vacuum in the market.

elZorro
13-04-2015, 07:38 AM
National will set another record for tie most consecutive deficits, breaking their own previous record! It sort of foreskin the face that National are the money managers & Labour the irresponsible spenders, when on record the opposite is what has actually occurred.
John Key on National Radio this morning referring to the Auckland property market saying it's unsustainable but insisting the only option to cool it was to make more land & housing available. Well its one option of many including taxes to perhaps produce a surplus, obviously not a priority for this government, despite promising it year after year. They could also look at foreign ownership. At some point there will be a scenario that means foreign ownership is mot attractive & we will see a reversal with sales rather than buys & that will create a vacuum in the market.

Daytr, National won't try any of those polices, it's their rich mates they're looking after, not the average NZer, or the NZ economy. That's what is so galling.

BTW, interesting spell-correction in your last post :).

Daytr
13-04-2015, 08:06 AM
Ha ha, thanks. The tablet I use quite often jumps to the most unusual predictive text!

artemis
13-04-2015, 08:12 AM
Artemis, I'm not sure what you're meaning here. There is a difference between a permanent fulltime job with annual holidays and sick pay etc, and a temporary contract job picking fruit for X$ a kg. There must be quite a rigmarole taking on part-time seasonal work when you're unemployed, although that is not something I've experienced. On the face of it though, at least half of the unemployed in the BOP region could have been working for part of the year, and maybe they did, but who knows if they earned more than the minimum wage. Overseas workers will come over and work at those low rates and then return home, because they don't have our higher costs of living for the rest of the year. It's not as simple as you think. You could argue that these overseas people are often really hard, uncomplaining workers, but that's not a reason to give up on the manufacturing sector in NZ. Perhaps you could supply some figures on how well the manufacturing sector is going. Real figures please, not feel-good data from a survey......

it is not difficult for people on jobseekers benefit to work part of the year or part time. They notify WINZ then call in to an automated system with details of work for the week. The benefit gets adjusted if necessary acccording to the thresholds.

Some work - better pay than the benefit, getting up in the morning, a purpose in life even if not permanent, role model for the family - has to be better than days on the sofa with the xbox.

Some of these jobs do pay wages rather than per kg.

If locals don't take up the available jobs, even if they are not utopian perfection, then I'd rather not keep hearing 'But there are no jobs".

Though as I said earlier, employers might not be too keen on them.

BlackPeter
13-04-2015, 10:17 AM
Daytr, National won't try any of those polices, it's their rich mates they're looking after, not the average NZer, or the NZ economy. That's what is so galling.


EZ, is this what you call a constructive political dialogue? Is Labour really that blindsided by their own propaganda, that they can't see reality anymore, or is this just you?

I guess you obviously can keep sulking in your very own little political bubble (isolated from the real world), but than you shouldn't complain about Labour having less and less political influence.

So what you are saying is that it is National's aim in life to look after all these rich bastards running Labour: Cunliffe lives, as I heard in quite a palace, Clark's hut in Mount Eden is not to be spat on either and there are lots of other well offs running the party of the "poor and downtrodden".

If we add to this natural National clientele the odd 50 % of voters who elected National in the last election (apparently all rich bastards in need to be looked after by National), than it is no wonder that Labour does not get any foot on the ground anymore. Even Northland (acknowledging the recent protest vote) used to be a safe National seat - and hey, even they didn't vote for anybody looking after the poor. All rich people in Northland - eh? I guess if what you say is right and the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders is rich, than maybe Labour needs to change its tune and play for these people as well?

OK - but maybe lets look into the issues. I am not sure, whether Auckland has a housing crisis, but it is certainly difficult to find there a reasonably priced place (at acceptable standards) to live. Is this the fault of the current government? Not sure - if you just lift your head and look over the typical ugly 6 foot high board fence many Kiwis like to erect around their houses - than you might find out that places to live are dear all over the world as long as people want to live there. The desire to live there is typically determined by the availability of good jobs, a bubbly social environment, thriving cultural environment, ... Try to find a cheap place with good living conditions in London, Frankfurt, New York, Singapore, Tokyo, Sydney, Hong Kong, even Beijing (though I wouldn't want to live there ...). There must be something all these governments have in common - they created successful economies and failed to provide cheap houses ...?

So - how can we fix this crisis?


We could make Auckland less attractive to live in ... probably not popular, but it would be an easy solution ...
We could make other parts of NZ more attractive to live in (e.g. by moving jobs (incl. government) to these places). Actually - yes, this is something the government could contribute to. Can't however remember any Labour government so far subscribing to this idea so far.
We could change our preferred style of living (owning a big box occupied by only one family and surrounded by a 6 foot high boarded fence). Actually - if you look at most other places I mentioned (where places to live are at a premium): there are other ways to live ... and if lots are dear, than it makes sense to house people e.g. in apartment blocks instead of having for each family a fraction of a quarter of an acre where they build there own living-box and driveway to place the BBQ in front of the 4WD. Is it really Nationals fault that we don't seriously consider alternatives? What did Labour do so far to change this expensive Kiwi habit?
Sure - we could crack the market and make it unattractive to own a house. Xenophobic attempts as proposed by Labour are part of this strategy. Just wonder how all these current house owners react if the government of the day seriously cracks down on the value of their property. BTW - just remember me - what did Helen do to curb the house price inflation (which during her reign was worse than over the last 7 years).


Haven't yet seen any proposal from Labour so far which would curb house price inflation without negative side effects - and they certainly didn't do a good job in that regard while they have been in government:

7268

Just remind me - when did Helen last wag her iron fist - was it from 2000 to 2009? Just enjoy the graph ....

craic
13-04-2015, 11:20 AM
My son has a house in London. He started off with a fairly grotty flat and improved it and paid down the mortgage. The house he eventually bought was a two-and-bit bedroom terraced house that was originally a workman's cottage. The original owners had lived there since the plague and had done nothing to the place. They retired to the seaside and he rebuilt the place from the inside out including a roof extension, a back extension and so forth.The main reason for going there was for a good school, Barnes Primary, for his children. It was a long hard slog but children's progress and the one million price tag made it worth while. Another son is doing the same in Auckland along with the millions of families around the world who have learned to live with inflation without the imaginary magic bullet that governments might provide.

Daytr
13-04-2015, 12:49 PM
BP, El Zorro has a point though that the Nats. aren't trying or looking at the types of policy change I mention. To examine immigration is not xenophobic in fact it could be quite the opposite as at times you may want to increase immigration, other times like now you may want to decrease, or slow. However in relation to property it may be foreign ownership not immigration that's examined & they are two related but different things. What we are seeing from the Nats is adding fuel to the fire in regards their recent first home owner grants. Expanding Auckland geographically is another poor policy, the lack of quality town/urban planning & lack of existing infrastructure for the current population let alone increased population is evidence that we need better policy & long term planning before expanding further.

fungus pudding
13-04-2015, 12:49 PM
EZ, is this what you call a constructive political dialogue? Is Labour really that blindsided by their own propaganda, that they can't see reality anymore, or is this just you?

I guess you obviously can keep sulking in your very own little political bubble (isolated from the real world), but than you shouldn't complain about Labour having less and less political influence.

So what you are saying is that it is National's aim in life to look after all these rich bastards running Labour: Cunliffe lives, as I heard in quite a palace, Clark's hut in Mount Eden is not to be spat on either and there are lots of other well offs running the party of the "poor and downtrodden".

If we add to this natural National clientele the odd 50 % of voters who elected National in the last election (apparently all rich bastards in need to be looked after by National), than it is no wonder that Labour does not get any foot on the ground anymore. Even Northland (acknowledging the recent protest vote) used to be a safe National seat - and hey, even they didn't vote for anybody looking after the poor. All rich people in Northland - eh? I guess if what you say is right and the overwhelming majority of New Zealanders is rich, than maybe Labour needs to change its tune and play for these people as well?

OK - but maybe lets look into the issues. I am not sure, whether Auckland has a housing crisis, but it is certainly difficult to find there a reasonably priced place (at acceptable standards) to live. Is this the fault of the current government? Not sure - if you just lift your head and look over the typical ugly 6 foot high board fence many Kiwis like to erect around their houses - than you might find out that places to live are dear all over the world as long as people want to live there.

Labour, through some sort of Twyford magic, will make it possible for every single NZer to live in the centre of Auckland, in an affordable dwelling. (whatever affordable means)

BlackPeter
13-04-2015, 01:17 PM
BP, El Zorro has a point though that the Nats. aren't trying or looking at the types of policy change I mention. To examine immigration is not xenophobic in fact it could be quite the opposite as at times you may want to increase immigration, other times like now you may want to decrease, or slow. However in relation to property it may be foreign ownership not immigration that's examined & they are two related but different things. What we are seeing from the Nats is adding fuel to the fire in regards their recent first home owner grants. Expanding Auckland geographically is another poor policy, the lack of quality town/urban planning & lack of existing infrastructure for the current population let alone increased population is evidence that we need better policy & long term planning before expanding further.

OK - I do agree that I have seen so far nothing from National either which is likely to improve the situation. We agree that any subsidy added to an overheated market will only keep it boiling, and yes - a further subdivision and / or extension of the Auckland territory is certainly not desirable either, just adding to traffic and already existing environmental problems.

However - neither a capital gains tax nor any restriction of foreign buyers will effectively reduce the cost pressure (just look at house prices in areas where they apply these measures). Hint: the UK (London) has a capital gains tax and Singapore (just as example) makes it basically impossible for foreigners to buy reasonable priced real estate. Both places have real estate sky rocketing ....

I remember however a very effective example for how to get real estate prices down: After the GFC you could buy in Detroit a villa with swimming pool for less than USD 10.000 (I didn't forget a handful of zeros). Only drawback: No jobs around and the city was bankrupt (i.e. council services restricted) ...

So, I guess we have again the choice between bad and worse. We might disagree on which of the both attributes to put to which party's proposal (and/or actions), but honestly - none of them is flash.

Why don't we try instead of identifying a good proposal, even if it doesn't come from any of the space takers in parliament?

Personally - I know that appartments blocks do work (and I have seen overseas many examples of apartments where I would be happy to live in) if well planned, well built and with good infrastructure connection and sufficient green around, though there are admittedly as well good examples for bad apartment living available.

The second point I think politicians of all colours should investigate is getting more jobs to where the people live instead of people to the jobs in Auckland CBD. It is just mind boggling why we as a people allow so much infrastructure in smaller NZ towns to lie underutilised only to add additional stress and traffic and cost to one city.

BlackPeter
13-04-2015, 01:46 PM
To examine immigration is not xenophobic in fact it could be quite the opposite as at times you may want to increase immigration, other times like now you may want to decrease, or slow.

Yes - I agree in principle. You could use immigration to further the economy ... and still be fair to the immigrants, but this would require long term planning and more wisdom than all our politicians combined can muster.

The way it actually is used is:

When times are bad than we look for people to bring money and skills into the country - we are happy to import brains and funds (Kim Dotcom would be an example for the latter)

Ah yes - and than times improve and we find out that these additional people we first invited need a place to live, a school for their children to go to, maybe from time to time access to health services and maybe even some space on the road to drive. This is obviously not acceptable as long as there are still native long term beneficiaries around who don't live (for whatever reason) in a nice house. And that is when we take the Winston Peters of this world off the chain, allow them to hold xenophobic speeches and support xenophobic policies.

I don't know - is it just me who feels that this opens some of the ugliest aspects onto our society (and I don't talk about the foreigners) and into the minds of some of our politicians?

Major von Tempsky
13-04-2015, 04:55 PM
Another interesting one for the Left Whingers to digest.....

"The New Zealand economy is still a rock star, according to Paul Bloxham, the man who originally coined the phrase.

In a New Zealand economics comment, Mr Bloxham, the chief economist for HSBC Bank Australia, said despite lower dairy prices and lower growth in its major trading partners, New Zealand’s economy continued to be supported by a construction boom and the story had further to run.

As a result, interest rates were at high levels when compared with the rest of the developed world and the currency was high.

The New Zealand dollar was nearing parity against the Australian dollar for the first time in 42 years. Some early signs of domestic price pressures picking up suggested the New Zealand Reserve Bank was unlikely to cut rates this year, in contrast to current market pricing, he said.

Mr Bloxham said there were a range of indicators showing the New Zealand economy was still booming.


The broadest economic indicator of gross domestic product, or GDP, showed growth was broad based across industries with 15 of 16 sectors showing expansion over 2014. Overall GDP was running at a well above annual trend of 3.5%. The more timely indicators confirmed the strength had continued into 2015.

After moderating in the middle of last year, in response to last year’s 1% increase in the official cash rate, business and consumer sentiment had bounced back in recent months and were at levels implying continued above trend growth, he said.

Housing price growth had also picked up pace in the past six months, after easing back in response to the Reserve Bank’s actions.

”Given the ramp up in Auckland housing prices, the Reserve Bank looks set to expand its macroprudential tightening measures in June.”

The economy was largely being driven by domestic factors, Mr Bloxham said.

Somewhat perversely, the economy is driven by immigrants in the North Island and the post-earthquake boom in the South Island.

Tourism is strong.

And contrary to what Labour have been trying to scare the horses with, softer dairy and other primary industry returns aren’t getting in the way of GDP growth and general confidence. All our economic eggs are not in one basket.

For National, the only concern is if this can be sustained into 2017 when they need a strong economy for a fourth term. People vote with their back pockets, and economic stability will be a huge factor in retaining the blue vote.



– Dene Mackenzie, ODT

elZorro
13-04-2015, 05:44 PM
Another interesting one for the Left Whingers to digest.....

"The New Zealand economy is still a rock star, according to Paul Bloxham, the man who originally coined the phrase.

In a New Zealand economics comment, Mr Bloxham, the chief economist for HSBC Bank Australia, said despite lower dairy prices and lower growth in its major trading partners, New Zealand’s economy continued to be supported by a construction boom and the story had further to run.

As a result, interest rates were at high levels when compared with the rest of the developed world and the currency was high.

The New Zealand dollar was nearing parity against the Australian dollar for the first time in 42 years. Some early signs of domestic price pressures picking up suggested the New Zealand Reserve Bank was unlikely to cut rates this year, in contrast to current market pricing, he said.

Mr Bloxham said there were a range of indicators showing the New Zealand economy was still booming.


The broadest economic indicator of gross domestic product, or GDP, showed growth was broad based across industries with 15 of 16 sectors showing expansion over 2014. Overall GDP was running at a well above annual trend of 3.5%. The more timely indicators confirmed the strength had continued into 2015.

After moderating in the middle of last year, in response to last year’s 1% increase in the official cash rate, business and consumer sentiment had bounced back in recent months and were at levels implying continued above trend growth, he said.

Housing price growth had also picked up pace in the past six months, after easing back in response to the Reserve Bank’s actions.

”Given the ramp up in Auckland housing prices, the Reserve Bank looks set to expand its macroprudential tightening measures in June.”

The economy was largely being driven by domestic factors, Mr Bloxham said.

Somewhat perversely, the economy is driven by immigrants in the North Island and the post-earthquake boom in the South Island.

Tourism is strong.

And contrary to what Labour have been trying to scare the horses with, softer dairy and other primary industry returns aren’t getting in the way of GDP growth and general confidence. All our economic eggs are not in one basket.

For National, the only concern is if this can be sustained into 2017 when they need a strong economy for a fourth term. People vote with their back pockets, and economic stability will be a huge factor in retaining the blue vote.



– Dene Mackenzie, ODT

Yes, great MVT, Dene Mackenzie is as true blue as they come, generally. But he's right, National will be hoping the economy will be in good shape in 2017. Here's a link to heaps of trends and graphs that Treasury has put out last month.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/mei/archive/pdfs/nzecp-charts-mar15.pdf

Of interest are the govt debt to GDP graphs, not factoring in the lower dairy payout yet, and the business confidence graph which showed a remarkable step change just after National were voted in (2008), after being miserable beforehand. That's why I don't trust those feel-good surveys. Many of the other graphs show a pattern of solid results under Labour, and oscillating but generally poorer results under National. Looking at house prices and immigration charts, it's obvious that Auckland prices will continue to go sky-high until record immigration falls back for whatever reason. House prices generally follow after the immigration numbers, as you'd expect.

National discounted a housing accord for no good reason today, Greens were for it, and Labour pointed out National didn't play ball last chance they had. Still, Andrew, it would have been good to see you standing alongside the Greens on this one.

Sgt Pepper
13-04-2015, 05:47 PM
Major

I watched one news tonight. I see Michael Woodhouse intends to abolish zero hour contracts, what is your opinion??

Daytr
13-04-2015, 05:58 PM
MVT I thought you were a 'professional economist' as you put it. Despite lower dairy? What lower dairy? I'll give you a hint its a trick question that anyone should know in regards the impact of lower dairy prices on the NZ economy.
Australia is one of our biggest tourism markets it will be interesting with parity if that remains so.
Also NZers will favor spending their strong NZDs overseas rather than on domestic tourism.

BP, I don't think comparing Auckland to London or Singapore are reasonable examples, Sydney perhaps is better & they have the same issues there as Auckland. These are alternative ideas on reigning in Auckland property prices & it would have some effect, economics always will. However even if it doesn't have quite the desired impact at least government revenue would be generated to fund the required infrastructure & funded by those who are adding to the pressure on the existing infrastructure.

westerly
13-04-2015, 07:00 PM
Yes - I agree in principle. You could use immigration to further the economy ... and still be fair to the immigrants, but this would require long term planning and more wisdom than all our politicians combined can muster.

The way it actually is used is:

When times are bad than we look for people to bring money and skills into the country - we are happy to import brains and funds (Kim Dotcom would be an example for the latter)

Ah yes - and than times improve and we find out that these additional people we first invited need a place to live, a school for their children to go to, maybe from time to time access to health services and maybe even some space on the road to drive. This is obviously not acceptable as long as there are still native long term beneficiaries around who don't live (for whatever reason) in a nice house. And that is when we take the Winston Peters of this world off the chain, allow them to hold xenophobic speeches and support xenophobic policies.

I don't know - is it just me who feels that this opens some of the ugliest aspects onto our society (and I don't talk about the foreigners) and into the minds of some of our politicians?

But times are not bad and we allow the wealthy to buy there way in.
As a xenophobe and racist I have no real objection to families who will be of benefit to the country immigrating to NZ. I do object to the wealthy buying bolt holes in NZ they can escape to for rest and relaxation. Winston talks sense from the viewpoint of the average person. When multiple high country stations are bought by individuals from overseas, when multiple farms are bought by corporations from overseas, locals are priced out.
A few years back when the exodus to Australia was in progress which must have freed up large numbers of houses,prices were rising way ahead of inflation. (incidentally your graph on the housing 1ndex conveniently stopped in 2009. It is now 2015) But prices continued to rise.
Immigration is the main contributor to house price increases. Locals are being priced out
As for people living in multi story appartments. For real with children?
Something must be wrong when a professioal economist like the Major is happy for our economy to rely on population growth and a major earhquake to succeed

westerly

elZorro
14-04-2015, 06:47 AM
Now John Key is saying that a budget surplus target is "artificial", and that the public won't worry about it being $200mill or so either way. So suddenly this metric that was so important to them last year, is not important at all in 2015.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11432084

Well either it is important, or it's not, which one do we believe? Andrew Little with a cold and muffled sound was on TV1 about it this morning, saying they'd had seven years to get it right. He also mentioned Labour's plank of getting businesses up and running for new and better paid jobs, so I liked that.

I think it's time that National had a good look at their tax income, and start plugging the gaps from the top income brackets. They pruned the tax take up there by too much, now they have trouble getting enough in from middle and lower NZ. That would be a quick fix for their issue, should they want to resolve it. Of course they could have helped grow the economy in the meantime, but that seems to be beyond them.

iceman
14-04-2015, 08:01 AM
Westerly it is very common for people in other countries to live in apartments in multi story buildings, with or without children. My son lives in Scandinavia with his wife and 2 young sons in an apartment block with 20 apartments in it. Most in that city live in much larger buildings. They live a good and happy life there. Kiwi attitudes in this regard need to change but there is far too much NIMBY attitude here so I don't hold out much hope for the near future. But it will happen. Noone, whether politicians or developers are or will doing anything serious about this until attitudes change !



Immigration is the main contributor to house price increases. Locals are being priced out
As for people living in multi story appartments. For real with children?
Something must be wrong when a professioal economist like the Major is happy for our economy to rely on population growth and a major earhquake to succeed

westerly

Daytr
14-04-2015, 09:19 AM
Iceman, agree it is more common overseas, but that's because they control their urban sprawl, something we are not doing in NZ. Look at Sydney or Melbourne, same issue, but at least they have plenty of room to spread even if its not a good thing. I see the North Island a bit like England in geography. Have you ever driven from London north at night? All you see is lights as one town after another merges into another. Auckland, Hamilton & Tauranga in particular need planning to prevent spread & the constant division of productive land. Where/when does it stop otherwise ? Concentration of apartments & entertainment etch makes for a vibrant hub. Melbourne & Wellington have done this well. Being able to walk from bars & restaurants to sporting facilities & entertainment centers with public transport radiating out from the hub makes a lot of sense both socially but economically.

iceman
14-04-2015, 09:33 AM
I agree with you on that daytr. That is the issue. But it is a failure of Local Government rather than Central Government as seems to be suggested on this thread. The exception being Central Government's responsibility to urgently reduce silly restrictions on developments such as is done with the RMA !


Iceman, agree it is more common overseas, but that's because they control their urban sprawl, something we are not doing in NZ. Look at Sydney or Melbourne, same issue, but at least they have plenty of room to spread even if its not a good thing. I see the North Island a bit like England in geography. Have you ever driven from London north at night? All you see is lights as one town after another merges into another. Auckland, Hamilton & Tauranga in particular need planning to prevent spread & the constant division of productive land. Where/when does it stop otherwise ? Concentration of apartments & entertainment etch makes for a vibrant hub. Melbourne & Wellington have done this well. Being able to walk from bars & restaurants to sporting facilities & entertainment centers with public transport radiating out from the hub makes a lot of sense both socially but economically.

artemis
14-04-2015, 09:43 AM
Major I watched one news tonight. I see Michael Woodhouse intends to abolish zero hour contracts, what is your opinion??


IMO the good workers will continue to get as much work as they want and the less desirable workers will be replaced by new hires and get no work.

Daytr
14-04-2015, 10:03 AM
Well lets put those less desirable workers on the dole then as that's where they will be heading. Remember this is hardly desirable work & its easy for us in ivory towers to judge others doing either laborious or hard work on minimum wage. I find if you offer a carrot rather than a stick you will get a better result overall. Zero hour contracts show just how out of touch National in & its likely to result in another policy back flip.

Iceman, its both not just central government or local government, is both & there is no way of getting around that. However its the role of Central government to lead & set the overall agenda & structure nationally for local or super councils to follow.

Sgt Pepper
14-04-2015, 10:18 AM
IMO the good workers will continue to get as much work as they want and the less desirable workers will be replaced by new hires and get no work.

Artemis
Just curious. Have you ever worked in an entry level/low paid job. I am not talking about a school holiday/University break job but one in which you worked to pay your rent/ mortgage and take care of family etc. If so when was this? Were you covered by a Union agreement?

Daytr
14-04-2015, 10:26 AM
MVT, if the economy is in such great shape, why does National continue to borrow & not generate a surplus. We have had good times for the last 4 years or so, mainly on the back of China. However National have chosen to expand debt at an alarming rate. We are now about to take a tax hit on the back of the dairy price that will start feeding through. The high NZD is also going to hurt other export related industries & employers. If we don't pay down debt in the good times or even keep it level, how do we expect to manage in the bad times?

gv1
14-04-2015, 01:09 PM
And..that is not far off bad times, just as our neighbour/cousiz are experiencing. Mergered all Ackld councils, costs/rates have increased. No accountability at ACC, management doing any and everything they want. Everywhere costs are rising without any end...

iceman
14-04-2015, 01:21 PM
Didn' ACC levies reduce on April 1 ?

And..that is not far off bad times, just as our neighbour/cousiz are experiencing. Mergered all Ackld councils, costs/rates have increased. No accountability at ACC, management doing any and everything they want. Everywhere costs are rising without any end...

craic
14-04-2015, 02:32 PM
If you watch Homes Under the Hammer on the living channel you will learn about the benefit of managed debt. Characters on there buy houses and flats in various states and renovate them with, in many cases, the intention of building up a portfolio of rental properties - some at quite an early age will say that they have ten, twenty or more houses and are continueing to build with banks only too ready to lend them money even though may not have paid off the last half-a-dozen houses. Eventually they stand to be very well off as the rents clear their debts. That is precisely what this and every other government does. This country is well off because we have well managed debts - being debt free is consistent with stagnation. As to throwing good money after bad, my bank fees this month so far stand at about $800. Someone is making a profit out of me but as long as my share is bigger, I don't care.

gv1
14-04-2015, 02:46 PM
Didn' ACC levies reduce on April 1 ?
Its because of them investing in s/market. But for how long.

Daytr
14-04-2015, 02:54 PM
I would agree with you Craic, if NZ government assets weren't being reduced at the same time!
When you create a property portfolio with debt your asset base & revenue base both expand to service the debt.
Economics 101 here. What we have is a government selling assets & increasing debt at the same time & revenue is about to take a hit.
That's just bad business.


If you watch Homes Under the Hammer on the living channel you will learn about the benefit of managed debt. Characters on there buy houses and flats in various states and renovate them with, in many cases, the intention of building up a portfolio of rental properties - some at quite an early age will say that they have ten, twenty or more houses and are continueing to build with banks only too ready to lend them money even though may not have paid off the last half-a-dozen houses. Eventually they stand to be very well off as the rents clear their debts. That is precisely what this and every other government does. This country is well off because we have well managed debts - being debt free is consistent with stagnation. As to throwing good money after bad, my bank fees this month so far stand at about $800. Someone is making a profit out of me but as long as my share is bigger, I don't care.

elZorro
15-04-2015, 06:34 AM
I would agree with you Craic, if NZ government assets weren't being reduced at the same time!
When you create a property portfolio with debt your asset base & revenue base both expand to service the debt.
Economics 101 here. What we have is a government selling assets & increasing debt at the same time & revenue is about to take a hit.
That's just bad business.

Good point Daytr, they're selling off Crown assets and still not balancing the books. Imagine if they had to fund the normal requirement for new schools from their income alone.

But the govt is trying to boost R&D funding, $80 mill extra is the news.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1504/S00157/budget-2015-80m-boost-for-rd-funding.htm

Read the fine print, it's $80mill over 4 years, so it's $20mill p.a., and that funding will only go to big business, or well funded business. Each business needs to fund the other 80% of the R&D, they need to spend at least $300,000 regardless, per year, on R&D.

All this means that $356mill has been allocated in govt R&D grants to just 152 businesses. An average of $2.34mill per business. These are not small startups, these are already well-funded businesses, who, it could be argued, will be doing the R&D anyway to hold market share, and because of sharemarket listings, ongoing strong sales and other means, have plenty of access to cashflow.

There are other fund pools that a smaller business can access, but the above example is where a lot of the funding goes. One or two of the recipients of these grants also provide some of their building space for National's election after-parties. Cosy.

On page 5 or 6 of this big list are about 57 businesses who have each been allocated up to $15million over four years. If they all take up the funding, it'll cost the taxpayer $855mill (minus taxes returned, sure) to support 57 businesses, many of whom are listed, overseas owned, or are well established after decades of trading.

https://www.callaghaninnovation.govt.nz/sites/all/files/sites/all/files/pictures/Website%20copy%20Callaghan%20Innovation%20RD%20Gra nts%20Feb%202014%20-%20May%202014.pdf

I have no grumble generally with the smaller grants, many of which fund tertiary students through their holidays. Except there could be more of them.

Anyway, next time you see some poor community house or service crying out for a few $100k of funding to keep their free public good service alive, and the govt drops back on previous support citing a shortage of funds, think of the bigger numbers on that list.

craic
15-04-2015, 07:23 AM
Selling assets - those that are not as profitable as you imagined - is good business. It frees funding for other purposes. Funding small businesses is also a mugs game - few last the distance. Funding established business for research and development is a wiser use of funds. I know that Labour would have the country in some sort of a paradise in no time flat according to their supporters but after several lengthy cracks at it, the voters judged them to have failed. As to Economics 101, not this lad. My papers were in psychology,history and education. And they were mostly C passes.

Daytr
15-04-2015, 11:01 AM
Well that depends what price you get. The power companies were returning a double digit return. Effectively the government had a an additional tax on the nation which imo was wrong in itself. Some government assets are their for social reasons not to return a profit, something National seems determined to change at any cost, socially, environmentally & financially.

craic
15-04-2015, 11:24 AM
All I know is that I sold the same asset twice this month and bought it back twice for a little over two G's less than I sold it for and that is net, after all the pipers had been paid. This particular forum is just an aside between my predatory activities on the net.

elZorro
15-04-2015, 07:03 PM
All I know is that I sold the same asset twice this month and bought it back twice for a little over two G's less than I sold it for and that is net, after all the pipers had been paid. This particular forum is just an aside between my predatory activities on the net.

But the govt can't act like that in general Craic, they have to take a longer term view.

Treasury is calling for the govt to have another look at CGT on housing. The proportion of Auckland homes sold to investors has gone up from 33% to 38%. They are now poor paying investments, so the main reason investors buy them is for capital gain. Very few of them are caught in a capital gains tax, as they hold them longer term.

http://business.scoop.co.nz/2015/04/15/reserve-banks-spencer-calls-on-govt-to-rethink-housing-tax/

Unedited article on John Key's address, from NZResources:


15/4/2015 — Economics, Politics and Government Key points to a vibrant future

Prime Minister John Key told a meeting of business people in Wellington yesterday that a reason why the economy was doing well was that New Zealand was one of the fastest growing economies through the positive attitude of business and householders.
This, he said was all backed by the Government’s approach to business development.
Now the Kiwi dollar was close to parity with the Australian dollar for the first time in around 40 years – something that was unthinkable until recently.
“We’ve also seen net migration between New Zealand and Australia shrink from an annual outflow of 36,700 two years ago to just 2,600 in the 12 months to February. This is the smallest net loss of people to Australia since March 1992 – a combination of fewer New Zealanders leaving and more returning home.
“When we first came into office in late 2008, New Zealand’s economy had been in recession for nearly a year – well before the global financial crisis. Government spending had climbed 50% in just five years.”
At that time the scenario was net Government debt would exceed 60% of GDP by the early 2020s, with some forecasters talking about an unemployment rate close to 10%.
The economy grew by 3.5% in calendar 2014 – its best performance since September 2007. Annual core Government spending was just 14% higher now than six years ago – including the considerable cost of the Canterbury earthquakes.
Key said the Government was approaching surplus and net core Crown debt would peak at less than 27% of GDP before falling.
“Another 80,000 jobs were created in the past year and the unemployment rate is 5.7%,” he said.
He said NZ can become a country of opportunity that will encourage more young people to bring up their families here instead of in Australia or further afield.
Key said there needs to be a relentless focused on improving competitiveness.
This could be achieved by maintaining competitive tax rates and delivering better results from public services.
The 2015 Budget to be presented by Finance Minister Bill English was just over five weeks away and Key pointed out that the Government was given a mandate at the last election for more reforms.
“Our challenge over the next few years is to ensure the economy continues to outperform, year on year.
“Two of the most important ways we can achieve sustainable, long-term growth are through innovation and investing in the education of our young people.”
The 2015 Budget would set out further steps in both of these areas.
He said smart, innovative exporters are the key to a prosperous future so innovation will be one of six focus areas in the business growth agenda.
Government investment in research and development will total $1.5 billion this year – a 70% increase in eight years.
Key said the new Budget will provide another $244 million over the next four years to meet growing school rolls and to improve the quality of learning environments.
Four new State schools will be built - Rototuna Senior High School in Hamilton; a primary school in Rolleston, near Christchurch; and two primary schools in Auckland – one at Kumeu and the other at Scott Point.
There would also be three new kura kaupapa Māori schools. They will be in Whakatane, Gisborne and Hastings.
There would also be expansion of facilities and classrooms at four existing schools - Golden Sands in Papamoa; Hingaia Peninsula School in Auckland; Shotover primary in Queenstown; and Papamoa College in Papamoa.
In addition, the Government next year we will fund an extra 241 classrooms at other schools, with almost half of them will in Auckland.
In his summary he pointed out that wages were, on average, increasing faster than the cost of living, more New Zealanders are getting off welfare and into work and the crime rate is falling.




A more balanced version:

15/4/2015 — Economics, Politics and Government
Key points to a vibrant future?

Prime Minister John Key told a meeting of business people in Wellington yesterday that a reason why the economy was doing well (yes, trust me it's true) was that New Zealand was currently one of the fastest growing economies through the weirdly positive attitude of business and householders, a result of their good PR spin.

This, he said, was all backed by the Government’s approach to business development, which is to essentially allow big business to do the development, once funded by some taxpayer grants .
Now the Kiwi dollar was close to parity with the Australian dollar for the first time in around 40 years – something that was unthinkable until recently. It helps that the Aussies are doing quite poorly at the moment, the first time in many years.
“We’ve also seen net migration between New Zealand and Australia shrink from an annual outflow of 36,700 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10835580)two years ago (even worse than Labour had it when we gave them stick) to just 2,600 in the 12 months to February. This is the smallest net loss of people to Australia since March 1992 – a combination of fewer New Zealanders leaving and more returning home. There are a lot less jobs over there, and many returning NZers have lost their well-paid jobs. They are returning because they have little choice.

“When we first came into office in late 2008, New Zealand’s economy had been in technical? recession for nearly a year – well before the global financial crisis. This was mostly because it had been performing so strongly in the previous years, but it entered a negative period in March 2008 (http://www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/overview/2010/04.htm). Government spending had climbed 50% in just five years, but the tax take then was always suitable to allow a strong budget surplus, as business was thriving.”

At that time one pessimistic scenario based on doubtful figures was net Government debt would exceed 60% of GDP by the early 2020s, with some forecasters talking about an unemployment rate close to 10%. We have used this half-baked flimsy report ruthlessly for seven years.
The economy grew by 3.5% in calendar 2014 – its best performance since September 2007, but not as good as some years when Labour were in office. Annual core Government spending was just 14% higher now than six years ago – including the considerable cost of the Canterbury earthquakes, because we have screwed down every public sector we can get away with.
Key said the Government was approaching surplus and net core Crown debt would peak at less than 27% of GDP before falling. He apologised for taking the debt to this point, after Labour got it down to 5% of GDP by 2008. He admitted that Labour had a strong budget surplus every year they were in office and had reduced core crown debt to $10bill, (now over $70bill) but National were keener on reducing the top bracket tax rate and had been unable to grow the economy at the required rate after the GFC, while faced with higher immigration.

“Another 80,000 jobs of some kind were created in the past year (only keeping up with most immigration and higher labour force participation)and the unemployment rate is 5.7%, still higher than Labour's best result at 3.5%,” he said.

He said NZ can become a country of opportunity that will encourage more young people to bring up their families here instead of in Australia or further afield. We'd just like them to do that outside of Auckland, he said, so the housing prices wouldn't look so bad. He apologised for not ensuring regional job policies were in place to help with this.

Key said there needs to be a relentless focus on improving competitiveness, and the govt won't be doing that.
This could be mimicked by maintaining competitive tax rates and delivering better results from public services, needed to try and get to a long promised budget surplus.

The 2015 Budget to be presented by Finance Minister Bill English was just over five weeks away and Key pointed out that the Government was given a mandate at the last election for more reforms. (Watch out).
“Our challenge over the next few years is to ensure the economy continues to outperform at our new underperforming standard, year on year.
“Two of the most important ways we can achieve sustainable, long-term growth are through innovation and investing in the education of our young people.” But we won't be doing that either, no funds.

The 2015 Budget would set out further steps in both of these areas.
He said smart, innovative exporters are the key to a prosperous future, so innovation will be one of six focus areas in the business growth agenda (because we have to head Labour off in this policy area , therefore we'll fake something).

Government investment in research and development will total $1.5 billion this year – a 70% increase in eight years. Most of this funding has gone to big business, not spread around the SME sector, because we reckon smaller businesses are chumps.

Key said the new Budget will provide another $244 million over the next four years to meet growing school rolls and to improve the quality of learning environments. Charter schools will be rolled out as per our mandate.
Four new State schools will be built - Rototuna Senior High School in Hamilton; a primary school in Rolleston, near Christchurch; and two primary schools in Auckland – one at Kumeu and the other at Scott Point.
There would also be three new kura kaupapa Māori schools. They will be in Whakatane, Gisborne and Hastings.
There would also be expansion of facilities and classrooms at four existing schools - Golden Sands in Papamoa; Hingaia Peninsula School in Auckland; Shotover primary in Queenstown; and Papamoa College in Papamoa.
In addition, the Government next year we will fund an extra 241 classrooms at other schools, with almost half of them will in Auckland. Most of these will be paid for by the sale of state electricity assets, which were providing a good return.

In his summary he pointed out that some wages were, on average, increasing faster than the cost of living, while others were being held constant, more New Zealanders are getting off welfare and into work (although the unemployment rate stays stubbornly higher than under Labour), and the crime rate is falling worldwide because of the increasing use of cheaper cameras and alarms.

slimwin
15-04-2015, 09:14 PM
Did anybody read that? :-)

craic
15-04-2015, 09:38 PM
Just a line. Add 15% capital gains tax and you just add !5% plus to the price of the house, hardly a deflationary measure. When supply exceeds demand, then the pressure eases.

Joshuatree
15-04-2015, 09:41 PM
Yeah never a truer word said in jest. Essential classic zorro.:t_up: Chuckling off to bed.

elZorro
16-04-2015, 06:41 AM
Yeah never a truer word said in jest. Essential classic zorro.:t_up: Chuckling off to bed.

Thanks for that JT.

If the government can't do it, maybe philanthropic organisations and businesses can help solve the youth unemployment problem in NZ.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11433222&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+16 +April+2015

Otorohanga made something like this work for them regionally, it was done without much cash, just a network of concerned businesses and publicly elected locals.

Major von Tempsky
17-04-2015, 03:03 PM
Beats me why the Reserve Bank is stirring on a capital gains tax. Fiscal Policy very definitely belongs to Central Government, and overseas and in the past, Central Banks keep their sticky beaks out of it. Monetary Policy is the Reserve Bank's area but not totally, Central Government may fiddle around the edges and do some jawboning.

As has been pointed out a Capital Gains tax applies to the whole country, not just Auckland, and has the effect of raising property prices - do we want that? NO!

The Reserve Bank has a number of tools and it has applied just two, keeping interest rates up a bit and stopping 100% finance. The Reserve Bank is able to fine tune policy so that it can raise the deposit required/shorten or lengthen the term just on Auckland houses through its control over the banks. Why doesn't it do that instead of wringing it's hands and calling for a capital gains tax?

Sgt Pepper
17-04-2015, 07:01 PM
Beats me why the Reserve Bank is stirring on a capital gains tax. Fiscal Policy very definitely belongs to Central Government, and overseas and in the past, Central Banks keep their sticky beaks out of it. Monetary Policy is the Reserve Bank's area but not totally, Central Government may fiddle around the edges and do some jawboning.

As has been pointed out a Capital Gains tax applies to the whole country, not just Auckland, and has the effect of raising property prices - do we want that? NO!

The Reserve Bank has a number of tools and it has applied just two, keeping interest rates up a bit and stopping 100% finance. The Reserve Bank is able to fine tune policy so that it can raise the deposit required/shorten or lengthen the term just on Auckland houses through its control over the banks. Why doesn't it do that instead of wringing it's hands and calling for a capital gains tax?

Major
RBNZ Deputy Grant Spencer has pretty impressive credentials, so his opinions carry some substantial intellectual weight do you not think?

Daytr
17-04-2015, 09:53 PM
Gareth Morgan's approach I think makes a lot of sense, tax all housing as if it was cash in a bank earning interest.

craic
17-04-2015, 10:41 PM
House trading for profit is taxable. Any activity undertaken for profit is taxable. Problem is in enforcement. The govt. can have the army of inspectors to collect the taxes or, as they have chosen to do, save money by not bothering to employ the manpower and forego the tax but save the expense.It might be a lot easier if they offered significant tax advantage to industries that moved out of Auckland.

artemis
18-04-2015, 06:45 AM
What about Mr Little's idea to require a larger deposit on second and subsequent properties? Could work and could be restricted to Auckland but would be easy to circumvent by using different entities.

fungus pudding
18-04-2015, 07:18 AM
What about Mr Little's idea to require a larger deposit on second and subsequent properties? Could work and could be restricted to Auckland but would be easy to circumvent by using different entities.


Exactly, and what would it achieve anyway? That's the sort of thing Australians call a 'thought bubble'.

elZorro
18-04-2015, 07:56 AM
House trading for profit is taxable. Any activity undertaken for profit is taxable. Problem is in enforcement. The govt. can have the army of inspectors to collect the taxes or, as they have chosen to do, save money by not bothering to employ the manpower and forego the tax but save the expense.It might be a lot easier if they offered significant tax advantage to industries that moved out of Auckland.

Craic, that's a good idea. National might not try it, but perhaps Labour would. It would help the regions, take some of the strain off Auckland infrastructure, help with youth unemployment, and provide a clear incentive for the redistribution of a rising population away from Auckland. We're not fighting over old weatherboard bungalows here in the provinces. They are still relatively cheap, and you could probably walk or cycle to work, or get there in a vehicle within ten minutes, without seeing a traffic light. Sounds more efficient to me.

BlackPeter
18-04-2015, 08:36 AM
House trading for profit is taxable. Any activity undertaken for profit is taxable. Problem is in enforcement. The govt. can have the army of inspectors to collect the taxes or, as they have chosen to do, save money by not bothering to employ the manpower and forego the tax but save the expense.It might be a lot easier if they offered significant tax advantage to industries that moved out of Auckland.

Moving jobs to the people sounds like an excellent idea - and tax incentives could be the right way to approach it. Like it. Instead of having to build more and more expensive roads and other infrastructure for one already overcrowded place we could better utilize the already existing infrastructure in the provinces and avoid a lot of new problems.

Just to supplement this idea ... some people on this thread talked earlier about constraining immigration - and I am not sure whether i liked the idea of immigration being a political football. However - what some other countries are doing is that they make it easier for immigrants to come in, if they commit for the first 5 years (or whatever) to move into areas where the immigrants are actually needed and desired.

I don't see a reason why we couldn't do the same thing - there is in my view no reason for the majority of immigrants to stay in Auckland, just because this is the place where they fist touched down (obviously - only if they are told beforehand, that living in the provinces is a condition for them being admitted into New Zealand).

Nice to see the ideas flowing - how else could we in an easy way mitigate the Auckland housing crisis?

Daytr
18-04-2015, 08:52 AM
The issue with Little's idea is similar to CGT on investment properties, its too easy to circumvent & generally people looking to buy a 2nd or 3rd house have equity or cash for the next. One issue that can snowball is equity on equity to build a property portfolio, which is all fine if property is going up in value or even stable, however if you see a major correction, that equity can be wiped out. So I suggest a component of actual cash or higher equity levels maybe should be required to be utilized for a 2nd or 3rd property etc. In saying that this is dabbling around the fringes & I don't think would have much impact. Under Gareth Morgan's housing tax policy there is no escaping as it applies to all housing including the family home is included. At first glimpse I thought this was lunacy, until I read the detail & now I actually think it makes a lot of sense. The fact that you only pay tax if your house value increases means it will target those areas such as Auckland that is rising the fastest & the provinces where the housing is stagnant wont be paying any or very little & if your house goes down you would receive a tax credit. His policy is well worth a read.

BP re immigration the number is set by government so it is political. Obviously with the much reduced outflow to Australia, it would make sense to reduce the inflow from elsewhere substantially until this stabalises.

fungus pudding
18-04-2015, 08:58 AM
Craic, that's a good idea. National might not try it, but perhaps Labour would. It would help the regions, take some of the strain off Auckland infrastructure, help with youth unemployment, and provide a clear incentive for the redistribution of a rising population away from Auckland. We're not fighting over old weatherboard bungalows here in the provinces. They are still relatively cheap, and you could probably walk or cycle to work, or get there in a vehicle within ten minutes, without seeing a traffic light. Sounds more efficient to me.

But it's not. Without a dominant city, NZ would suffer. The whole world works that way. Throughout the next decade or two Auckland will evolve into predominantly apartment living to accommodate more working age people. 'Whether or not it is clear to you no doubt the world is evolving as it should.' (Max Ehrmann 1927)

iceman
18-04-2015, 09:57 AM
Moving jobs to the people sounds like an excellent idea - and tax incentives could be the right way to approach it. Like it. Instead of having to build more and more expensive roads and other infrastructure for one already overcrowded place we could better utilize the already existing infrastructure in the provinces and avoid a lot of new problems.

Just to supplement this idea ... some people on this thread talked earlier about constraining immigration - and I am not sure whether i liked the idea of immigration being a political football. However - what some other countries are doing is that they make it easier for immigrants to come in, if they commit for the first 5 years (or whatever) to move into areas where the immigrants are actually needed and desired.

I don't see a reason why we couldn't do the same thing - there is in my view no reason for the majority of immigrants to stay in Auckland, just because this is the place where they fist touched down (obviously - only if they are told beforehand, that living in the provinces is a condition for them being admitted into New Zealand).

Nice to see the ideas flowing - how else could we in an easy way mitigate the Auckland housing crisis?

I share this view BP. A quick and easy solution to ease the pressure on Auckland's out of control housing issue is to issue only residencies to people wanting to reside in the provinces. I don't understand why the Government does not seriously consider this.

Baa_Baa
18-04-2015, 10:35 AM
I share this view BP. A quick and easy solution to ease the pressure on Auckland's out of control housing issue is to issue only residencies to people wanting to reside in the provinces. I don't understand why the Government does not seriously consider this.

Immigration.govt preferences are here: http://skillshortages.immigration.govt.nz you will note the emphasis on qualifications and that many of the jobs are already nationwide.

BlackPeter
18-04-2015, 10:59 AM
Immigration.govt preferences are here: http://skillshortages.immigration.govt.nz you will note the emphasis on qualifications and that many of the jobs are already nationwide.

Slight deviation from the Auckland housing crisis (though related). The result of our glorious immigration policy is that we have (not just) Indian doctors driving taxi in Auckland instead of working in their trained profession on the West Coast (or wherever else they are in desperate need for qualified medical staff).

http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/immigration/maybe_ambulances_would_be_better.htm
https://www.facebook.com/3news/posts/10152439024233606

Our current immigration policy is a joke - we lure highly educated people (like doctors, teachers, barristers) to New Zealand, just to tell them here that while their degrees have been good enough to immigrate to NZ, they are not good enough to work here in their trained profession (for no good reason - its just that a strong lobby of self interested doctors, teachers and lawyers want to avoid competition and artificially keep their salaries up).

Easy way to get highly qualified immigrants who currently occupy space in the Auckland slums into the provinces: allow them to work in their trained professions!

Sgt Pepper
18-04-2015, 11:40 AM
But it's not. Without a dominant city, NZ would suffer. The whole world works that way. Throughout the next decade or two Auckland will evolve into predominantly apartment living to accommodate more working age people. 'Whether or not it is clear to you no doubt the world is evolving as it should.' (Max Ehrmann 1927)

FP

You seem reasonably experienced in the property sector. However do you believe the increasingly alarmist comments from the RBNZ concerning the need for the government to take action in the Auckland residential property market are misplaced? Do you see any risk to our main trading banks and the wider economy with their exposure to this market in the event of a severe correction? Is there anything the government can or should be doing that will have a positive effect? In my opinion the fallout could be severe for us all.

fungus pudding
18-04-2015, 12:01 PM
FP

You seem reasonably experienced in the property sector. However do you believe the increasingly alarmist comments from the RBNZ concerning the need for the government to take action in the Auckland residential property market are misplaced? Do you see any risk to our main trading banks and the wider economy with their exposure to this market in the event of a severe correction? Is there anything the government can or should be doing that will have a positive effect? In my opinion the fallout could be severe for us all.

Yes, it could be severe. The property market will turn - it always swings from buyers' to sellers' market. Nothing new about that. The banks will take a bit of a pummelling - as will some property owners, especially some investors. The only thing sensible thing the government can do, particularly local government, is make it easier for developers to build. Otherwise they should keep their noses out of it. It's all about supply.

fungus pudding
18-04-2015, 12:01 PM
FP

You seem reasonably experienced in the property sector. However do you believe the increasingly alarmist comments from the RBNZ concerning the need for the government to take action in the Auckland residential property market are misplaced? Do you see any risk to our main trading banks and the wider economy with their exposure to this market in the event of a severe correction? Is there anything the government can or should be doing that will have a positive effect? In my opinion the fallout could be severe for us all.

Yes, it could be severe. The property market will turn - it always swings from buyers' to sellers' market. Nothing new about that. The banks will take a bit of a pummelling - as will some property owners, especially some investors. The only thing sensible thing the government can do, particularly local government, is make it easier for developers to build. Otherwise they should keep their noses out of it. It's all about supply.

Sgt Pepper
18-04-2015, 01:11 PM
Yes, it could be severe. The property market will turn - it always swings from buyers' to sellers' market. Nothing new about that. The banks will take a bit of a pummelling - as will some property owners, especially some investors. The only thing sensible thing the government can do, particularly local government, is make it easier for developers to build. Otherwise they should keep their noses out of it. It's all about supply.

In some ways this presents a difficult political situation for any government. If( or when) a severe downturn occurs, inevitably an economically distressed cohort of property owners/investors will look for someone to blame. Either this occurred because the government did x y z or this occurred beacuse the government did not do x y z

elZorro
18-04-2015, 05:35 PM
But it's not. Without a dominant city, NZ would suffer. The whole world works that way. Throughout the next decade or two Auckland will evolve into predominantly apartment living to accommodate more working age people. 'Whether or not it is clear to you no doubt the world is evolving as it should.' (Max Ehrmann 1927)

FP, maybe you haven't been driving up in Auckland for a while. Just got back from there, and we were held up for about 30mins on the motorway, and another 30mins trying to find a park in a shopping mall. It's crazy up there, and that wasn't a really busy day. It can take workers over an hour to get to work, each way, every day. I don't think a tax break will cause every business to move, it'll just incentivise a few to take over empty buildings in the regions, where potential staff are waiting for jobs.

westerly
18-04-2015, 05:41 PM
Slight deviation from the Auckland housing crisis (though related). The result of our glorious immigration policy is that we have (not just) Indian doctors driving taxi in Auckland instead of working in their trained profession on the West Coast (or wherever else they are in desperate need for qualified medical staff).

http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/immigration/maybe_ambulances_would_be_better.htm
https://www.facebook.com/3news/posts/10152439024233606

Our current immigration policy is a joke - we lure highly educated people (like doctors, teachers, barristers) to New Zealand, just to tell them here that while their degrees have been good enough to immigrate to NZ, they are not good enough to work here in their trained profession (for no good reason - its just that a strong lobby of self interested doctors, teachers and lawyers want to avoid competition and artificially keep their salaries up).

Easy way to get highly qualified immigrants who currently occupy space in the Auckland slums into the provinces: allow them to work in their trained professions!


Just how highly qualified are all these people? From my own experience there seem to be plenty of Indian and other nationalities working in the health system. I for one do not want someone with dubious qualifications being let loose to treat patients. There are any number of immigration consultants working to get people into NZ Just because someone turns up and says he or she is qualified in whatever profession does not mean we must accept there word. A competency test and and certification of their qualifications is essential.

westerly

fungus pudding
18-04-2015, 06:03 PM
FP, maybe you haven't been driving up in Auckland for a while. Just got back from there, and we were held up for about 30mins on the motorway, and another 30mins trying to find a park in a shopping mall. It's crazy up there, and that wasn't a really busy day. It can take workers over an hour to get to work, each way, every day. I don't think a tax break will cause every business to move, it'll just incentivise a few to take over empty buildings in the regions, where potential staff are waiting for jobs.

The thing that will incentivise businesses to move will be availability of staff. When Auckland gets too expensive for the working masses, employers / factories will move to where they are. Rest assured that in 50 years there will still be flourishing NZ cities other than Auckland. The best thing any govt. can do, is nothing. It's simply the evolution of the country. (if empty buildings - [read cheap buildings] - don't provide incentive, neither will tax breaks. And yes, I have been to Auckland reasonably recently.


P.S. An example of Auckland's evolution is this article in The Herald.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11435225

elZorro
18-04-2015, 06:36 PM
Slight deviation from the Auckland housing crisis (though related). The result of our glorious immigration policy is that we have (not just) Indian doctors driving taxi in Auckland instead of working in their trained profession on the West Coast (or wherever else they are in desperate need for qualified medical staff).

http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/immigration/maybe_ambulances_would_be_better.htm
https://www.facebook.com/3news/posts/10152439024233606

Our current immigration policy is a joke - we lure highly educated people (like doctors, teachers, barristers) to New Zealand, just to tell them here that while their degrees have been good enough to immigrate to NZ, they are not good enough to work here in their trained profession (for no good reason - its just that a strong lobby of self interested doctors, teachers and lawyers want to avoid competition and artificially keep their salaries up).

Easy way to get highly qualified immigrants who currently occupy space in the Auckland slums into the provinces: allow them to work in their trained professions!

Thanks for that BP. I had a quick look, and I see that a policy change from the Health Ministry in late 2013 is behind some of the issues. If you are an overseas trained doctor of medicine with appropriate matching qualifications and have passed any NZ tests needed, and may even have some years of work experience overseas, you still need to do a year or two as a junior intern in a NZ Hospital. Except the applications for such jobs are screened by a software package first, called the Ace Matching System. In late 2013, the settings on this software were changed, so that only NZ or Aussie-trained people could be entered into it.


Who is eligible to participate in the ACE programme?

Category 1: Graduates from New Zealand medical schools and are citizens or permanent residents of New Zealand/Australia.
Category 2: Graduates from Australian medical schools and are citizens or permanent residents of New Zealand/Australia.
Category 3: Graduates from New Zealand medical schools and are not permanent residents of New Zealand/Australia.

Now that is one nasty government policy that you wouldn't expect from a market-driven party like National. Yes, we'll have new doctors all right, but only if they are trained in NZ or Australia. There is no way that these latest overseas-trained people from further away, who are now domiciled in NZ and are bringing up their families here, can work in their chosen profession as certified doctors.

elZorro
18-04-2015, 07:06 PM
The thing that will incentivise businesses to move will be availability of staff. When Auckland gets too expensive for the working masses, employers / factories will move to where they are. Rest assured that in 50 years there will still be flourishing NZ cities other than Auckland. The best thing any govt. can do, is nothing. It's simply the evolution of the country. (if empty buildings - [read cheap buildings] - don't provide incentive, neither will tax breaks. And yes, I have been to Auckland reasonably recently.

I know your opinion is always to have the government stay out of the market, FP. But if they had done that over the decades, we wouldn't have smoke-free workplaces and retail premises, there would have been no hydro dams or think-big projects on the scale we needed, no major forestry plantations, no national airline or rail service. And now even the Reserve Bank is telling John Key that Labour was probably along the right line with their CGT policy. Bernard Hickey says that maybe during the 2014 election, voters - for whatever reason- didn't make their feelings known about how they felt on this issue.

I saw how National handled the CGT policy problem. They said nothing about it until close to the election. Then, they craftily implied that it would cost just about every home owner some tax, by catching David Cunliffe out, all backed up with social media in a way that was impossible to counter so close to the final polling day.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/no-capital-gains-tax-huge-risk-government-6290341

Fran O'Sullivan, also saying that something must be done. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11434452&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+18 +April+2015)

iceman
19-04-2015, 08:11 AM
Tony ALexander says it would be madness to introduce CGT now and Gareth Morgan says it hasn't worked elsewhere and Labour's proposal was too full of holes to possibly work ! Even Andrew Little is very cold on it and your new found friend Winnie hates it.
It is not going to happen anytime soon !


I know your opinion is always to have the government stay out of the market, FP. But if they had done that over the decades, we wouldn't have smoke-free workplaces and retail premises, there would have been no hydro dams or think-big projects on the scale we needed, no major forestry plantations, no national airline or rail service. And now even the Reserve Bank is telling John Key that Labour was probably along the right line with their CGT policy. Bernard Hickey says that maybe during the 2014 election, voters - for whatever reason- didn't make their feelings known about how they felt on this issue.

I saw how National handled the CGT policy problem. They said nothing about it until close to the election. Then, they craftily implied that it would cost just about every home owner some tax, by catching David Cunliffe out, all backed up with social media in a way that was impossible to counter so close to the final polling day.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/no-capital-gains-tax-huge-risk-government-6290341

Fran O'Sullivan, also saying that something must be done. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11434452&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+18 +April+2015)

elZorro
19-04-2015, 08:33 AM
Tony ALexander says it would be madness to introduce CGT now and Gareth Morgan says it hasn't worked elsewhere and Labour's proposal was too full of holes to possibly work ! Even Andrew Little is very cold on it and your new found friend Winnie hates it.
It is not going to happen anytime soon !

That's a bit NIMBY of you Iceman, what other suggestions do you have to cool the housing market, restore fairness to the tax issues in NZ, and increase the income of a government who clearly are stuck between a rock and a hard place?

fungus pudding
19-04-2015, 08:41 AM
That's a bit NIMBY of you Iceman, what other suggestions do you have to cool the housing market, restore fairness to the tax issues in NZ, and increase the income of a government who clearly are stuck between a rock and a hard place?

There is no need to cool the housing market. It will do it better all by itself by not interfering. To restore fairness to tax is easy. A lower, flatter tax will do it. Structured properly, it would increase the tax take. GST could and should be raised as income taxes are lowered. That'll do the trick. Far better to encourage earnings and discourage spending, than the way it is now. Amen.

iceman
19-04-2015, 08:55 AM
Not sure what you mean with it being NIMBY. We don't have this problem here in sunny Nelson so it isn't really an issue for me personally. I don't have any silver bullet for solving AUCKLAND's housing crisis EZ, but most certainly don't think an ill thought out full of holes CGT will do anything to solve it. In my view, any CGT (wealth tax) that may work is a comprehensive one which includes all asset classes including the family home.
Changing the RMA to speed up consent process and more and quicker land supply is definitely an issue. I have little doubt that the future in Auckland at least, lies in much more apartment living. Local Government needs to get their act together to facilitate this much much faster.
Some form of immigration control or distribution of new immigrants more around the country would help ease pressures in Auckland.
Banks rules need to change so banks are less interested in lending to residential investors and more interested in lending to businesses, especially promising start ups.

Not sure either what you mean by "restore fairness to the tax issues in NZ" . Am I correct in reading that as you wanting the more than half of "tax payers" in NZ that are net recipients of Government funds to start paying their way, or are you advocating taxing the rich bastards (even more) like Cullen did ?


That's a bit NIMBY of you Iceman, what other suggestions do you have to cool the housing market, restore fairness to the tax issues in NZ, and increase the income of a government who clearly are stuck between a rock and a hard place?